<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
  <channel>
    <title>Non_duality on George&#39;s Blog</title>
    <link>https://blog.georgefabish.com/tags/non_duality/</link>
    <description>Recent content in Non_duality on George&#39;s Blog</description>
    <generator>Hugo</generator>
    <language>en-US</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 25 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://blog.georgefabish.com/tags/non_duality/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>The Great Divorce</title>
      <link>https://blog.georgefabish.com/reviews/the-great-divorce/</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:32:26 -0500</pubDate>
      <guid>https://blog.georgefabish.com/reviews/the-great-divorce/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;I read this book after seeing it tangentially referenced in the &amp;ldquo;Doors of Perspective&amp;rdquo;. Written as the forward states in response to the short story by William Blake, C.S Lewis sets out to refute the idea of Hell and Heaven being made of the same stuff. Or put in more general terms this is his refutation of the concept of non-duality. Instead of using arguments he chooses to use story as a device to get his points across. In this story the main character takes a bus ride from what turns out to be hell to a place that turns out to be heaven, or more accurately a place of transition to heaven. Upon arrival he eventually runs into George MacDonald, and MacDonald acts much like Virgil did in Dante&amp;rsquo;s inferno and guides the main character through this new and foreign place. What unfolds is a series of vignettes where the residents of heaven would interact with old friends from hell and try to convince them in various ways to &amp;ldquo;see the light&amp;rdquo;.  The main points of these small exchanges are that each person chooses to keep themselves in hell and out of &amp;ldquo;eternal joy&amp;rdquo;. Like other C.S Lewis stories I&amp;rsquo;ve read his strongest talent is his ability to spot and succinctly point out deficiencies in character. Especially of the self-righteous. Every time I read any of his stories, I feel self-conscious of some way in which I am acting selfishly or harming others with my choices. If you ever read any of his works, you&amp;rsquo;ll know exactly what I mean. This is a weak point in secular philosophy (IMO) because it is difficult to justify telling someone to alter their behavior without the authority of a metaphysic behind you. Lewis continually manages to thread the needle between intellect and faith in a compelling way that is difficult to ignore. That being said I don&amp;rsquo;t really feel like this book did much in the way of addressing some of the more difficult questions about hell and heaven. It did a fantastic job of shedding a light on how even good things like love and pity can be twisted into bad things. But in the stories people continually chose hell and their own misery over the joy they were created to experience, but the question of whether or not there was actually a &amp;ldquo;choice&amp;rdquo; to begin with is a slippery slope which leads to a lot of other complications. That being said this is a short read and does give the reader plenty of things to think about and is definitely worth the read.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
