logo

27 pages 54 minutes read

G. K. Chesterton

The Fallacy of Success

Nonfiction | Essay / Speech | Adult | Published in 1908

A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.

Essay Topics

1.

Chesterton indirectly makes the distinction between instinct and method. What relationship, if any, does he suggest exists between the two concepts?

2.

Chesterton indicates that he is willing to consider different definitions of success. What definition would align with his own values of logical consistency, practicality, and virtue? Does he provide any hints regarding this in the essay?

3.

In what ways might the authors of books on success counter the criticisms Chesterton levels against them?

4.

Might Chesterton’s parody of the style of writing produced by the authors he condemns be dismissed as a strawman argument? By invoking the word “fallacy,” does Chesterton leave himself vulnerable to the charge?

5.

Chesterton was a Christian and would have professed to worship God; however, he critiques The Instinct to Worship extensively in this essay. What hints does Chesterton provide as to the “proper” way to worship?

6.

How does Chesterton use literary techniques such as sarcasm, parody, and comicality to make a serious argument? What is the relationship between truth and humor in the essay?

7.

In what ways does Chesterton’s essay demonstrate awareness of the conflict between his traditional Christian values and the dominant progressive and secular values of his time?

8.

Today, books about success in business, life, and relationships continue to appeal to readers. How could books about success avoid the pitfalls Chesterton identifies?

9.

In what ways does Chesterton perform apologetic work in defense of his broader values in this essay? What deeper concerns motivate him to warn his readers about books most people would not read?

10.

Chesterton is in his own way a strategic and complex writer. Yet he represents the craftiness of the authors of books about success negatively. Is this hypocrisy, or a paradox? If the latter, what is the underlying resolution of the conflict?

blurred text
blurred text
blurred text
blurred text