Catholic Thought discussion

Chapter 3 Summary:The Suicide of Thought

I don't know. I know people like Chesterton but to me his thoughts seem all over the place.

Doreen wrote: "Chapter 3 Summary:The Suicide of Thought

I don't know. I know people like Chesterton but to me his thoughts seem all over the place."

There is logic to his arguments though it takes effort and time to plough through to see it. Anyone who writes 100 books in his/her lifetime could no doubt use some economy of expression. Einstein said: “When the solution is simple, God is answering,” and “If you can’t explain it simply, you don’t understand it well enough.”

Good point Galicius. Think I definitely need to read more Chesterton. Just was disappointed more in myself for not seeing the logic and leading this discussion better.

I'm disappointed with myself too. I am behind. I read the first chapter and haven't been able to progress. I still hope to finish before Lent ends.

The argument in this chapter centers on the Will. The title “Suicide of Thought” is a helpful point in trying to figure out what GK’s argument is about. He goes after recent publications and thinkers of his period. He finds that both Nietzsche and Shaw worship Will. He puts a whole group in the camp “the Jacobin”, “new rebel”, “politician”, “philosopher”, and “Russian pessimist”, “man of this school”, “modern revolutionist”. GK writes, “by rebelling against everything he has lost his right to rebel against anything.” (p. 66)

GK laments the emptiness of modern literature and thinking. He argues that “the philosophies of Schopenhauer and Tolstoy, Nietzsche and Shaw, as clearly as an inevitable railway smash could be seen from a balloon. They are all on the road to emptiness of the asylum. He comes down hard on Nietzsche who “ends in being an idiot”. (p 67) For madness may be defined as using mental activity so as to reach mental helplessness; and they have nearly reached it”. (p. 68)

He points to Joan of Arc as the “perfectly practical person who did something while they are wild spectators who do nothing”. (p. 69)

Carlos wrote: "In this chapter I think GK is going into greater detail about the perils for a society that pursues “reason without root; reason in the void.”

Such a pursuit leads inexorably to Materialism, the b..."

Carlos, I agree with you and you write very well and clearly. I derived this much from Chapter 4 “Ethics of Elfland” (pp. 71-100) what you wrote about Chapter 3. Discussion on materialism is the root of this chapter. Some of the conclusions addressed and answered here are an issue I have while reading Hawking’s “Brief History of Time” which in various ways expounds, as you may well know, on the vastness of the universe, search for the one “law”. GK remarks that “materialist, like the madman, is in prison; the prison of thought . . .The cosmos went on for ever, but not in its wildest constellation could there be anything really interesting; anything, for instance, such as forgiveness or free will.” (p. 94) I don’t think Hawking would ever use a word like “magical” about his view of the universe as GK sees it. GK uses terms to describe Nature that are used in fairy tales “charm,” “spell,” “enchantment.” “The sun shines because it is bewitched.” (p. 81) The first time Hawking uses the word “God” is when he, it seems, somewhat reluctantly considers:

“It would be very difficult to explain why the universe should have begun in this way, except as the act of God who intended to create things like us.” (p. 163)

He is discussing the big bang theory and that the rate of expansion and the initial state of universe must have been “very carefully chosen indeed”. (p. 163)

(Carlos I looked for your quotes in “Orthodoxy”. I found your first quote “reason without root; reason in the void.” (In Chapter 2, p. 46) but do not find your other two quotes in this book. Are you getting them from somewhere else in Chesterton?)