Talk:Jacques Ellul
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] | ||
 |
This article is supported by the Science and academia work group. | ||
 |
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Philosophy, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details. | ||||||||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. | ||||||||
| Low | This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale. | ||||||||
|
|||||||||
there are no sources cited within the article, even though there are a few quotes. I think I recognized a few of them from The Technological Society, but I would have to go back and check and for right now I simply don't have time (I'm a grad student and it's the middle of the semester, things are starting to get busy!) Orpheus42 12:55, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
A majority of the content of this article seems to be taken from http://www.regent.edu/acad/schcom/rojc/mdic/ellul.html.129.62.116.124 04:16, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Anarchist?
This article identifies Ellul as a "Christian anarchist", citing his book Anarchy and Christianity. But reading that book, I find Ellul stating that he is not really an anarchist. Ellul writes that he is "very close to one of the forms of anarchism," but he then proceeds to emphasize what separates him from the "true anarchist" as follows: "The true anarchist thinks that an anarchist society -- with no state, no organization, no hierarchy, and no authorities -- is possible, livable, and practicable. But I do not." Jacques Ellul (Geoffrey W. Bromiley, tr.) Anarchy and Christianity, p.19 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1981). Granted, Ellul's book contains many contradictions and at points perhaps verges on incoherence, with Ellul stating just four pages later that "Anarchy . . . has a bright future before it. This is why I adopt it." Id. Still, I have to ask -- is it proper for this article to identify Ellul as an anarchist, when Ellul characterized the anarchist vision is an impossibility, and bluntly denied that he was a "true anarchist"? Eric Alan Isaacson 16:36, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
But of course this just resorts into the same kindof superficial, reading of literal phrases and tag words and not delving into specific concepts. We should be able to look past any particular shift in Ellul's usage of such a vague and empty term as "Anarchism" and try to identify the characteristics of the state or social order he envisioned when he used that term in a given passage. - Caleb King (Jan 23, 2008) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.78.25.46 (talk • contribs) 07:30, 24 January 2008
Yes, but I think it is still fair to call Ellul an anarchist so long as the latter term is qualified by 'Christian'. In this sense there is no contradiction or incoherence: according to Ellul's Christian belief human authority/hierarchy is a necessary evil, a product of the Fall (this view is what also separates him from mainstream Christianity and makes him a 'radical'). Incoherence in Ellul's thinking most likely stems from the assumption that because he believes authority/state organization is necessary he also deems it legitimate. Ellul's 'anarchist vision' is ultimately bound up with the Christian eschatological vision, when 'God is all and in all' and there is no need or context for human authority (the New Jerusalem). In other words the anarchist ideal is desirable for lovers of freedom but outside of the recapitulation of humankind, the final intervention of God, it is impossible. With respect to Ellul's statement that 'Anarchy has a bright future before it' one needs to consult his other works on technology and the state (The Technological Society, 1954 and The Technological System, 1977). In the technological society, where social regimentation and state planning are perfected techniques, human authority, paradoxically, becomes redundant and even taboo (the 'master' becomes the 'employer'; the 'ruler' becomes the 'management'). The anarchist vision thus has a bright future on two levels: firstly because it is the natural response of human freedom/hope vis the modern technological determinism; secondly because the technological society, the society of the future, will in any event make human authority more and more implausible/irrelevant. (talk) 07:50, 27 February 2008 (UTC) Andrew E
[edit] WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 04:09, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Righteous Among the Nations
List of Righteous Among the Nations by country lists Jacques Ellul as one. I can't find any source for that.
Any help?.. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 04:04, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
