"Meditation in a Toolshed"

After first reading Lewis' text I was completely absorbed by the sheer beauty of his piece. The argument was so logical and he was so comprehensive in his work, that by the end of reading it, it seemed impossible to disagree with him. After discussing the issue in class, this seemed to be the case for many students. Certainly questions were raised and a discussion ensued, but this was more a creation from the piece and not an argument against it. After the discussion in class I felt the need to read the text again. Following the reading, I felt like I had a better comprehension of the text but it also made me more curious about the subject in general.

The basic statement that Lewis is making throughout his article is that there are two basic ways of looking at something/someone. You can look at it, from an objective view that sees what is occurring. Or you can look along from a subjective point of view that is the literal experience. The example that Lewis used that makes most sense to me was that of being in love. Looking "at" a relationship would come from a scientist who describes the experience from an outsider's perspective. "For him it is all an affair of the young man's genes and a recognized biological stimulus." However the relationship when looking "along" it is an incredibly different experience. The man in love does not see it as just chemicals and hormones, it is an experience that he feels when he is around her.
Lewis then articulates how our society in recent years has placed a great deal of value in looking at rather than looking along. He then begins to explain why the current status cannot remain. It is understandable that the subjective view can lead us astray, however the objective view is always based in a subjective view that can never be removed.
I think the section that I found most interesting was near the end when Lewis says, "In other words, you can step outside one experience only by stepping inside another. Therefore, if all inside experiences are misleading, we are always misled."I found this idea fascinating because it is so true. No matter how much we try to step outside of our own experience we are always a part of a different experience which still defines how we look at things. After reading this I could not help but question Lewis' first example of light shining in a shed. We can look at the light from the side and see how it shines through the shed, or we can look along it and see the tree and sun outside the shed. It seems that if you are not looking along the light you are looking along the darkness of the shed. I wonder if one is more correct than the other. The obvious answer seems to be that it shifts from example to example and we must discern accordingly. With some examples it is rather obvious, those who saw Nazi Germany as a good thing were most likely looking along a path that was not following God's desires. But what of more controversial topics? I can think of countless examples, such as; gay marriage, abortion, animal rights, etc. I do not have the answer to which path is better to look along, but I found it interesting to see how our own paradigms can differ so greatly.
This is why Lewis' piece is so profound, because he understands he cannot solve every issue in life. However, he does understand that we need to look both at and along an issue to discern it. To fully comprehend something it is necessary to look along it. Conversely, we need the ability to take a step out of our hermeneutic situation, removing ourselves as best we can, so we can question what we know and better understand our own ideas. Looking at and looking along are both inextricable from one another. We must understand that each plays a crucial role in understanding and wisdom, or suffer the pain of idiocy.