Heretics

This book is a passionate critique of the prevailing philosophies of the early 20th century, which the author sees as various forms of "heresy." The central argument is that modern thought has made a catastrophic error in abandoning "orthodoxy"—a complete, defined, and dogmatic view of the universe—in favor of relativism, skepticism, and a narrow focus on pragmatism or aesthetics. The author contends that this rejection of foundational beliefs does not lead to freedom and progress, but to intellectual weakness, spiritual despair, and practical incompetence. Through a series of witty and paradoxical essays on his contemporaries (like Shaw, Kipling, and Wells), he argues that a fixed creed is not a limitation but the essential precondition for all meaningful art, action, and joy.

The Modern Rejection of Truth

The author begins by diagnosing the central problem of the modern era: the belief that one's ultimate philosophy does not matter. He observes that "heresy," once a term for being wrong, is now a boast, while "orthodoxy," or being right, is seen as contemptible. This cultural shift reveals that society has ceased to care about philosophical truth. This "negative spirit" is evident in modern art and ethics, which have become adept at identifying evil, typified by the grim realism of Ibsen, but have lost the ability to imagine or define the good. Without a positive ideal of virtue and happiness, modern ideals like "liberty," "progress," and "education" become meaningless dodges, as they promote movement without agreeing on a destination. This leads to a profound societal disappointment and an inability to answer the fundamental question of what constitutes a good life.

Case Studies in Modern Heresy

The author dedicates the core of the book to analyzing the flawed philosophies of his prominent contemporaries, treating them as case studies for this modern failure. He critiques Rudyard Kipling's imperialism, arguing that its cosmopolitanism and admiration for efficiency lack the true, tragic love of a specific homeland that defines patriotism. He examines George Bernard Shaw, asserting that Shaw's famous wit is merely the consistent application of a single, inhuman dogma: the worship of the "Superman," an ideal that requires despising humanity as it currently exists. He analyzes H.G. Wells, whose faith in science and progress is shown to be built on a fallacy, as one cannot measure "progress" without a fixed, unchanging standard of what is good. Other targets include the "Smart Set" novelists who praise a sterile, intellectual aristocracy; the aesthetes who foolishly try to separate art from morality; and the slum novelists whose "realism" is just an outsider's condescending perspective, failing to capture the romantic and melodramatic spirit of the poor. In each case, the author demonstrates how their clever but incomplete philosophies ultimately make the world smaller, sadder, and less vital.

The Return to Orthodoxy

In his concluding argument, the author reaffirms that the creation of dogmas is the defining and most human of all acts. To abandon conviction is to sink back into the thoughtless state of nature. He argues that true mental progress consists not in casting off beliefs, but in building a more complete and definite philosophy. He dismisses the fear that dogma leads to bigotry, claiming instead that bigotry is the anger of those who have no opinions, while fanaticism is best tempered not by a lack of ideas, but by a wealth of them. Ultimately, he declares, every person operates from a creed, even if it is an unexamined one. The great intellectual and spiritual task is to discover what we truly believe and defend it as a faith. The modern age of doubt, he concludes, will force humanity to rediscover the most basic realities as sacred dogmas. We will find ourselves fighting to prove that leaves are green and that two and two make four, becoming "of those who have seen and yet have believed."