If you are looking for the introduction to this book study you can click HERE. Each part of the study guide will be linked to the bottom of the original introduction as they become available so that you may more easily find whichever part you are ready for. Still need to buy the book? You can get it HERE!
Grammar Questions: (The Information of the Text)
What does “Orbilius” choose to debunk? (pg. 10)
What are some literary references, which Lewis alludes to, that he believes would help us form more just sentiments about animals? (pg. 10)
Lewis says there are “two classes of men who are, respectively, above and below the danger of such writing”, what are they? (pg. 11)
According to Lewis, what does Orbilius accomplish with his “English lesson” and what does he fail to accomplish? (pg. 11)
What does Lewis say is “another possibility” that Lewis considers concerning the possible motives of Gaius, Titius, and Orbilius that he had so far charitably dismissed? (pg. 11-12)
What discipline does Lewis argue these men are actually practicing instead of English? (pg. 12)
Acting out of charity, what does Lewis suggest as the two most likely reasons why these men have failed in their attempt to teach students about their stated purpose, namely English and Literary Criticism? (pg. 12-13)
What, according to Lewis, is the task of the modern educator? (pg. 13-14)
“Until quite modern times all teachers” believed what? (pg. 14-15)
According to Lewis, how did St. Augustine define “virtue”? (pg. 16)
How does Lewis explain the Hindu concept of “Rta”? (pg. 17)
Logic Questions: (The Interpretation/Comparison of the Text)
What is Lewis’ point concerning the description of animals? Why is anthropomorphic (applying human qualities to nonhuman things) sometimes good and appropriate when speaking of animals? (pg. 10)
Why are neither “the man who really knows horses and loves them” and the “irredeemable urban blockhead” in any danger of the kind of writing Orbilius is trying to “debunk”? (pg. 10-11)
Why does Lewis charge the literary critics with injustice? (pg. 12)
Lewis states, “The right defense against false sentiments is to inculcate just sentiments.” (pg. 14) What does he mean by this?
What does it mean to say “that certain emotional reactions on our part could be either congruous or incongruous” towards certain objects? Indeed that such objects “could not merely receive, but could merit, our approval or disapproval”? (pg. 14-15)
Logically speaking, if the Hindu gods obey a law outside themselves, then what might we say about that law and about those gods? (pg. 17)
Rhetoric Questions: (The Analysis of Ideas in the Text)
Lewis charges these supposed “literary critics” (Gaius, Titius, and Orbilius) with failing to really do literary criticism. He says they are instead doing “philosophy.” What is the proper domain of each of these disciplines? Where might they intersect and where should they keep clear lines of demarcation?
Aristotle, Lewis tells us, taught that “the aim of education is to make the pupil like and dislike what he ought.” (pg. 16) Do you agree that this is the proper aim of education? Why or why not? If not, what is? If so, what difficulties might we face towards that goal?
Theological Analysis: (Sola Scriptura)
Read Romans 2:12-15. How does this text of Scripture affect how we understand what Lewis is saying about Hinduism on page 17?
Read Philippians 4:8-9. How ought this text of Scripture to impact our thinking on what Lewis has to say about ordering our affections?
Virtues/Vices/Great Ideas: (Find them in the Text)
Truth, Love