Questionable Logic

As I read C.S. Lewis' chapter upon Eros for the second time, his logical argument refuting nakedness as truly self-revealing appears to have a major logical flaw. Lewis' only supports for the natural nature of clothedness come from human convention - primarily language. According to Lewis, the word naked began as "a past participle . . . the naked man . . . had undergone a process of naking" (104). Human beings cannot trust language to provide deep and original insight into concepts, for language itself had a human origin. Even though the word "naked" was once a past participle, that has nothing to do with whether or not fallen humanity was correct in labeling the word as such. Bringing language - a human creation - into an argument about the natural nature of nudity does not seem like a wonderfully logical decision.