Explore the vast range of titles available.

Presence in the Modern World is Jacques Ellul's most foundational book, combining his social analysis with his theological orientation. Appearing first in French in 1948, and later in English as The Presence of the Kingdom, it has reached the status of a classic that retains all of its relevance dealing with today's challenges. How should we respond to such complex forces as technology or the state? How can we communicate with one another, despite the problems inner to modern forms of media? Do we have hope for the future of our civilisation? Ellul responds by describing how a Christian's unique presence in the world can make a difference. Instead of acting as 'sociological beings', we must commit ourselves to the kind of revolution that will occur only when we become radically aware of our present situation and undertake 'a ferocious and passionate destruction of myths'. In this way, states Ellul, we become the medium for God's action in the modern world.

The article reviews and evaluates major categories of propaganda research as they have been classified by Jacques Ellul, using for the first time bibliometric methods. Jacques Ellul is a unique thinker who is expert in history, sociology, law, and political science who lived through the most pervasive propaganda periods of the 20th century. His classification of propaganda types is one of his most important contributions to the study of propaganda; it is not what most people typically think about propaganda, but relates to much more complicated phenomena. The question of what the most researched propaganda category is today is addressed. Our findings lead to the conclusion that although Ellul identified 8 categories of propaganda, political propaganda was and still remains the most studied category. This leads to the conclusion that in spite of the social and political impact of Ellul’s works on propaganda, his theoretical definitions and classifications have much less influence on academic research in this field.

The concept of hope has varied in meaning from ancient Greece to the present day. Often understood as an expectation or an illusion, hope seems to greatly determine the way human beings live and think about their existence. It is precisely in this context that the questioning of the Christian faith and particularly eschatology arises. The aim of this article is to analyse the concept of Hope, distinguishing it from concepts such as expectations and hopes, and placing it in the sphere of Christian life and theology. In this context, realities such as immortality, eternity, and death will be explored in order to understand if there is room for a Hope that goes beyond empirical certainty or capricious and illusory desire.

This response to Joshua Reichard’s essay focuses on his references to Jacques Ellul’s technique which uses dialectic on two parallel levels: sociological and theological. Ellul argues that technique long predated the Industrial Age, and began in the earliest cities, though it was only incidental to society’s power centers from the ancient through early modern eras. Only in the modern age has technique come to a position of dominance where some see it as a possible threat to humanity due to dystopian elements such as artificial intelligence. This essay explores Ellul’s frequent references to both utopias and dystopias. By the 1950s, utopias were said to have ushered in totalitarianism. Dystopias were popular because they decried utopias as being out of touch with reality and thus dangerous to society. Ellul’s strong Christian faith provided answers to his concerns about the direction of human history, including technique. Though the twentieth-century dystopian totalitarian systems threatened humanity by utilizing technology for maximum repression over populations, they like prior systems may eventually dissipate and be replaced.

This article considers the impact of both historical and digital transhuman practices in archaeology with an eye towards recent conversations concerning punk archaeology, slow archaeology, and an ‘archaeology of care’. Drawing on Ivan Illich, Jacques Ellul, and Gilles Deleuze, the article suggests that current trends in digital practices risk alienating archaeological labour and de-territorializing archaeological work. Dans cet article l'auteur examine l'impact des pratiques transhumaines historiques et numériques en archéologie en prenant compte des conversations récentes relatives à l'archéologie lente, l'archéologie punk et l'archéologie « concernée ». En s'appuyant sur les travaux d'Ivan Illich, Jacques Ellul et Gilles Deleuze, l'auteur soutient que les tendances actuelles en pratiques numériques risquent d'aliéner et de déterritorialiser le travail des archéologues. Translation by Madeleine Hummler Die Auswirkungen von historischen und digitalen transhumanen Verfahren in der Archäologie vor dem Hintergrund der jüngsten Diskussionen über die sogenannte langsame Archäologie, Punk Archäologie und „beteiligte Archäologie“ werden hier untersucht. In diesem Beitrag, der von den Arbeiten von Ivan Illich, Jacques Ellul und Gilles Deleuze inspiriert ist, wird darauf hingedeutet, dass die aktuellen Entwicklungen in der digitalen Praxis das Risiko eingehen, die Archäologen zu entfremden und die archäologische Arbeit zu deterritorialisieren. Translation by Madeleine Hummler

Jacques Ellul predicted that technology-driven societies risk losing human agency to autonomous technological systems focused on efficiency (“technique”). This essay assesses critically Ellul’s concerns regarding technological dystopia through the narrow context of Generative Artificial Intelligence. While acknowledging valid concerns raised by Ellul and contemporary scholars, the essay contends that Generative AI’s inherent limitations will prevent it from realizing such dystopian scenarios. Specifically, Generative AI relies fundamentally on human-generated data, and inevitably suffers from “model collapse,” a technical degradation resulting from recursive training on AI-generated content. Consequently, Generative AI lacks the capacity for sustained autonomy and poses minimal long-term threats compared to Agentic AI. An eventual collapse of Generative AI models may catalyze a renaissance of human creativity, and thereby ensure humanity evades Ellul’s most dire predictions of a technological dystopia.

By the twenty-first century, artificial intelligence promises to transform the world from iPhones and automation in education, business, and government, to international relations where superpowers vie for global dominance. Even without an AI superintelligence, Agentic AI’s emergent qualities pose risks of uncharted capabilities that concern even AI creators, apart from malvolent individuals who may use this new technology for dubious purposes. Genetic engineering promises to cure diseases and extend the human life span. Yet this Orwellian Brave New World also portends unprecedented control over populations via DNA-powered AI systems that could enable universal tyranny. Recalling Jules Verne, the essay proposes that fiction may become fact. To retain control of the new Age of Robotics requires humanizing its effects but resisting the transhumanist hubris while reaffirming the inherent value and dignity of a creature created in the image and likeness of God.

Drury reports Wittgenstein telling him, “I am not a religious man but I can’t help seeing every problem from a religious point of view, I would like my work to be understood in this way”. My paper attempts to make sense of this strange claim. I first consider the meaning Wittgenstein gives to ‘religious’ in speaking of questions he explicitly designates as such, and then explain how that (sort of) meaning could also apply to the (other) characterisations he provides of his philosophical work. I also consider the subsidiary question, and suggest two very different reasons as to why Wittgenstein nonetheless did not consider himself ‘a religious man’. While I find much confusion in what Wittgenstein says about religion, his crucial insight is that both religious and philosophical thinking are characterised by the same kind of difficulty. Both spring from our moral–existential confusion and despair over finding, or accepting the sense we find, in our life with others. In the later parts of this paper, I show how the metaphysical I–world perspective of the Tractatus (the first specific form taken by Wittgenstein’s own ‘religious point of view’) exemplifies this very rootedness of philosophical/religious thinking in despair, and how in Wittgenstein’s later philosophy, including in some of his later explicitly religious remarks, an I–You perspective starts to emerge, one where our difficulties in sense-making are seen as the other side of our difficulties in opening ourselves to each other in love. I also suggest, however, that an unresolved tension nonetheless remains in Wittgenstein’s late thinking between an I–You orientation and a focus on collective normativity. Finally, I suggest that foregrounding love tends to dissolve the very idea of specifically ‘religious’ problems quite generally, and so leaves us with a double question about how to understand religion as such, and about whether, or how, we can give coherent sense to Wittgenstein’s idea that his point of view is specifically ‘religious’.

[...]the University of Torontos Centre for Culture and Technology, founded by McLuhan, continues to exist and support McLuhans approach to scholarship. [...]Ongs scholarly home, Saint Louis University, preserves much of Ongs legacy with The Walter J. Ong, S.J., Center for Digital Humanities (https://www.slu.edu/arts-and-sciences/ong-center/). [...]we might be less likely to lean on Postman as a starting point for media scholarship. [...]Postman's scholarly home, New York University, does not preserve or maintain an archive of his works. [...]I summarize scholarship that re-articulates Postman's approach to research and the themes of his research. [...]I will summarize research that develops Postman's major phases of scholarship and connects his work to other scholars. [...]I will offer some directions for future research based on some gaps in scholarship related to Postman. 1. [...]if we are to take up Postman's scholarship, then we would want a sense of Postman's life in the context of the issues he addressed.

The application of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) technologies in the field of propaganda influences information creation, dissemination, and reception, and introduces new ethical challenges. This paper revisits the philosophical discourses of Jacques Ellul on technology and propaganda, placing them within the context of the rise of today’s generative AI technologies. Ellul identified the First Industrial Revolution as the initial juncture in the history of human technology that formed technique as a social phenomenon, which subsequently shaped the nature of propaganda as a technique. Subsequent developments in computer technology in the latter half of the 20th century enabled the formation of a technological system. This raises the question: Could generative AI represent another pivotal moment in the evolution of the technological system, and what are the ethical implications of propaganda technology in this context? This article seeks to illuminate current discussions on GenAI technology and propaganda ethics with Ellul’s insightful theoretical insights. In terms of research methodology, this study relies on textual interpretation and classical hermeneutics, including three processes: syntactic text interpretation, historical background, and situational application. Ellul’s research delves into the intrinsic links and inherent ethical dimensions between propaganda and technology, examining their comprehensive and enduring impacts. This normative perspective is crucial for a deep understanding of contemporary propaganda within the framework of emerging technologies, helping us to transcend the escalating spiral of propaganda technology and counter-propaganda techniques. By incorporating propaganda facilitated by generative AI technologies into the overall development logic of the technological society, this approach explores its ethical implications from a more macroscopic and holistic perspective.