James Goates
Kerry Spencer
Writing 150
October 10, 2011
What Christians Believe: The Difference Between Christianity and Everything Else
C.S. Lewis writes of his logical understanding of the Christian faith after his conversion from atheism in “What Christians Believe.” To establish an understanding of the Christian faith as he has seen the religion, Lewis brilliantly appeals to a competent believer’s (atheist, Christian, Jewish, etc.) sense of logos and pathos with analogies, satire, and his dissection of religious belief.
Lewis draws strongly on the audience’s logos and pathos with reasonable analogies that bring a familiar understanding. Lewis uses the analogy of a surgeon and a cancer cell to contradict the view that God is above good and evil. He points out a logical flaw in this train of thought, that with this view the surgeon can be seen as bad because of his “killing of cancer.” He also uses the analogy of the mother and her untidy children to show a reasonable situation where will allows action against will. The audience can then identify and feel a familiarity for anytime that an event similar to the situation has occurred. He even goes on to directly address the audience by saying, “[it] is not what you willed, but your will has made it possible.” These feelings of logical understanding and familiarity help Lewis to bring his audience towards a comprehension of his beliefs.
Satire is one of Lewis’ greatest techniques for bringing his audience to understanding and accepting his beliefs. Lewis points out the weakness and flaws of the opposing these ideas to bring the audience to his beliefs. He makes the audience question the validity of the ideas by directly calling them “silly.” He even goes to the point of implying ignorance of those that attempt to destroy Christianity by pointing out the flaws in the attackers’ arguments when sarcastically commenting “as if ‘religion’ were something God created.” Through the logical identification of human ignorance and vices, Lewis appeals to the pathos through the logos to draw his audience to his views.
Lewis starts one of his most prominent ideas with a large group of people and divides them into two, those who believe and those who do not. From there he examines believers and divides them into the Pantheists and a group that includes Christians, Jews, and Muslims; he especially contrasts Christians with Pantheists. As he funnels down through the ideas, Lewis meticulously depicts each thought like, “God is quite definitely ‘good’ or ‘righteous,’ a God who takes sides, who loves love and hates hatred, who wants us to behave in one way and not in another” to show his thought pattern. But most important is how he connects all the pathways together. For example, “Atheism is too simple. And I will tell you another view that is also too simple. ” Lewis fuses the ideas of each pathway in such a way that the audience transitions from thoughts quickly in a way that seems natural. In other instances throughout the article Lewis writes in a way where if the reader stops to argue, Lewis is already on to another idea and the audience is forced to follow his thought pattern to get from point A to point B. Once there, the audience understands Lewis’ idea and feels that it is the logical pathway because they understand the passage of A to B.
Lewis’ point in this story is not that of conversion but understanding. He uses his sense of logic to show others with a sense of logic how he came to his conclusion. While Lewis may not have converted anyone to a belief in a God or the Christian faith, he effectively displayed his beliefs in a way that a competent audience could logically understand his beliefs and conclusions of the Christian faith.
I think your opening paragraph needs to be slightly clearer and maybe a little longer. When you mention logos and pathos, it sort of implies that the tools used are appeals to logos and pathos when, in fact, they are analogies and the other two things.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the logos pathos thing Brandon said. But once I understood your thesis a little better, I thought the ideas in your essay were nicely organized. In the first paragraph, your analysis of the cancer example might be backwards. I thought Lewis was showing that there could be no good and evil from a different perspective. You said he was arguing the opposite. It was later that he said there must be a good and evil. I think. You looked at it in greater depth than I did hopefully. Other than that, and a few awkward sentences, I though it was very well done!
ReplyDeleteStructure is fine. I think you need more of an opener the introduction that catches the reader's attention.
ReplyDeleteAlso, you need to more analyltical commentary more on the quotes you put in there. For example, in the second paragraph you simply list off two analogies without giving any commentary to how each one specifically relates to Lewis' effectiveness.
I read this article, and I don't think your point about satire is very strong. The essay doesn't poke fun at any part of society. You can't just use the one word "silly" to justify that point in your thesis. I 'd just take it out.
I thought you had good world choice. Although, I do have to agree with the comments above. Your first paragraph needs to be clearer. It would just help the readers a bit, if your thesis was clearer. Other than that, you did a great job!
ReplyDeleteOdd comment:
ReplyDeleteSomething that has always bugged me about my own personal writing is when I say, "the audience is FORCED to..." do this or that. I can never figure out a better way to say it but it still doesn't seem like the right word to use. I only noticed it in your analysis because I always say it in mine. Otherwise, it probably wouldn't have bothered me. Nothing else really did. Good job.
I would rearrange the first sentence, because It reads a little awkwardly. Consider revising it to, "In his essay 'What Christians Believe', C.S. Lewis writes of his logical understanding of the Christian faith." It reads easier that way.
ReplyDeleteYou have a well thought out thesis.
In your analogies paragraph, you have great examples but your commentary is a little weak and hard to follow. Maybe stick with one example and focus on good commentary, rather than have two examples with less than good commentary.
You did a nice job with the structure in this analysis, however the fourth paragraph is a little long. You seemed to be summarizing in the beginning of the fourth paragraph; keep in mind that we (your audience) have already read it, so I would cut out the summarizing. That way paragraph length is more homogenous.
My final critique, the last paragraph has the right idea, but it is short and weak. Try and expand through your thought process there, and also try and tie your thesis back into the conclusion.
I know I had a lot to say... but well done! I'm not as negative as I seem:)
Excellent job. I'm super impressed!
ReplyDeleteGreat job! This was a very structured and organized paper. Like what the others have said, your thesis was a bit of a trick to figure out, but the rest of paper did a fine job of making it clearer. Also I would like to see a bit more detail on how the analogies really appeal to the audience's logos and pathos. Other than that awesome job!
ReplyDelete-Sophia Tateoka
First of all, I really like the organization of the essay. I know that in our peer review in class, the biggest thing that SWILUA stressed was that we needed to have a very organized essay with your thesis matching perfectly with your other paragraphs, so bravo. I really like how you point out his specific quotes that supported his arguments that actually were rather interesting. This seems like a really interesting article and through your insight, I actually want to read it. Well done.
ReplyDeleteI appreciate the organization and how it kept me oriented the whole time. I also think that you have some really good insight on the tools that Lewis uses. I would just look over three things.
ReplyDeleteFirst, on the subject of organization. Your paragraphes are organized really well, but I would try to organize your sentences inside of your paragraphes a little more. Maybe use more transition words in your paragraphes.
Second, I would change the satire paragraph though. I would either add another example of proof or I would just take it out. I always like to have at least two examples because if I can't find more than one source I feel like I don't have enough evidence to prove that I am right. It is just less convincing.
Third, on the other hand, your fourth paragraph is has too much proof and not enough commentary on why it is actually proof. I would try to have at least two sentences of commentary for every example I use.
One thing I am big on is organization and you nailed that. I loved that I knew what I was going to hear in the body paragraphs before even reading them.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoy your conclusion, it doesn't seem like the thesis statement with words mixed around, it directs the reader back to the main idea.
I would cite page numbers with quotes from the text i.e. (Lewis 123). Also, I would use more direct quotes from the texts rather than referring to it in your own words, it would make your examples clearer.
The introduction could have been a little better. you could have added something to grab the attention of the reader better. However, i like how clear and straightforward your thesis was.
ReplyDeletealso i thought that your second to last paragraph was confusing in the way you worded it. i would suggest making that more clear. but other than that, excellent job!
--Michael Knapp
Well "dad" I must say I enjoyed the simplicity of your analysis. It was nice to hear your thoughts directly, no fluff. Thank you!
ReplyDeleteOne area I thought the paper was a little weak was in your 3rd paragraph. It felt weaker than your other paragraphs. It seems a little less clear as well.
Last comment: Try to draw your reader into your paper in your first paragraph. It helps your paper a lot if the reader is drawn in.
All in all, Good Job!
Your Son
Very good. Mostly clear, well-organized, and to the point. You did a good job of clearly identifying the Lewis' audience and the rhetorical devices he uses. Your opening paragraph could be worded a bit more clearly, though.
ReplyDelete-Zack Yancey
This was a great analysis. Your points were very clear. I liked your use and explanation of the text. You introduction was also very clear, and I knew where you would be going with your essay the entire time. Great work!
ReplyDelete