DOCSLIB.ORG

The Civil Economy Perspective for a Participatory Society Stefano Zamagni[1] 1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Civil Economy Perspective for a Participatory Society Stefano Zamagni[1] 1 Enhancing Socio-Economic Integration: The Civil Economy Perspective for a Participatory Society Stefano Zamagni[1] 1. Introduction and purpose One of the most penetrating dangers of our time was described by the 20th century writer C.S. Lewis as “chronological snobbery”, that is, the uncritical acceptance of something merely because it belongs to the intellectual trends of our age. Avoiding such a danger requires both intelligibility of res novae and moral commitment. Across the globe we are seeing two parallel developments unfold, which undermine the realization of a truly participatory society both within and across the nations of the world. First of all, a growing concentration of wealth and a centralization of power which divide societies along old and new lines. Secondly, the division between the “winners” and “losers” of global integration and technological progress is threatening to derail growth. In his Introduction to the present volume, Pierpaolo Donati writes: “We are asked to outline and implement a kind of society that can ensure the full participation of all its members, not simply in terms of compensation or compassion for the most disadvantaged, but in terms of a just and sustainable societal configuration in which people have the opportunity to pursue a good life for themselves and for everyone else”. In what follows, I will speak in favour of the civil economic paradigm as a concrete and original way to cope with the intellectual challenge posed by Donati. To this end, I deem it proper to consider a few stylized facts characterizing the present time. Firstly, the political system has not yet been able to significantly modify the financial institutions responsible of the present crisis. Under these conditions, there is no guarantee that in the next 15-20 years another bank and financial crisis will not occur. In his latest book,[2] Alan Greenspan writes: “Our highest priority going forward is to fix our broken political system. Short of that, there is no viable long-term solution to our badly warped economy”. It is a fact that the economic machinery continues to operate in an intolerably unfair way. Inequality has become endogenous to the system and this not only generates economic costs (e.g. speculative bubbles, decreasing rate of investment; consumption distortions), but, above all, it gives rise to social and human costs. Indeed, an inequality rate exceeding a certain threshold reduces health and increases mortality rates.[3] In recent years, neither economic theory nor empirical evidence have been able to confirm the presumed trade-off between equality and efficiency, as exposed in the classic work by Arthur Okun.[4] In 2014 the IMF produced empirical results showing that greater equality is associated with faster subsequent medium-term growth, both across and within countries. So, there is no economic justification to endorse inequality. On the contrary, fairness is so central to humans that one can infer that it has evolutionary roots (Brosnan and de Waal, 2003). The probable reason is that cooperation was crucial for the survival of the tribe. Evolution favoured the propagation of those traits that predisposed us to value fairness. In spite of the widespread prevalence of this disposition, the notion of fairness is not firmly integrated into mainstream economics. It remains well behind concepts such as efficiency, even though there is no evidence that the latter is more important to us than the former. Secondly, the scaffolding of the present-day market system tends to erode some of the values that support our civilization. Indeed, the Schumpeterian process of creative destruction applies not only to firms and to inputs of production, but also to the very values that gave rise to market capitalism in the first place. In particular, the present market system tends to empower the strong over the weak and to make people believe that greed is the appropriate way of incentivizing economic agents and achieving the best results. However, this is a mere ideological approach to the problem. It is revealing what Mark Carney – the governor of the Bank of England – declared at a PASS workshop in July 2014: “Just as any revolution eats its children, unchecked market fundamentalism can devour the social capital essential for the long-run dynamism of capitalism itself”.[5] Thirdly, the point above deserves further consideration. F. Hayek’s The Road to Serfdom had an enormous impact on the evolution of the spirit of the times as far as economic thinking was concerned. Especially on M. Friedman’s thinking. Through his two books Capitalism and Freedom (1962) and Free to Choose (1980), the founder of the Chicago School of Economics amplified Hayek’s impact. The efforts of these two Nobel laureates culminated in M. Thatcher’s and R. Reagan’s determination to “roll back the state”, at the end of the ’70s. The result was a concentration of power in the hands of an elite that had never been seen before. The accumulation of great fortunes undermined the political system not only through lobbying and campaign contributions, but - 1 - also by discouraging people from political participation. “From 1998 through 2010, business interests and trade groups spent $28.6 billion on lobbying compared with $492 million for labor, nearly a 60-to-1 advantage”.[6] As underlined by J. Komlos,[7] the general point is that the concentration of riches enables the elite not only to engage in conspicuous consumption that makes the rest of the population feel inferior, but also enables them to “buy” economists as well as politicians.[8] That defines another road to serfdom. Hayek’s mind was closed to the possibility that there were multiple threats to individual freedom. He feared exclusive state power and failed to see that any concentration of power can become a serious threat. He believed that as soon as one abandons laissez-faire, one is on a slippery slope and there is no turning back. Yet, there is an alternative to both extremes, as I will indicate below. Meanwhile, let us recall Pope Francis’ warning: “A new tyranny is thus born, invisible and often virtual, which unilaterally and relentlessly imposes its own laws and rules”.[9] Fourth, and as a consequence of the above, global capitalism as a model of social order, has increasingly assumed the characteristics of a religion, since it posits an overarching goal for human life and seeks to pursue it on the basis of a specific concept of human being. One is reminded of the prophetic essay by the philosopher Walter Benjamin,[10] where the author clarifies that capitalism serves to satisfy the same worries, anguish, and disquiet formerly answered by religion. Today, the masking of the ideological nature of global capitalism takes place in two ways, as posited by P. Williams.[11] On the one hand, decisions with moral content are presented in technical terms (e.g.: human rights have to be limited for the sake of efficiency). On the other hand, technical arguments are put forward as genuine moral alternatives (e.g. the market versus state alternative is presented as if it were an ideological question). I do believe that it has become urgent to try to de-mask the ideological nature of the global economic order. Let us recall that ideology consists in labelling as “order” what is in fact a complex pattern of hierarchical, asymmetrical power relationships. The path from ideology to idolatry is a short one. Fifth, climate change and environmental degradation (in particular the loss of biodiversity) threaten to reverse the recent noteworthy achievements in the fight against poverty. The World Bank estimates that the proportion of the world’s population living in extreme poverty has declined significantly, from 37.1% in 1990 to around 9.6% in 2015. However, the poorest people in the world face grave and imminent risks from global warming. The very life support of the poor – including the ability to grow food and to access safe water – is under dire threat. Finally, social science – and specifically economics – still lacks a fully fledged theory explaining how a traditional society plagued with endemic poverty can evolve towards an advanced economy. We know how to compare different economic systems and we also know which factors are strategically important for progress. Yet, full knowledge of how to enhance the transition of a given society from an old social equilibrium to a new one is still missing. This is a real paradox of the intellectual life of capitalism, which is still seeking a plausible and rigorous explanation of the rise and decline of market economies. How is it that the market in certain historical periods becomes the dominant system of exchange and allocation of both outputs and factors of production; and how does it manage to supersede non-market systems such as those offered by the state, associations, corporations, and manorial systems? In a recent contribution, van Bavel shows that such a process is neither the result of the detrimental effects of non-market forces, nor of external shocks, of a climatologic, epidemic or military nature. Rather, the causes of that process are mainly endogenous; i.e. they are the effect of the forces called forward by dominant markets themselves and the market elites they created. In turn, dominant groups use their economic strength to acquire status and political leverage that allow them to obtain means of coercion to compensate for the reduction in productive investments. This explains why and how the dominating rise of factor markets is self-undermining. Success in terms of economic growth enables a few market elites to privatize and accumulate financial assets, natural resources and machinery. Over time, this leads to social polarization and a reduction in welfare for those who are marginalized.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Margaret S. Archer Editor Morphogenesis and the Crisis of Normativity Morphogenesis and the Crisis of Normativity
    Social Morphogenesis Margaret S. Archer Editor Morphogenesis and the Crisis of Normativity Morphogenesis and the Crisis of Normativity [email protected] Social Morphogenesis Series Editor: MARGARET S. ARCHER Centre for Social Ontology, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK Aims and scope: To focus upon ‘social morphogenesis’ as a general process of change is very different from examining its particular results over the last quarter of a century. This series ventures what the generative mechanisms are that produce such intense change and discusses how this differs from late modernity. Contributors examine if an intensification of morphogenesis (positive feedback that results in a change in social form) and a corresponding reduction in morphostasis (negative feedback that restores or reproduces the form of the social order) best captures the process involved. The series consists of 5 volumes derived from the Centre for Social Ontology’s annual workshops “From Modernity to Morphogenesis” at the University of Lausanne, headed by Margaret Archer. More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/11959 [email protected] Margaret S. Archer Editor Morphogenesis and the Crisis of Normativity 123 [email protected] Editor Margaret S. Archer Centre for Social Ontology University of Warwick Coventry, UK This volume IV follows the book “Social Morphogenesis”, edited by Margaret S. Archer, which was the first book in the series published in 2013 http://www.springer.com/social+ sciences/book/978-94-007-6127-8, the volume “Late Modernity”, edited by Margaret S. Archer, published in 2014 and the volume “Generative Mechanisms Transforming the Social Order”, edited by Margaret S.
    [Show full text]
  • Logic I Format: Work Text (Digital Available August 2016)
    Logic I Format: Work Text (Digital Available August 2016) Course Objective The Logic I course introduces students to the science and art of right thinking or reasoning through the use of informal logic. After a short survey of the contributions of Greek philosophers, students will dive into an extended study of logical fallacies of relevance, presumption, and clarity. Fallacies include ad hominem personal attacks, appeals to fear, red herrings, equivocation, and sweeping generalizations. Students will analyze arguments and everyday conversations in order to identify and counter fallacies. The course concludes with an investigation into the principles of argumentative dialogue and the impact of language and emotions in debate. Course Prerequisites or Corequisites None Unit 1: Reasoning Understand that logic is “right thinking or reasoning.” Understand that logic is a wide field involving art, science, and skill. Recognize the contribution of Greek philosophers, Socrates and Aristotle, to the establishment of logic as a field of study. Understand the importance of logic in a classical education. Distinguish the difference between formal logic and informal logic. Compare and contrast inductive and deductive reasoning. Define fallacy. Recognize and analyze fallacious arguments of relevance. Recognize and describe ad hominem abusive fallacies. Recognize and describe ad hominem circumstantial fallacies. Recognize and describe tu quoque fallacies. Recognize and describe genetic fallacies. Recognize and describe mob appeal fallacies. Recognize and understand the subtle difference between an appeal to belief and an appeal to popularity. Recognize and describe snob appeal fallacies. Unit 2: The Contrast Recognize, classify, and describe an appeal to fear. Recognize and describe the appeal to force as a variation of the appeal to fear.
    [Show full text]
  • Fallacies of Relevance1
    1 Phil 2302 Logic Dr. Naugle Fallacies of Relevance1 "Good reasons must, of force, give place to better." —Shakespeare "There is a mighty big difference between good, sound reasons, and reasons that sound good." —Burton Hillis "It would be a very good thing if every trick could receive some short and obviously appropriate name, so that when a man used this or that particular trick, he could at once be reproved for it." —Arthur Schopenhauer Introduction: There are many ways to bring irrelevant matters into an argument and the study below will examine many of them. These fallacies (pathological arguments!) demonstrate the lengths to which people will go to win an argument, even if they cannot prove their point! Fallacies of relevance share a common characteristic in that the arguments in which they occur have premises that are logically irrelevant to the conclusion. Yet, the premises seem to be relevant psychologically, so that the conclusion seems to follow from the premises. The actual connection between premises and conclusion is emotional, not logical. To identify a fallacy of relevance, you must be able to distinguish between genuine evidence and various unrelated forms of appeal. FALLACIES THAT ATTACK I. Appeal to Force (Argumentum ad Baculum ="argument toward the club or stick") "Who overcomes by force has overcome but half his foe." Milton. "I can stand brute force, but brute reason is quite unbearable. There is something unfair about its use. It is like hitting below the intellect." Oscar Wilde 1 NB: This material is taken from several logic texts authored by N.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Curriculum Vitae STEFANO ZAMAGNI Posizione Attuale
    Curriculum Vitae STEFANO ZAMAGNI Posizione Attuale Professore ordinario di Economia Politica, Università di Bologna e Adjunct Professor of International Political Economy, Johns Hopkins University, Bologna Center. Nascita 4 Gennaio 1943, Rimini, Italia. Stato civile Coniugato con Vera Negri; due figlie, Giulia e Elena; quattro nipoti. Cittadinanza Italiana. e-mail: [email protected] ; [email protected] Educazione Laurea in economia e Commercio (Marzo 1966), Università Cattolica S. Cuore, Milano. Linacre College, University of Oxford (U.K.): 1969-1973. Lingue straniere: Inglese; francese; spagnolo. Attività didattica 1966-69 Università Cattolica S. Cuore, Milano - assistente volontario nell'Istituto di Scienze Economiche. 1973-75 Università di Parma, professore incaricato di Economia Politica e di Programmazione Economica. 1976-79 Università di Parma, professore straordinario di Economia Politica, docente di Microeconomia. 1979- Università di Bologna, professore ordinario di Economia Politica, docente di Microeconomia. 1977- Johns Hopkins University, Bologna Center, docente di "International Trade Theory", "Microeconomics", "Quantitative Methods for Economics", “Public Sector Economics”. 1985-2007 Università L. Bocconi, Milano, professore a contratto di Storia dell'analisi economica. 1989-90 Scuola Superiore della Pubblica Amministrazione, sede di Bologna, docente di Macroeconomia. 1988-1995 SPISA, Università di Bologna, docente di Macroeconomia. 1996- Università di Bologna, Master Universitario in Economia della Cooperazione,
    [Show full text]
  • Stefano Zamagni University of Bologna (ITALY)
    RECIPROCITY, CIVIL ECONOMY, COMMON GOOD Stefano Zamagni University of Bologna (ITALY) 1. An introductory justification This essay has a triple aim. First, to refresh a traditional Italian line of economic thought, which was rooted in the civic humanism of the thirteenth century and continued, with ups and downs, through the golden age of Italian Enlightenment philosophy in both its Milanese and Neapolitan variants. Second, to explain why it is not a good thing that interpersonal relations continue to be precluded from mainstream economics and why the discipline would do well to adopt a new scientific paradigm, the relational one. It is truly paradoxical that a field of study like economics, which from the very dawn of the discipline has been concerned essentially with the study of relations between men living in society (just think of such aspects as the production of goods and services, consumption choices, market exchanges, institutional arrangements, and so forth) has apparently never – save for the temporary detour into civil economy recounted in section 2 – felt the need to reckon with relationality. The economist’s agenda certainly does include the study of relations between man and nature, but it could never be held that this is the key to economic studies – not, that is, unless we want to reduce economics to a sort of social engineering, to remove it from the sphere of the “moral sciences.” Finally, I will indicate how the principle of reciprocity allows and favours the passage from the traditional welfare state to the civil welfare model. To avoid misunderstanding, one specification is in order from the outset.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix 1 a Great Big List of Fallacies
    Why Brilliant People Believe Nonsense Appendix 1 A Great Big List of Fallacies To avoid falling for the "Intrinsic Value of Senseless Hard Work Fallacy" (see also "Reinventing the Wheel"), I began with Wikipedia's helpful divisions, list, and descriptions as a base (since Wikipedia articles aren't subject to copyright restrictions), but felt free to add new fallacies, and tweak a bit here and there if I felt further explanation was needed. If you don't understand a fallacy from the brief description below, consider Googling the name of the fallacy, or finding an article dedicated to the fallacy in Wikipedia. Consider the list representative rather than exhaustive. Informal fallacies These arguments are fallacious for reasons other than their structure or form (formal = the "form" of the argument). Thus, informal fallacies typically require an examination of the argument's content. • Argument from (personal) incredulity (aka - divine fallacy, appeal to common sense) – I cannot imagine how this could be true, therefore it must be false. • Argument from repetition (argumentum ad nauseam) – signifies that it has been discussed so extensively that nobody cares to discuss it anymore. • Argument from silence (argumentum e silentio) – the conclusion is based on the absence of evidence, rather than the existence of evidence. • Argument to moderation (false compromise, middle ground, fallacy of the mean, argumentum ad temperantiam) – assuming that the compromise between two positions is always correct. • Argumentum verbosium – See proof by verbosity, below. • (Shifting the) burden of proof (see – onus probandi) – I need not prove my claim, you must prove it is false. • Circular reasoning (circulus in demonstrando) – when the reasoner begins with (or assumes) what he or she is trying to end up with; sometimes called assuming the conclusion.
    [Show full text]
  • Adorbs Quizzes.Indd
    Name: ____________________________ ____ / 10 points THE AMAZING DOCTOR RANSOM’S Q UIZ 1 for adorable fallacies 1–7 COMPREHENSION Answer the following big-picture questions, demonstrating your grasp of the material along with some origi- nal thought. (2 pts each) 1. Define Ad Hominem. Is the truth of a proposition affected by the character of the speaker? 2. If you’re writing a paper (or reading one), list at least five criteria that can help you deter- mine whether an authority is relevant or not? IDENTIFICATION Identify the adorable fallacy present, or declare the reasoning fallacy-free. (1 pt each) 3. Gillette: “If there’s a lumberjack with a manly jaw using our brand of razor, it must work.” 4. Shark: “You lions disgust me. Preying on the weak of the Serengeti is a grievous wrong.” Lion: “What’s the big deal? You do it too.” 5. Friend: “You can’t tell me I shouldn’t watch this when you’re such a pious dweeb.” Quizzes and tests copyright © 2015 by Canon Press. You may make as many copies as you need. CONT. 6. Son: “I can’t believe you won’t let me buy a Harley-Davidson motorcycle, Mom. It’s because you’re a woman, isn’t it?” 7. Presbyterian: “Our children shouldn’t read The Lord of the Rings because, after all, Tolkien was a Roman Catholic.” 8. “Unless you apologize to me, I’ll post scurrilous reviews of all your products on the Web.” Name: ____________________________ ____ / 10 points THE AMAZING DOCTOR RANSOM’S Q UIZ 2 for adorable fallacies 8–14 COMPREHENSION Answer the following big-picture questions, demonstrating your grasp of the material along with some origi- nal thought.
    [Show full text]
  • Stefano Zamagni
    Curriculum Vitae STEFANO ZAMAGNI Present position: Professor of economics, University of Bologna and Adjunct professor of International Political Economy, Johns Hopkins University, Bologna Center. Education: Catholic University in Milan, Italy, Degree in Economics, March 1966. University of Oxford (UK): 1969-1973. Teaching activities 1966-69: University of Milan, assistant lecturer in Economics. 1973-75: University of Parma, lecturer in Economics and in Public Sector Economics. 1976-79: University of Parma, chair professor of Economics. 1979-2013 : University of Bologna, chair professor of Economics. 1977- : Johns Hopkins University, Bologna Center, adjunct professor of Economics. Courses taught: International Trade Theory; Macroeconomics; Microeconomics; Public Sector Economics. 1985-2007 : Bocconi University, Milan, visiting professor of History of Economic Analysis. 1989-91: High School of Public Administration, Bologna, visiting professor of Microeconomics. 1988-1995 : SPISA, University of Bologna, visiting professor of Microeconomics. 1996-: University of Bologna, Master in “Economics of Cooperative Firms”. 1999-:2010 University of Bologna, Master in "Health economics" 2013-: Adjunct professor, University of Bologna. Administrative positions 1981-85: Director of the School of Touristic Studies, University of Bologna at Rimini. 1982- : Associate Director of Johns Hopkins University - Bologna Center. 1985-93: Chairman of the Department of Economics - University of Bologna. 1989-91: Coordinator of the Ph.D. program in Economics, University of Bologna. 1989-92: Vice-President of the Italian Economic Association. 1986-89: Member of the executive committee of the Italian Economic Association 1989-99: Member of the Executive Committee of the International Economic Association. 1993-96: Dean of the Faculty of Economics, University of Bologna. 1987-95: Member of the Scientific Committee of Ente L.
    [Show full text]
  • Prophet of Postmodernism?
    CS LEWIS: EXPONENT OF TRADITION AND PROPHET OF POSTMODERNISM? by CHARLES ANTHONY EDWARD MOODIE submitted in accordance with the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF THEOLOGY in the subject CHURCH HISTORY at the UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AFRICA PROMOTER: PROFESSOR G LC FRANK NOVEMBER 2000 ************************** ACKNOWLEDGMENTS To Father Chrysostom Frank, formerly Professor and Head of the Department of Church History at the University of South Africa, for the challenge, both academic and personal, which he set me in the studies which led to this doctoral thesis; for the essential guidance which he provided; and for making possible the upgrading of my MTh studies to a doctorate. To my wife Margaret, for her love and support and for encouraging me to undertake, not only this academic venture, but all my previous part-time studies - at significant personal cost to herself. To my parents, whose commitment and love lie at the root of all that I have managed to achieve. To Dr Andre le Roux, formerly rector of Edgewood College of Education, for the challenge to academic improvement which he always held out to those who worked with him, and for the continuing interest and encouragement which he offered in the development of this study in particular. CS LEWIS: EXPONENT OF TRADITION AND PROPHET OF POSTMODERNISM? SUMMARY The 'postmodern challenge' is increasingly felt in the 'end of modernity' to which Gianni Vattimo refers. The West and the world has hitherto been dominated by what Andrew Gamble characterises as the Modem or Western Ideology. But the validity of that worldview and its associated ways of thinking, going back to the 'Enlightenment' and beyond, has come to be radically questioned.
    [Show full text]
  • Agency and Causal Explanation in Economics Virtues and Economics
    Virtues and Economics Peter Róna László Zsolnai Editors Agency and Causal Explanation in Economics Virtues and Economics Volume 5 Series Editors Peter Róna, University of Oxford, St. Giles, Oxford, UK László Zsolnai, Corvinus University of Budapest, Budapest, Hungary Editorial Advisory Board Helen Alford, Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas (“Angelicum”), Rome, Italy Luk Bouckaert, Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium Luigino Bruni, LUMSA University, Rome and Sophia University Institute, Loppiano Georges Enderle, University of Notre Dame, USA Carlos Hoevel, Catholic University of Argentina, Buenos Aires, Argentina John Loughlin, Cardiff University, Emeritus Professor, Wales, UK David W. Miller, Princeton University, USA Sanjoy Mukherjee, Rajiv Gandhi Indian Institute of Management, Shillong, India Mike Thompson, GoodBrand, London, CEIBS Shanghai, and University of Victoria, Vancouver, Canada Johan Verstraeten, Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium Stefano Zamagni, University of Bologna, and Johns Hopkins University – SAIS Europe and Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences, Italy The series is dedicated to virtue ethics and economics. Its purpose is to relocate economic theory to a domain where the connection between the virtues and economic decisions, as that connection is actually experienced in everyday life, is an organic component of theory rather than some sort of an optionally added ingredient. The goal is to help develop a virtue-based economic theory which connects virtues with the contents of economic activities of individuals, unincorporated and incorporated economic agents. The primary context is Catholic Social Teaching but other faith traditions (especially Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, and Confucianism) will also be explored for their construction of virtues in economic action. Special attention will be made to regulatory and policy issues in promoting economic justice.
    [Show full text]
  • The-Romantic-Rationalist.Pdf
    EDITED BY “ W E A R E F A R T O O JOHN PIPER & EASILY PLEASED.” DAVID MATHIS C. S. Lewis stands as one of the most influential Christians of the twentieth century. His commitment to the life of the mind and the life of the heart is evident in classics like the Chronicles of Narnia and Mere Christianity—books that illustrate the unbreakable connection between rigorous thought and deep affection. With contributions from Randy Alcorn, John Piper, Philip Ryken, Kevin Vanhoozer, David Mathis, and Douglas Wilson, this volume explores the man, his work, and his legacy—reveling in the truth at the heart of Lewis’s spiritual genius: God alone is the answer to our deepest longings and the source of our unending joy. “Altogether an interesting, lively, and thought-provoking read.” Michael Ward, Fellow of Blackfriars Hall, University of Oxford; author, Planet Narnia: The Seven Heavens in the Imagination of C. S. Lewis “A great introduction to and reflection on a remarkable Christian!” Michael A. G. Haykin, Professor of Church History and Biblical Spirituality, The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary “Paints a well-rounded, sharply observed portrait that balances criticism with a deep love and appreciation for the works and witness of Lewis.” Louis Markos, Professor of English, Scholar in Residence, and Robert H. Ray Chair of Humanities, Houston Baptist University; author, Restoring Beauty: The Good, the True, and the Beautiful in the Writings of C. S. Lewis JOHN PIPER is founder and teacher of desiringGod.org and chancellor of Bethlehem College and Seminary. He served for 33 years as pastor at Beth- lehem Baptist Church in Minneapolis and is author of more than 50 books.
    [Show full text]
  • CS Lewis and the Modern World
    Digital Commons @ George Fox University Faculty Publications - Department of English Department of English 2009 "The tS ance of a Last Survivor": C. S. Lewis and the Modern World (Chapter One of The Rhetoric of Certitude) Gary L. Tandy Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu/eng_fac Part of the Creative Writing Commons, and the English Language and Literature Commons The Rhetoric of Certitude The Rhetoric of Certitude C. S. Lewis's Nonfiction Prose GARY L. TANDY The Kent State University Press Kent, Ohio ~/tJGSC~CK Lf/\R~r~\' ~ n[~C~.r r.cE EN"TTR U.Cr:.Cl:" F G>' U!·1iV[F;~ iTY riE\'.TUiG. Oil 9713~' Frontis: C. S. Lewis at his desk. To Janet, Julia, Jackson, Used by permission of The Marion E. Wade Center, and John Garrison. Wheaton College, Wheaton, IL. And for Mom, who waits to greet us in Aslan's Country. © 2009 by The Kent State University Press, Kent, Ohio 44242 All rights reserved Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 2008030054 ISBN 978-0-87338-973-0 Manufactured in the United States of America Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Tandy, Gary L. The rhetoric of certitude : C. S. Lewis's nonfiction prose I Gary L. Tandy. p. em. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-o-87338-973-0 (hardcover: alk. paper) oo 1. Lewis, C. S. (Clive Staples), 1898-1963-Criticism and interpretation. I. Title. PR6023.E926z898 2009 823'.912-dc22 2008030054 British Library Cataloging-in-Publication data are available. 13 12 11 10 09 5 4 3 2 1 Contents Introduction ix 1 "The Stance of a Last Survivor": C.
    [Show full text]