#27: On Chronological Snobbery
C.S. Lewis and the Uncritical Acceptance of the Intellectual Climate of Our Own Age
The Curious Case of C.S. Lewis
C.S. Lewis, the famed atheist who converted to Christianity in 1931, originally discounted the faith on the basis that it was nothing more than an ancient and outmoded religion with no relevance to modern life. Lewis’ atheism was deeply held, having first lost his faith at age nine (9) when his mom passed away from cancer, a tragedy exacerbated by his already distant and austere father’s withdrawal into himself.
Lewis, an Irishman by birth, enrolled in Oxford University in 1917, but his education was interrupted by World War I. Shortly after enrolling at the university, Lewis joined the British Army and was sent to the front-line trenches in France. Four months later, Lewis was wounded by friendly fire that missed its target. Two of his comrades fighting alongside him were killed in the same explosion. Naturally, this was a life-altering experience. Witnessing firsthand the horrors of trench warfare, followed by a desperately depressing convalescence intensified and affirmed his already deeply-held nonbelief in God.
Owen Barfield and Chronological Snobbery
But, something happened when Lewis returned to school and resumed some semblance of a normal life. He and his close mate and fellow Inkling, Owen Barfield, spent many hours engaged in philosophical and metaphysical conversations. The Inklings was an informal literary discussion group started by J.R.R. Tolkein and C.S. Lewis.
It was during these discussions, aka intellectual explorations, that Lewis ultimately abandoned his insistence that the natural/material world is all there is. Each time Lewis challenged the truth claims of Christianity, that “outdated” religion, Barfield pressed him to question the assumptions underlying his objections.
Slowly, methodically, and admittedly grudgingly, Lewis moved toward what he called “supernaturalism,” a term he previously used disparagingly).
Lewis later reflected …
… [Barfield] made short work of what I have called my "chronological snobbery," the uncritical acceptance of the intellectual climate common to our own age and the assumption that whatever has gone out of date is on that account discredited.
You must find why it went out of date.
Was it ever refuted (and if so by whom, where, and how conclusively) or did it merely die away as fashions do?
If the latter, this tells us nothing about its truth or falsehood. From seeing this, one passes to the realization that our own age is also "a period," and certainly has, like all periods, its own characteristic illusions. They are likeliest to lurk in those widespread assumptions which are so ingrained in the age that no one dares to attack or feels it necessary to defend them.” - C.S. Lewis, Surprised by Joy, (Ch. 13, pp. 207-208)
Although Lewis coined the term “chronological snobbery,” Barfield also described the concept as the belief that "intellectually, humanity languished for countless generations in the most childish errors on all sorts of crucial subjects, until it was redeemed by some simple scientific dictum of the [19th] century."
SIDEBAR » Charles Darwin’s publication of On the Origin of Species is a classic example of chronological snobbery in action. Michel Foucault, French postmodern philosopher of the 20th century, and some of his contemporaries defended the validity and legitimacy of chronological snobbery by articulating the concept of “epistemes,” or “the communal presuppositions about knowledge and its nature and limits.”1
The word “episteme” comes from the term epistemology—the study of knowledge and knowing, i.e. how we know what we know and whether we can know if it’s true. Essentially, the concept of “epistemes” is that once we have new ways of knowing, i.e. scientific advancement, we enter into a new “episteme,” and any previously-produced knowlege on the same topic is automatically invalid since it was part-and-parcel of an old “episteme.”
A Personal Challenge
I raise this issue now as we continue our study of origins and worldview (or at least continuing exploring the process I’ve been pursuing in my own search for truth).
As we keep the pitfalls of chronological snobbery in mind, I earnestly challenge anyone who automatically dismisses as unintellectual those who give credence to the Genesis account to:
(1) explain which part of evolutionary theory disproves any or all of Genesis 1-11, and
(2) question the assumptions on which any such part of evolutionary theory relies.
I have been pursuing this for several years now and I’ve yet to receive any answers, only conjecture.
And, FWIW, microevolution, or studying at and below the species level, doesn’t contradict the Genesis account, so that’s not the issue in play. It’s macroevolution, or studying above the species level, including the origins of the universe and man, that sits at the heart of the evolution v. creation debate.
Honestly, I’d rather be dismissed and maligned by my fellow man than miss out on knowing the truth and living fully within the bounds of reality. I’m getting used to being made to “look a fool” by those who refuse to engage in substantive discussion on this issue. No matter how things turn out, we each must have the courage to face the world as it is, not as we wish it to be.
Back to Chronological Snobbery
One way we can avoid falling into the trap of chronological snobbery is to heed C.S. Lewis’s advice to read old books.
He says …
It’s a good rule after reading a new book never to allow yourself another new one till you have read an old one in between. If that is too much for you, you should at least read one old one to three new ones ....
Every age has its own outlook. It is especially good at seeing certain truths and especially liable to make certain mistakes. We all therefore need the books that will correct the characteristic mistakes of our own period ...
None of us can fully escape this blindness, but we shall certainly increase it, and weaken our guard against it, if we read only modern books....
The only palliative is to keep the clean sea breeze of the centuries blowing through our minds and this can only be done by reading old books.
—
It won’t surprise you that I read a lot of new books, but it may surprise you that I actually read more old books. In doing so, I’ve been privileged to gain golden nuggets of wisdom galore and to go on unexpected adventures I never knew I needed to experience.
I echo C.S. Lewis and urge you to read books, all kinds of books across every genre. At once you’ll be informed, delighted, enraged, and humbled, and that’s a good thing!
—
Back soon with more on Chris, Me, and that Evolution/Creation Thing (Part 2).
Always writing in pursuit of the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
xo,
Kelley
October 17, 2024
Neal C. Gillespie, Charles Darwin and the Problem of Creation, Chicago, IL (The University of Chicago Press, 1979) p.1.
Lewis’s testimony is remarkable because of the beautiful simplicity of it. Barfield and Tolkien both walked him through his objections with grace and sound reasoning that Lewis simply couldn’t refute. And it took astounding humility to admit that so publicly, but what a testament to the quiet faithfulness of his friends. On a similar note, have you ever heard of David Wood and Nabeel Qureshi? Their testimonies are similarly remarkable and intertwined.
These testimonies are really fantastic. They're gritty, complicated, and intense, which is what real life is! P.S. I'm a Colson Fellow too!