Search this study companion
At a glance
Lewis opens with a then-current schoolbook for teenagers (he calls its anonymous authors “Gaius and Titius” and their book “The Green Book”) that uses a well-known anecdote — two tourists at a waterfall, one calling it “sublime” and one calling it merely “pretty” — to teach that such words describe only the speaker’s own feelings, never a real quality of the waterfall itself.
A small grammar lesson like this, Lewis argues, quietly delivers a whole philosophy: that value judgments are never true or false, only reports of private emotion. Repeated across an entire education system, that lesson does not produce clear thinkers so much as people who no longer trust their own capacity to feel that anything is really admirable, contemptible, or good.
Scripture for reflection
“Keep thy heart with all diligence; for out of it are the issues of life.”
Proverbs 4:23 KJV
UECF.NET summary
Lewis begins with a close reading of a wartime English textbook aimed at older schoolchildren. Its authors illustrate a point about grammar with the story of two visitors to a waterfall: one calls it “sublime,” the other merely “pretty.” The textbook concludes that both are really talking about their own feelings, not about the waterfall — so all such statements are, at bottom, statements about the speaker, dressed up as if they were statements about the world.
That claim, Lewis says, looks like an incidental point of grammar but is really a complete theory of value smuggled into the minds of children who have no way to notice or resist it. If it is true, then every judgment that something is beautiful, admirable, shameful, or noble is nothing more than a report of personal taste. Lewis sets this modern subjectivism against a much older and, in his view, more widely shared conviction — found across many unconnected traditions of thought — that some things really do deserve our admiration or contempt, independent of how any particular person happens to feel about them. He calls this shared inheritance, borrowing a term from Chinese thought, the “Tao”: the way, or the road, that any culture’s traditional morality has in common with the others.
Lewis then sets out the classical picture of a human being as reason (the “head”) governing appetite (the “belly”) through trained, appropriate emotion (the “chest”). Older education, on this view, was less about handing down facts than about training the chest — teaching a person to love what truly deserves love and to feel disgust at what truly deserves it. A curriculum that debunks all sentiment as merely subjective does not create more rational people; it removes the very organ — trained feeling — that lets reason actually govern conduct. The chapter’s memorable image is of a coming generation of clever, capable “men without chests,” from whom educators still expect ordinary virtues like courage, loyalty, and honor, without having given them any of the trained feeling those virtues require.
Main themes
- The difference between debunking a sentiment as merely subjective and training it to fit reality
- Education as the formation of right feeling (an “ordinate” heart), not only the transfer of information
- A single grammatical claim about language can carry an entire, unexamined philosophy of value
Key ideas
- The waterfall anecdote is used by Lewis to show how a textbook can teach a complete philosophy (subjectivism about value) while appearing only to teach grammar.
- Lewis’s picture of the human person — head, chest, and belly — makes trained emotion (the “chest”) the necessary link between knowing what is right and actually doing it.
- “Men without chests” are people educated out of confidence in their own moral and aesthetic responses — clever, but without the trained feeling that makes virtue possible in practice.
Important concepts
- The Tao — Lewis’s chosen shorthand (borrowed from Chinese thought) for the traditional doctrine of objective value that he finds, with variations, in Platonic, Aristotelian, Stoic, Christian, Hindu, Chinese, and other classical traditions of ethics.
- Head / Chest / Belly — Lewis’s picture of practical reason: the intellect (head) and the appetites (belly), linked and governed by trained sentiment (the chest) — the seat of “just” or fitting emotional response.
- Men without chests — Lewis’s description of people who have been taught to distrust all their value-feelings as merely subjective, leaving them intelligent but morally inert.
- Ordinate affections — Feeling the appropriate degree of love, admiration, or disgust toward something that genuinely deserves it — the aim, on Lewis’s account, of older and specifically classical moral education.
Related Bible references
- Proverbs 22:6
- Philippians 4:8
- Deuteronomy 6:5–7
- Psalm 119:11
Practical application
- Notice the next time a book, article, or class treats a moral or aesthetic reaction as “just how you feel” rather than as something that could be fitting or unfitting, true or false.
- Ask what your own upbringing trained your gut reactions to love and to despise — and whether those reactions were trained well.
Questions for study
Reflection questions
- Can you think of something you were once taught to treat as a matter of pure personal preference that you have since come to believe is objectively good, beautiful, or true (or the reverse)?
- Do you agree that feelings can be trained to be more or less accurate — the way a musical ear or a moral conscience can be trained — rather than simply accepted as they come?
Small-group discussion
- Is there a “Green Book” in today’s culture — a place where subjectivism about values is taught almost incidentally, packaged inside something else entirely? How should Christian parents and educators respond?
These notes are an original UECF.NET study companion and are not a reproduction of C. S. Lewis’s text, which remains in copyright. Read Chapter 1 (“Men Without Chests”) in The Abolition of Man itself — from a library, bookseller, or the Internet Archive’s access-restricted lending copy — then use this page to review its themes and questions. Scripture quotations above are the King James Version. No quotations from Lewis are included on this page.