Tag Archives: Jürgen Habermas

FRANCIS SCHAEFFER ANALYZES ART AND CULTURE Part 27 Jurgen Habermas (Featured artist is Hiroshi Sugimoto)


Jürgen Habermas Interview

Uploaded on Feb 1, 2007

Rare video footage of Jurgen Habermas discussing some of his theories.




Francis Schaeffer notes:

At Berkeley the Free Speech Movement arose simultaneously with the hippie world of drugs. At first it was politically neither left nor right, but rather a call for the freedom to express any political views on Sproul Plaza. Then soon the Free Speech Movement became the Dirty Speech Movement, in which freedom was seen as shouting four-letter words into a mike.  Soon after, it became the platform for the political New Left which followed the teaching of Herbert Marcuse. Marcuse was a German professor of philosophy related to the neo-Marxist teaching of the “Frankfurt School,” along with...Jurgen Habermas (1929-). 

Brannon Howse talks some about the Frankfurt School in some of his publications too. 

During the 1960’s many young people were turning to the New Left fueled by Marcuse and Habermas but something happened to slow many young people’s enthusiasm for that movement.

1970 bombing took away righteous standing of Anti-War movement

Francis Schaeffer mentioned the 1970 bombing in his film series “How should we then live?” and I wanted to give some more history on it. Schaeffer asserted:

In the United States the New Left also slowly ground down,losing favor because of the excesses of the bombings, especially in the bombing of the University of Wisconsin lab in 1970, where a graduate student was killed. This was not the last bomb that was or will be planted in the United States. Hard-core groups of radicals still remain and are active, and could become more active, but the violence which the New Left produced as its natural heritage (as it also had in Europe) caused the majority of young people in the United States no longer to see it as a hope. So some young people began in 1964 to challenge the false values of personal peace and affluence, and we must admire them for this. Humanism, man beginning only from himself, had destroyed the old basis of values, and could find no way to generate with certainty any new values.  In the resulting vacuum the impoverished values of personal peace and affluence had comes to stand supreme. And now, for the majority of the young people, after the passing of the false hopes of drugs as an ideology and the fading of the New Left, what remained? Only apathy was left. In the United States by the beginning of the seventies, apathy was almost complete. In contrast to the political activists of the sixties, not many of the young even went to the polls to vote, even though the national voting age was lowered to eighteen. Hope was gone.

After the turmoil of the sixties, many people thought that it was so much the better when the universities quieted down in the early seventies. I could have wept. The young people had been right in their analysis, though wrong in their solutions. How much worse when many gave up hope and simply accepted the same values as their parents–personal peace and affluence. (How Should We Then Live, pp. 209-210


Sunday, August 28th, 2011, 11:11pm

Aug. 24 marked the 41st anniversary of the Sterling Hall bombing on the University of Wisconsin-Madison campus.

Four men planned the bomb at the height of the student protests over the Vietnam War. Back then, current Madison Mayor Paul Soglin was one of the leaders of those student protests in the capitol city. This weekend, Soglin recalled the unrest felt by UW-Madison students.

“The anti-war movement adopted a lot of its tactics and strategies from the civil rights movement which was about ten years older,” said Soglin. “It was one of picketing, demonstration, and passive resistance.”

The four men who planned the bombing focused on the Army Mathematics Research Center housed in Sterling Hall because it was funded by the U.S. Department of Defense and therefore, worked on weapons technology. Karl Armstrong was one of the four men and he recently spoke with CBS News in his first television interview detailing the moments right before the bomb was set off.

“He asked me, he says, ‘Should we go ahead? Are we gonna do this?’ I think I made a comment to him about something like, ‘Now, I know what war is about,'” remembered Armstrong. “And I told him to light it.”

The bomb killed one researcher and father of three, 33-year-old Robert Fassnacht, although Armstrong maintains they planned the attack thinking no one would get hurt. The four men heard about the death as they were in their getaway car after the bomb went off.

“I felt good about doing the bombing, the bombing per se, but not taking someone’s life,” recalled Armstrong.

The researcher’s wife told CBS News that she harbors no ill will toward Armstrong and the other bombers. Three of the four men were captured and served time in prison. Armstrong served eight years of a 23-year sentence.

The fourth man, Leo Burt, was last seen in the fall of 1970 in Ontario and is to this day, still wanted by the FBI, with a $150,000 reward for his capture.

E P I S O D E 9

T h e Age of Personal Peace and Affluence 

I. By the Early 1960s People Were Bombarded From Every Side by Modern Man’s Humanistic Thought

II. Modern Form of Humanistic Thought Leads to Pessimism

Regarding a Meaning for Life and for Fixed Values

A. General acceptance of selfish values (personal peace and affluence) accompanied rejection of Christian consensus.

1. Personal peace means: I want to be left alone, and I don’t care what happens to the man across the street or across the world. I want my own life-style to be undisturbed regardless of what it will mean — even to my own children and grandchildren.

2. Affluence means things, things, things, always more things — and success is seen as an abundance of things.

B. Students wish to escape meaninglessness of much of adult society.

1. Watershed was Berkeley in 1964.

2. Drug Taking as an ideology: “turning on” the world.

3. Free Speech Movement on Sproul Plaza.

a) At first neither Left nor Right.

b) Soon became the New Left.

(1) Followed Marcuse and Habermas.

(2) Paris riots.

4. Student analysis of problem was right, but solution wrong.

5. Woodstock, Altamont, and the end of innocence.

6. Drug taking survives the death of ideology but as an escape.

7. Demise of New Left: radical bombings.

8. Apathy supreme. The young accept values of the older generation: their own idea of personal peace and affluence, even though adopting a different life-style.

C. Marxism and Maoism as pseudo-ideals.

1. Vogue for idealistic communism which is another form of leap into the area of non-reason.

2. Solzhenitsyn: violence and expediency as norms of communism.

3. Communist repression in Hungary and Czechoslovakia.

4. Communism has neither philosophic nor historic base for freedom. There is no base for “Communism with a human face.”

5. Utopian Marxism steals its talk of human dignity from Christianity.

6. But when it comes to power, the desire of majority has no meaning.

7. Two streams of communism.

a) Those who hold it as an idealistic leap.

b) Old-line communists who hold orthodox communist ideology and bureaucratic structure as it exists in Russia.

8. Many in West might accept communism if it seemed to give peace and affluence.

III. Legal and Political Results of Attempted Human Autonomy

A. Relativistic law.

1. Base for nonarbitrary law gone; only inertia allows a few principles to survive.

2. Holmes and sociological (variable) law.

3. Sociological law comes from failure of natural law (see evolution of existential from rationalistic theology).

4. Courts are now generating law.

5. Medical, legal, and historical arbitrariness of Supreme Court ruling on abortion and current abortion practice.

B. Sociological law opens door to racism, abrogation of freedoms,  euthanasia, and so on.

IV. Social Alternatives After Death of Christian Consensus

A. Hedonism? But might is right when pleasures conflict.

B. Without external absolute, majority vote is absolute. But this justifies a Hitler.

V. Conclusion

A. If there is no absolute by which to judge society, then society is absolute.

B. Humanist thinking—making the individual and mankind the center of all things (autonomous) — has led to death in our culture and in our political life.

Note: Social alternatives after the death of Christian consensus are continued in Episode Ten.


1. What was the basic cause of campus unrest in the sixties? What has happened to the campus scene since, and why?

2. What elements — in the life and thought of the communist and noncommunist world alike — suggest a possible base for world agreement?

3. “To prophesy doom about Western society is premature. We are, like all others who have lived in times of great change, too close to the details to see the broader picture. One thing we do know:

Society has always gone on, and the most wonderful epochs have followed the greatest depressions. To suggest that our day is the exception says more about our headache than it does about our head.” Debate.

4. As Dr. Schaeffer shows, many apparently isolated events and options gain new meaning when seen in the context of the whole. How far does your own involvement in business, law, financing, and so on reveal an acquiescence to current values?

Key Events and Persons

Oliver Wendell Holmes: 1841-1935

Herbert Marcuse: 1898-1979

Jurgen Habermas 1929-

Alexander Solzhenitsyn: 1917-

Hungarian Revolution: 1956

Free Speech Movement: 1964

Czechoslovakian repression: 1968

Woodstock and Altamont: 1969

Radical bombings: 1970

Supreme Court abortion ruling: 1973

Solzhenitsyn’s The Gulag Archipelago: 1973-74

Further Study

Keeping one’s eyes and ears open is the most useful study project: the prevalence of pornographic films and books, more and more suggestive advertising and TV shows, and signs of arbitrary absolutes.

The following books will repay careful reading, and Solzhenitsyn, though long and horrifying, should not be skipped.

Os Guinness, The Dust of Death (1973).

Alexander Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago: Parts I-II (1973), Parts III-IV (1974).


A Christian Manifesto Francis Schaeffer

Published on Dec 18, 2012

A video important to today. The man was very wise in the ways of God. And of government. Hope you enjoy a good solis teaching from the past. The truth never gets old.

The Roots of the Emergent Church by Francis Schaeffer

How Should We then Live Episode 7 small (Age of Nonreason)

#02 How Should We Then Live? (Promo Clip) Dr. Francis Schaeffer

10 Worldview and Truth

Two Minute Warning: How Then Should We Live?: Francis Schaeffer at 100

Francis Schaeffer “BASIS FOR HUMAN DIGNITY” Whatever…HTTHR

Distinguished guest lecture by Jürgen Habermas at KU Leuven

Published on Apr 27, 2013

Read the full text of the lecture here: http://www.kuleuven.be/communicatie/e…

The renowned German philosopher and sociologist Jürgen Habermas came to Leuven and shared his perspective on the future of a democratic Europe on April 26 2013 in the Pieter De Somer Auditorium. The lecture was introduced by the President of the European Council, Herman Van Rompuy.


Dr. Peter Berger on Religion & Modernity

Published on September 21, 2011

What Happens when a Leftist Philosopher Discovers God? by Peter Berger

Society is the social science journal superbly edited by Jonathan Imber. In its fall issue it carries an article by Philippe Portier (Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes in Paris), entitled “Religion and Democracy in the Thought of Juergen Habermas”. Coincidentally, in a recent issue of the German news magazine Der Spiegel, Habermas is on a list of German celebrity intellectuals who pop up continuously in the media. (The list includes Margot Kaessmann, the Protestant bishop who resigned after being caught driving under the influence. Curiously, she only became a celebrity after this unfortunate incident.) Habermas has been a public intellectual (a more polite term for celebrity) for a very long time. I have never been terribly interested in Habermas, but the coincidence made me think about him. Portier’s article does tell an intriguing story. It might be called a man-bites-dog story.
Habermas is exactly my age. Our paths crossed briefly in the 1960s, when he was a visiting professor in the Graduate Faculty of the New School for Social Research, where I was then teaching. We did not particularly take to each other.  I was put off by both his leftist politics and his ponderous philosophical language. (German philosophers, no matter where located on the ideological spectrum, vie with each other in producing texts which are comprehensible only to a small group of initiates.) I also sensed a certain professorial arrogance. I remember reading a response by Habermas to a critic, limited to the statement that he refused to discuss with an individual who quoted Hegel from a secondary source.
Habermas first received a doctorate in philosophy, but moved toward sociology under the influence of the neo-Marxist Frankfurt School, then acquired a second doctorate in the latter field under the fiercely Marxist Wolfgang Abendroth. In 1964 he became a professor in Frankfurt, as successor to Max Horkheimer, who by then was a neo-Marxist icon. Habermas was a hero of the so-called student revolution which erupted in the late 1960s. His students fanned out across West German academia, creating a network which for a while administered an effective ideological hegemony in the human sciences. At the time I found Habermas’ role in this rather objectionable. But I gave him credit for distancing himself sharply from the more radical wing of the student movement, as he later distanced himself from the anti-Enlightenment views of  the postmodernists.

In 1981 Habermas published his magnum opus, The Theory of Communicative Action, a strong endorsement of reason as the foundation of public life in a democracy. He retired from his professorship in 1993, but not from his role as an active advocate of Enlightenment rationality. It is debatable how far his more recent work still continues under a neo-Marxist theoretical umbrella. His views on religion have shifted considerably.
Portier distinguishes three phases in Habermas’ treatment of religion.

In phase one, lasting up to the early 1980s, he still viewed religion as an “alienating reality”, a tool of domination for the powerful. In good Marxist tradition, he thought that religion would eventually disappear, as modern society comes to be based on “communicative rationality” and no longer needs the old irrational illusions.

In phase two, roughly 1985-2000, this anti-religious animus is muted. Religion now is seen as unlikely to disappear, because many people (though presumably not Habermas) continue to need its consolations. The public sphere, however, must be exclusively dominated by rationality. Religion must be relegated to private life. One could say that in this phase, at least in the matter of religion, Habermas graduated from Marxism to the French ideal of laicite—the public life of the republic kept antiseptically clean of religious contamination.
Phase three is more interesting. As of the late 1990s Habermas’ view of religion is more benign. Religion is now seen as having a useful public function, quite apart from its private consolations. The “colonization” of society by “turbo-capitalism” (nice term—I don’t know if Habermas coined it) has created a cultural crisis and has undermined the solidarity without which democratic rationality cannot function. We are now moving into a “post-secular society”, which can make good use of the “moral intuition” that religion still supplies. Following in the footsteps of Ernst Bloch and other neo-Marxist philo-Godders, Habermas also credits Biblical religion, Judaism and Christianity, for having driven out magical thinking (here there is an echo of Max Weber’s idea of “ the disenchantment of the world”), and for having laid the foundations of individual autonomy and rights.

Habermas developed these ideas in a number of publications and media interviews. The most interesting source (not discussed by Portier in the article) is a 2007 publication by a Catholic press,The Dialectics of Secularization. It is a conversation between Habermas and Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (at the time of this exchange head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, subsequently Pope Benedict XVI). Habermas here gives credit to Christianity for being the purveyor of a universal egalitarianism (equality of all people) and for an openness to reason, thus continuing to provide moral substance for democracy. Not surprisingly, Ratzinger (current Pope) agreed. I am not sure what Habermas’ personal beliefs are. But I don’t think that his change of mind about religion has anything to do with some sort of personal conversion. Rather, as has been the case with most sociologists of religion, Habermas has looked at the world and concluded that secularization theory—that is, the thesis that modernization necessarily leads to a decline of religion—does not fit the facts of the matter. Beyond this acknowledgement of the empirical reality of the contemporary world, Habermas admits the historical roots in Biblical religion of modern individualism, and he thinks that this connection is still operative today. Yet, when all is said and done, Habermas now has a positive view of religion (at least in its Judaeo-Christian version) for utilitarian reasons: Religion, whether true or not, is socially useful.
Let us stipulate that smoking is unhealthy. Let us then assume that a tribe in some remote jungle believes that tobacco smoke attracts malevolent spirits. A public health official sent into the region does not, of course, share this superstition. But he makes use of it in dissuading people from acquiring a taste for newly available cigarettes—because he knows that some people do the right thing for a wrong reason. Eventually, he thinks, people will do the right thing for a better reason. And that will be the end of the demonological theory of tobacco smoke.
Any sociologist will agree that religion, true or not, is useful for the solidarity and moral consensus of society. The problem is that this utility depends on at least some people actually believing that there is the supernatural reality that religion affirms. The utility ceases when nobody believes this anymore.
Edward Gibbon, in chapter 2 of his famous history of the decline of the Roman Empire, has this to say: “The various modes of worship, which prevailed in the Roman world, were all considered by the people, as equally true; by the philosopher, as equally false; and by the magistrate, as equally useful”. When you cross the philosopher with the magistrate, you get Habermas.

Rick Roderick on Habermas – The Fragile Dignity of Humanity [full length]

Uploaded on Jan 25, 2012

This video is 5th in the 8-part video lecture series, The Self Under Siege: Philosophy in the Twentieth Century (1993).

Lecture notes:

I. Habermas is perhaps the last important defender of a kind of rationalism that attempts to save the contributions of modernity, while recognizing its distortions and pathologies. He will attempt to disentangle enlightenment in myth in the name of human emancipation free from unnecessary constraints.

II. Habermas begins his project with a distinction between labor (as analyzed by Marx) and interaction. The first is based on production, the second on communication. The first is monological, the second dialogical. Freud serves as the model for the study of distorted forms of speech and action upon which a critical theory of society can take its start.

III. But to criticize distorted communication, a model of undistorted communication is required. Habermas seeks to develop an argument that the human species has a fundamental interest in undistorted communication that is built into the very structure of language.

IV. Undistorted communication must meet four conditions; the symmetry condition (everyone has an equal chance to talk and listen); the sincerity condition (everyone discloses what they believe to be true); the normative condition (everyone attempts to say what is right morally).

V. Such communication would make a free society possible in which the only force a free person must recognize is “the unforced force of the better argument”. This is not just an elitist notion, since “in a process of enlightenment there can only be participants”.

VI. Undistorted speech and action opens us up to the concept of communicative rationality that acts as a counter concept to merely instrumental rationality as criticized by Marcuse. For Habermas, we should seek a balance between instrumental and critical reason, between science and the ethical and the aesthetic dimensions that have been unbalanced by power and money, state and economy.

VII. The fragile self is caught between these abstract systems of control in its struggle for autonomy and meaning. Habermas’ project for emancipation holds out the hope that a measure of the dignity of humanity can be rescued from the one-sided development of modernity through the power of solidarity and reason.

VIII. Habermas’ project is ongoing, and includes activity in the public sphere where alone the promise of a reasoned consensus based on undistorted communication might be fulfilled.

For more information, see http://www.rickroderick.org


Jürgen Habermas

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jürgen Habermas
Born 18 June 1929 (age 85)
Düsseldorf, Rhine Province,Prussia, Germany

Jürgen Habermas (/ˈjɜrɡən/ or /ˈjʊərɡən ˈhɑːbərmɑːs/;[1] German: [ˈjʏrɡn̩ ˈhaːbɐmaːs];[2] born 18 June 1929) is a German sociologist and philosopher in the tradition of critical theory and pragmatism. He is perhaps best known for his theories on communicative rationality and the public sphere. Global polls consistently find that Habermas is widely recognized as one of the world’s leading intellectuals.[3]

Associated with the Frankfurt School, Habermas’s work focuses on the foundations of social theory and epistemology, the analysis of advanced capitalistic societies and democracy, the rule of law in a critical social-evolutionary context, and contemporary politics, particularly German politics. Habermas’s theoretical system is devoted to revealing the possibility of reason, emancipation, and rational-critical communication latent in modern institutions and in the human capacity to deliberate and pursue rational interests. Habermas is known for his work on the concept of modernity, particularly with respect to the discussions of rationalization originally set forth byMax Weber. He has been influenced by American pragmatism, action theory, and even poststructuralism.


Jürgen Habermas (1929-   )

Jürgen Habermas was born in Düsseldorf, Germany, in 1929. He was 15 when Germany lost the war to the Allies in 1945. He had served in the Hitler Youth and had been sent to defend the western front during the final months of the war. His father was a passive sympathizer with Nazism. Following the Nuremberg trials and the release of documentary films depicting the activities in the concentration camps, Habermas had a political awakening: “All at once we saw that we had been living in a politically criminal system.” This horrific realization was to have a lasting impact on his philosophy, a vigilance against the repeating of such politically criminal behavior.

Habermas’ entrance onto the intellectual scene began in the 1950’s with an influential critique of Martin Heidegger’s philosophy. He studied philosophy at Universities in Göttingen and Bonn, which he followed with studies in philosophy and sociology at the Institute for Social Research under Max Horkheimer and Theodor Adorno. In the 1960’s and 70’s he taught at the University of Heidelberg and Frankfurt am Main. He then accepted a directorship at the Max Planck Institute in Starnberg in 1971. In 1980 he won the Adorno Prize, and two years later he took a professorship at the University of Frankfurt, remaining there until his retirement in 1994.

Habermas embraced the critical theory of the Frankfurt School, a position that views contemporary Western society as maintaining a problematic conception of rationality inherently destructive in its impulse toward domination. He cited the domination over nature by science and technology as exemplary in this regard, And though the Frankfurt School included the 18th century Enlightenment in its evaluation of problematic rationalities, Habermas sought to defend aspects of the Enlightenment that he believed to be constructive and even emancipatory; the development of solutions to problems through the use of reason and logic, while breaking from habits, the traditional conventions that include the strict obedience of religion and its prohibitions. Because Modernism took on the Enlightenment project, it often did so by lamenting the loss of a sense of purpose, coherence and social values in modern society. For Habermas, this tendency is ineffectual, and thus he calls for a return to the Enlightenment’s privileging of order and reason.

In his work, Towards Reconstructing Historical Materialism, Habermas laid out his primary differences with Marx. He viewed Marx’ assessment of human evolution as simply an economic progression as too narrow a definition that leaves out any sense of individual freedom, a critique that Habermas held of modern society as a whole. Habermas divided this notion of economic progression, an evolution of societies, from the process of learning that is assumed by Historical Materialism. Marx viewed progress as linear and deterministic, whereas Habermas argues that the process of learning is dynamic and unpredictable from one epoch to another.

Habermas’ primary contribution to philosophy is his development of a theory of rationality. An ongoing element throughout his work is a critique of industrial democracies in the West for the equating humanity with economic efficiency. For Habermas the ability to use logic and analysis, rationality, goes beyond the strategic calculation of how to achieve a chosen goal. There exists a possibility for community, through communicative action that strives for agreement between others — this is rationality itself. Habermas thus stressed the importance for having an “ideal speech situation” in which citizens are able to raise moral and political concerns and defend them by rationality alone.

In 1981 Habermas published The Theory of Communicative Action, in which he develops on the concept of an ideal speech situation and an accompanying ethics of discourse. Working with Frankfurt School colleague Karl-Otto Apel, he proposes a model of communicative rationality that takes into account the effect power has upon the situation of discourse and opposes the traditional idea of an objective and functionalist reason. Within societal interactions is the performance of subjective and intersubjective duties that are determined by other capacities of reasoning. The theory is developed into comprehensive social theory from which an ethics of discourse is derived. As a furthering of the speech-act philosophy of J.L. Austin, along with theories of child development as envisioned by Jean Piaget, Habermas and Apel sought to construct a non-oppressive, inclusive and universalist moral framework for discourse, based on the inherent desire in all speech acts for a mutual understanding.

The theory of communicative action was applied by Habermas to politics and law, advocating a “deliberative democracy” in which governmental institutions and laws would be open to free reflection and discussion by the public. A key obstacle to the institution of this forum of open policy making is the legitimacy of private property, as it divides interests and makes unequal the situations of individuals. Habermas believes that within his form of democracy, men and women aware of their interest in self-governance and responsibility would seek to adhere only to the most rational argument.

Habermas’ garnered most respect and a teacher and mentor for many theorists working in political sociology, social theory, and social philosophy. Since his retirement from teaching he has continued to be an active thinker and writer.


Francis Schaeffer has written extensively on art and culture spanning the last 2000 years and here are some posts I have done on this subject before : Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 10 “Final Choices” episode 9 “The Age of Personal Peace and Affluence”episode 8 “The Age of Fragmentation”episode 7 “The Age of Non-Reason” episode 6 “The Scientific Age” , episode 5 “The Revolutionary Age” episode 4 “The Reformation” episode 3 “The Renaissance”episode 2 “The Middle Ages,”, and  episode 1 “The Roman Age,” . My favorite episodes are number 7 and 8 since they deal with modern art and culture primarily.(Joe Carter rightly noted,Schaefferwho always claimed to be an evangelist and not a philosopher—was often criticized for the way his work oversimplified intellectual history and philosophy.” To those critics I say take a chill pill because Schaeffer was introducing millions into the fields of art and culture!!!! !!! More people need to read his works and blog about them because they show how people’s worldviews affect their lives!

J.I.PACKER WROTE OF SCHAEFFER, “His communicative style was not that of a cautious academic who labors for exhaustive coverage and dispassionate objectivity. It was rather that of an impassioned thinker who paints his vision of eternal truth in bold strokes and stark contrasts.Yet it is a fact that MANY YOUNG THINKERS AND ARTISTS…HAVE FOUND SCHAEFFER’S ANALYSES A LIFELINE TO SANITY WITHOUT WHICH THEY COULD NOT HAVE GONE ON LIVING.”

Francis Schaeffer’s works  are the basis for a large portion of my blog posts and they have stood the test of time. In fact, many people would say that many of the things he wrote in the 1960’s  were right on  in the sense he saw where our western society was heading and he knew that abortion, infanticide and youth enthansia were  moral boundaries we would be crossing  in the coming decades because of humanism and these are the discussions we are having now!)

There is evidence that points to the fact that the Bible is historically true as Schaeffer pointed out in episode 5 of WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE? There is a basis then for faith in Christ alone for our eternal hope. This link shows how to do that.

Francis Schaeffer in Art and the Bible noted, “Many modern artists, it seems to me, have forgotten the value that art has in itself. Much modern art is far too intellectual to be great art. Many modern artists seem not to see the distinction between man and non-man, and it is a part of the lostness of modern man that they no longer see value in the work of art as a work of art.” 

Many modern artists are left in this point of desperation that Schaeffer points out and it reminds me of the despair that Solomon speaks of in Ecclesiastes.  Christian scholar Ravi Zacharias has noted, “The key to understanding the Book of Ecclesiastes is the term ‘under the sun.’ What that literally means is you lock God out of a closed system, and you are left with only this world of time plus chance plus matter.” THIS IS EXACT POINT SCHAEFFER SAYS SECULAR ARTISTS ARE PAINTING FROM TODAY BECAUSE THEY BELIEVED ARE A RESULT OF MINDLESS CHANCE.


“So it’s like idealism, in general. And so like realism and Dada. That’s also trying to search the expansion of the human ability to see things in a different way. So they are like very ambitious adventurism in a way.

Featured artist: Hiroshi Sugimoto: Becoming an Artist | Art21 “Exclusive”

Uploaded on Apr 29, 2011

Episode #141: Filmed in his New York studio, artist Hiroshi Sugimoto recounts his student days studying Western philosophy (Hegel, Kant, Marx) in Tokyo, encountering Oriental philosophy (such as Zen Buddhism) in California, and his interest in the history of Modernism—all schools of thought that demonstrate “the human ability to see things in a different way.”

Central to Hiroshi Sugimoto’s work is the idea that photography is a time machine, a method of preserving and picturing memory and time. Sugimoto sees with the eye of the sculptor, painter, architect, and philosopher. He creates images that seem to convey his subjects’ essence, whether architectural, sculptural, painterly, or of the natural world.

Learn more about Hiroshi Sugimoto at: http://www.art21.org/artists/hiroshi-…

CREDITS | Producer: Wesley Miller & Nick Ravich. Interview: Susan Sollins. Camera: Mead Hunt. Sound: Merce Williams. Editor: Mary Ann Toman. Artwork Courtesy: Hiroshi Sugimoto. Video: © 2011, Art21, Inc. All rights reserved

Hiroshi Sugimoto, Richard Tuttle, Fred Wilson, and Krzysztof Wodiczko.


From his website:

Stylized Sculpture

The history of clothing is as old as that of humanity itself. From the time human

consciousness first awakened from animal nature, we humans have wrapped our

bareness in clothing, very much the way Adam and Eve did with fig leaves. The first

human clothes were animal pelts, a sign of supremacy over other animals by virtue of

our superior physical skills and intelligence. Humans used weapons and tools to kill

animals, skin their hides, and eat their meat.

Fur served to help humans conserve body heat and survive the ice ages, but

conversely led to the devolution of body hair. The ability to maintain a constant body

temperature, whatever the climate, is thought to have contributed to making human

estrus, or sexual “heat,” constant as well, this permanent mating season greatly

strengthening the human capacity to propagate. Likewise, clothing came to conceal our

genitalia while enhancing physical measures of attraction, enabling us to consciously

control our reproductive activities. These added, interrelated dimensions of clothed

body expression must have played a major role in the socializing process and the rise

of civilization.

By the age of the earliest civilizations, humans had gained the knowledge of how to

weave and dye plant fibers, and as primitive communal society stratified into classes,

clothing came to symbolize rank and status. Figures of authority in particular made

extra display of their power and wealth by means of special clothing and adornment.

In India, China, Korea, Japan, and elsewhere in Asia―as in Mesopotamia, Egypt,

Greece, and Rome―ancient civilizations each developed a unique culture of attire.

In the early fifteenth century, Europe entered the age of seafaring and exploration,

while scientific advancements led to an ever more logical mindset and with it a rational

worldview of a spherical planet―which grew “smaller” with every new discovery.

Thereafter, European imperialist expansion encompassed almost the entire world, this

overwhelming rule establishing a primacy of Eurocentric standards of dress that

became synonymous with modernization.

Gender awareness again came to the fore in the 1920s―after World War I―and the

progressive emancipation and elevation of women earned fashion an important place

in modern life, thanks especially to the pioneering efforts of Madeleine Vionnet and

Gabrielle “Coco” Chanel. The Dada, surrealist, and futurist avant-garde art movements

further influenced fashion, and this fusion of fashion and art has continued into the

present day. Stylized Sculpture looks at the post-Vionnet history of fashion with a view

toward the human body clothed in “artificial skin” as modern sculpture.

– Hiroshi Sugimoto


From PBS:

Hiroshi Sugimoto

About Hiroshi Sugimoto

Hiroshi Sugimoto was born in Tokyo, Japan, in 1948, and lives and works in New York and Tokyo. His interest in art began early. His reading of André Breton’s writings led to his discovery of Surrealism and Dada and a lifelong connection to the work and philosophy of Marcel Duchamp. Central to Sugimoto’s work is the idea that photography is a time machine, a method of preserving and picturing memory and time. This theme provides the defining principle of his ongoing series, including “Dioramas” (1976–), “Theaters” (1978–), and “Seascapes” (1980–). Sugimoto sees with the eye of the sculptor, painter, architect, and philosopher. He uses his camera in a myriad of ways to create images that seem to convey his subjects’ essence, whether architectural, sculptural, painterly, or of the natural world. He places extraordinary value on craftsmanship, printing his photographs with meticulous attention and a keen understanding of the nuances of the silver print and its potential for tonal richness—in his seemingly infinite palette of blacks, whites, and grays. Recent projects include an architectural commission at Naoshima Contemporary Art Center in Japan, for which Sugimoto designed and built a Shinto shrine, and the photographic series, “Conceptual Forms,” inspired by Duchamp’s “Large Glass: The Bride Stripped Bare by her Bachelors, Even.” Sugimoto has received fellowships from the Guggenheim Foundation and the National Endowment for the Arts; in 2001, he received Hasselblad Foundation International Award in Photography. He has had one-person exhibitions at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York; the Museum of Modern Art, New York; the Museum of Contemporary Art, Los Angeles; Contemporary Arts Museum, Houston; Museum of Contemporary Art, Chicago; and Hara Museum of Contemporary Art, Tokyo; among others. Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden, Washington, DC, and Mori Art Museum, Tokyo, were joint organizers of a 2005 Sugimoto retrospective.


Hiroshi Sugimoto

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Hiroshi Sugimoto, Neue Nationalgalerie, Berlin

“Appropriate Proportion”, one of his architectural projects. Renovation of Gooh shrine, Naoshima, Kagawa prefecture, Japan

Hiroshi Sugimoto (杉本博司, Sugimoto Hiroshi), born on February 23, 1948, is a Japanese photographer currently dividing his time between Tokyo, Japan and New York City, United States. His catalogue is made up of a number of series, each having a distinct theme and similar attributes.

Early life and education

Hiroshi Sugimoto was born and raised in Tokyo, Japan. In 1970, Sugimoto studied politics and sociology at Rikkyō University in Tokyo. In 1974, he retrained as an artist and received his BFA in Fine Arts at the Art Center College of Design, Los Angeles, California. Afterwards, Sugimoto settled in New York City.


Sugimoto has spoken of his work as an expression of ‘time exposed’, or photographs serving as a time capsule for a series of events in time. His work also focuses on transience of life, and the conflict between life and death.

Sugimoto is also deeply influenced by the writings and works of Marcel Duchamp, as well as the Dadaist and Surrealist movements as a whole. He has also expressed a great deal of interest in late 20th century modern architecture.

His use of an 8×10 large-format camera and extremely long exposures has garnered Sugimoto a reputation as a photographer of the highest technical ability. He is equally acclaimed for the conceptual and philosophical aspects of his work.[citation needed]

Dioramas and Portraits

Sugimoto began his work with Dioramas in 1976, a series in which he photographed displays in natural history museums. (A polar bear on a fake ice floe contemplates his fresh-killed seal; vultures fight over carrion in front of painted skies; exotic monkeys hoot in a plastic jungle.)[1] Initially the pictures were shot at the American Museum of Natural History, a place he returned for later dioramas in 1982, 1994, and 2012.[2] The cultural assumption that cameras always show us reality tricks many viewers into assuming the animals in the photos are real until they examine the pictures carefully. His series Portraits, begun in 1999, is based on a similar idea. In that series, Sugimoto photographs wax figures of Henry VIII and his wives. These wax figures are based on portraits from the 16th century and when taking the picture Sugimoto attempts to recreate the lighting that would have been used by the painter. Focusing on Madame Tussaud’s in London, its branch in Amsterdam and a wax museum in Ito, Japan, Sugimoto took three-quarter view photos, using 8-by-10-inch negatives, of the most realistic wax figures. They are typically taken against a black background.[3]


In 1978, Sugimoto’s Theatres series involved photographing old American movie palaces and drive-ins with a folding 4×5 camera and tripod, opening his camera shutter and exposing the film for the duration of the entire feature-length movie, the film projector providing the sole lighting.[4] The luminescent screen in the centre of the composition, the architectural details and the seats of the theatre are the only subjects that register owing to the long exposure of each photograph, while the unique lighting gives the works a surreal look, as a part of Sugimoto’s attempt to reveal time in photography.


In 1980 he began working on an ongoing series of photographs of the sea and its horizon, Seascapes, in locations all over the world, using an old-fashioned large-format camera to make exposures of varying duration (up to three hours).[5][6] The locations range from the English Channel and the Cliffs of Moher [7] to the Arctic Ocean, from Positano, Italy, to the Tasman Sea and from the Norwegian Sea at Vesterålen to the Black Sea at Ozuluce in Turkey. The black-and-white pictures are all exactly the same size, bifurcated exactly in half by the horizon line.[8] The systematic nature of Sugimoto’s project recalls the work Sunrise and Sunset at Praiano by Sol LeWitt, in which he photographed sunrises and sunsets over the Tyrrhenian Sea off Praiano, Italy, on the Amalfi Coast.[9]

Architecture works

In 1995, Sugimoto photographed the Sanjūsangen-dō (“Hall of Thirty-Three Bays”) in Kyoto. In special preparation for the shoot, he had all late-medieval and early-modern embellishments removed, as well as having the contemporary fluorescent lighting turned off.[10] Shot from a high vantage point[1] and editing out all architectural features, the resulting 48 photographs[1] concentrate on the bodhisattvas, 1,000 life-size and almost identical gilded figures carved from wood in the 12th and 13th centuries, that are banked up inside the building.[11]

In 1997, on a commission from the Museum of Contemporary Art in Chicago, Sugimoto began producing series of large-format photographs of notable buildings around the world. In 2003, the museum showed the series in a sepulchral installation, with the pictures installed on layered rows of dark-painted partitions.[12] Sugimoto’s later Architecture series (2000–03) consists of blurred images of well-known examples of Modernist architecture.[13]

In 2001, Sugimoto traveled the length of Japan, visiting the so-called meisho “famous sites” for pines: Miho no Matsubara, Matsushima, Amanohashidate.[14] On the royal palace grounds in Tokyo, Sugimoto photographed a pine landscape, copying a traditional 16th-century Japanese ink-painting style.[15] Listed as Japanese national treasures, the Shorinzu-byobu (Pine Forest Screens) (ca. 1590) by Momoyama period (1568 1600) painter Hasegawa Tōhaku (1539–1610) represent a coming of age in Japanese imaging.


In July 2003 Sugimoto travelled to St. Louis to photograph the Pulitzer Foundation for the Arts, designed by Tadao Ando whose work he had portrayed various times before. However, his ended up photographing Richard Serra’s sculpture Joe (the first in his “Torqued Spiral” series), which rests in an outdoor courtyard, at dawn and at dusk for five days.[16] The resulting Joe series was made with short exposure. The blurring effect results from Sugimoto’s unconventional use of the flexibility of the large format camera, whereby he sets the distance between the lens and the film to twice the focal length, in his words “twice-infinity”.[17] Sugimoto gave the photographs serial numbers from his Architecture series. Significantly, the hand-developed gelatin-silver photographs are mounted on aluminum panels but are otherwise unframed, unglazed and unlaminated to draw attention to what Sugimoto describes as the “transformation from the three-dimensional steel source sculpture to the thin layers of what I would call my ‘silver sculpture’.”[18] When the Pulitzer Foundation decided to publish a book about the series, Sugimoto asked Jonathan Safran Foer, whom he had met years earlier, to write a text to accompany the nineteen selected photographs.[16]

A 2004 series comprises large photographs of antique mathematical and mechanical models, which Sugimoto came across in Tokyo and shot from slightly below.[19] The Mathematical forms – stereometric models in plaster – were created in the 19th century to provide students with a visual understanding of complex trigonometric functions. The Mechanical forms – machine models including gears, pumps and regulators – are industrial tools used to demonstrate basic movements of modern machinery. Sugimoto began working on this series as a response to The Bride Stripped Bare by Her Bachelors, Even (The Large Glass) by Marcel Duchamp.[20]

For the series Stylized Sculpture (2007), Sugimoto selected distinctive garments by celebrated couturiers from the collection of the Kyoto Costume Institute, shot in chiaroscuro on headless mannequins—from Madeleine Vionnet’s precociously modern T-dress and Balenciaga’s wasp-waisted billowing ensemble to Yves St Laurent’s strict geometric Mondrian shift and Issey Miyake’s sail-like slip.[21]

For his 2009 series Lightning Fields Sugimoto abandoned the use of the camera, producing photographs using a 400,000 volt Van de Graaff generator to apply an electrical charge directly onto the film.[4] Instead of placing an object on photo-sensitive paper, then exposing it to light, he produced the image by causing electrical sparks to erupt over the on surface of a 7-by-2.5-foot sheet of film laid on a large metal tabletop.[22] The highly detailed results combine bristling textures and branching sparks into highly evocative images.

Recent work

In 2009 U2 selected Sugimoto’s Boden Sea, Uttwil (1993) as the cover for their album No Line on the Horizon to be released in March that year. This image had previously been used by sound artists Richard Chartier and Taylor Deupree for their 2006 CD inspired by Sugimoto’s “seascapes” series.[23] Sugimoto noted it was merely a “coincidence” that the image appears on both album covers. In addition, he notes that the agreement with U2 was a “stone age deal” or, artist-to-artist. No cash exchanged hands, rather a barter agreement which allows Sugimoto to use the band’s song “No Line on the Horizon” (partly inspired by the “Boden Sea” image) in any future project.[24]

In 2009, Sugimoto acquired some rare negatives made by Henry Fox Talbot in the 1840s and retrieved through an intensely fragile process what “looks remarkably like Plato’s shadows in the cave”.[25] The works of Sugimoto’s All Five Elements series (2011) consist of optical quality glass with black and white film.[26] On the occasion of Art Basel in 2012, Sugimoto presented Couleurs de l’Ombre, 20 different colorful scarf designs in editions of just seven, all created – using a new inkjet printing method – for French fashion label Hermès.[27]


Sugimoto is also an accomplished architect. He approaches all of his work from many different perspectives, and architecture is one component that he uses to design the settings for his exhibitions. His recent projects include an architectural commission at Naoshima Contemporary Art Center in Japan, for which Sugimoto designed and built a Shinto shrine.[28] He also gets involved with the performance art occurring beside them. This allows him to frame his works precisely the way he wants to.

In 2013, Sugimoto created a sculpture and rock garden for the Sasha Kanetanaka restaurant in Omotesandō, Tokyo. He also designed Stove, a top-tier French restaurant housed in a refurbished wooden house in the Kiyoharu Art Village, Yamanashi Prefecture.[29]


Sugimoto has exhibited extensively in major museums and galleries throughout the world, including the Museum of Contemporary Art in Los Angeles (1994), the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York (1995); Deutsche Guggenheim, Berlin (2000); the Kunsthaus Bregenz, Austria (2002); the Serpentine Gallery, London (2003) and the Fondation Cartier pour l’Art Contemporain, Paris (2004). A major 30-year survey of his work opened at the Mori Art Museum, Tokyo in 2005 and travelled to the Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden, Washington, D.C. and the Modern Art Museum of Fort Worth, Texas (2006). In 2007, a European retrospective began at K20 Kunstsammlung Nordrhein-Westfalen, Düsseldorf (2007) and traveled to the Museum der Moderne, Salzburg, Neue Nationalgalerie, Berlin and Kunstmuseum Luzern, Switzerland. (2008). In 2011, Gagosian Gallery in Paris showed Sugimoto’s series Stylized Sculpture alongside Rodin‘s sculptures The Three Shades (c. 1880), Monument to Victor Hugo (1897), and The Whistler Muse (1908).[21]

In 2005, Japan Society, New York, and Arthur M. Sackler Gallery, Washington, organized a US and Canadian tour of “Hiroshi Sugimoto: History of History”, an exhibition of artifacts that Sugimoto has collected over the years, particularly from East Asia and Japan, curated by the artist himself (travelled to the Kanazawa 21st Century Museum of Contemporary Art and the National Museum of Art, Japan).[30]


Sugimoto’s work is held in numerous public collections including the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York; Moderna Museet, Stockholm; Centre Georges Pompidou, Paris; Museum of Contemporary Art, Tokyo; Museum of Modern Art, New York; National Gallery, London; National Museum of Modern Art, Tokyo; Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.; MACBA, Barcelona; and Tate Gallery, London.[31]



Art market

Sugimoto has been represented by Pace Gallery, New York, since 2010,[32] while also regularly showing with Gagosian Gallery. Before, he showed with Sonnabend Gallery.


  1. ^ Jump up to: a b c Blake Gopnik (February 20, 2006), Hiroshi Sugimoto, Emphasizing the Play Of Shadow and Lie Washington Post.
  2. Jump up ^ Randy Kennedy (October 8, 2012), ‘Fossilizing’ With a Camera New York Times.
  3. Jump up ^ Katherine Roth (September 10, 2001), Framing a Snapshot in Time Los Angeles Times.
  4. ^ Jump up to: a b c Peter Yeoh (2010). “Capturing Light – Hiroshi Sugimoto reveals the essence of his life’s work”. Glass Magazine (2): 174–179. ISSN 2041-6318.
  5. Jump up ^ David Pagel (December 18, 1997), A Focus on Tranquillity Los Angeles Times.
  6. Jump up ^ Hiroshi Sugimoto: 7 Days / 7 Nights, November 6, 2008 – February 14, 2009 Gagosian Gallery, New York.
  7. Jump up ^ “North Atlantic Ocean, Cliffs of Moher,” Hiroshi Sugimoto 1989.Metropolitan Museum of Art http://www.metmuseum.org/collections/search-the-collections/267005.html
  8. Jump up ^ William Wilson (March 4, 1994), Sugimoto’s Sea of Meditation at MOCA Los Angeles Times.
  9. Jump up ^ Charles Hagen (February 21, 1992), ART IN REVIEW; Hiroshi Sugimoto New York Times.
  10. Jump up ^ Sea of Buddhas (1995) Hiroshi Sugimoto.
  11. Jump up ^ John Russell (December 7, 1995), PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; Radiant Wonders of the Mid-Century World New York Times.
  12. Jump up ^ Holland Cotter (October 17, 2003), ART IN REVIEW; Hiroshi Sugimoto — ‘Architecture’ New York Times.
  13. Jump up ^ Hiroshi Sugimoto Guggenheim Collection.
  14. Jump up ^ Pine Trees (2001) Hiroshi Sugimoto.
  15. Jump up ^ Ann Wilson Lloyd (February 11, 2001), The Hall of Mirrors Meets the House of Wax New York Times.
  16. ^ Jump up to: a b Andrew Blum (September 17, 2006), Art Capturing Art Capturing Art Capturing … New York Times.
  17. Jump up ^ Hiroshi Sugimoto, Architecture
  18. Jump up ^ Hiroshi Sugimoto: Joe, September 9 – October 14, 2006 Gagosian Gallery, Los Angeles.
  19. Jump up ^ Michael Kimmelman (May 27, 2005), ART IN REVIEW; Hiroshi Sugimoto New York Times.
  20. Jump up ^ Hiroshi Sugimoto: Conceptual Forms, April 7 – May 28, 2005 Gagosian Gallery, London.
  21. ^ Jump up to: a b Rodin – Sugimoto, February 11 – March 25, 2011 Gagosian Gallery, Paris.
  22. Jump up ^ Carol Kino (November 11, 2010), Stealing Mother Nature’s Thunder New York Times.
  23. Jump up ^ Is the New U2 Album Cover a Rip-off? Retrieved Jan 19, 2009
  24. Jump up ^ Photographer Sugimoto strikes a Stone Age deal with U2. The Japan Times. Retrieved Nov 18, 2010
  25. Jump up ^ Laura Cumming (August 14, 2012), Hiroshi Sugimoto; The Queen: Art and Image; Elizabeth Blackadder; Ingrid Calame – review The Guardian.
  26. Jump up ^ Hiroshi Sugimoto: Five Elements, 2011, October 7 – July 15, 2012 Chinati Foundation, Marfa.
  27. Jump up ^ Nick Compton (June 19, 2012), Limited-edition Hermès Editeur scarves by Hiroshi Sugimoto Wallpaper.
  28. Jump up ^ Hiroshi Sugimoto: The Day After, November 6 – December 24, 2010. Pace Gallery, New York.
  29. Jump up ^ Darryl Jingwen Wee (October 8, 2013), Hiroshi Sugimoto-designed Restaurant Opens in Yamanashi Artinfo.
  30. Jump up ^ Grace Glueck (September 23, 2005), Hiroshi Sugimoto Show New York Times.
  31. Jump up ^ Rothko/Sugimoto: Dark Paintings and Seascapes, October 4, 2012 – November 17, 2012 Pace Gallery, London.
  32. Jump up ^ Carol Vogel (January 28, 2010), [1] New York Times.

External links


Facing death head on:

Chamber of Horrors

People in olden times were apparently less fearful and grievous of death than we are

today. To some it was even an honor to be chosen by the gods as a sacrificial victim, a

liberation from the sufferings and strife of this life.

I went to London in 1994, and visited Madame Tussaud’s Wax Museum. There I saw the

blade that guillotined Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette and the electric chair that executed

the Lindberg baby’s kidnapper, among other exhibits―all very real. To corroborate these

various murderous instruments invented by civilized men, I took the requisite eye-witness

photographs: thus did people in times past face death head on.

Several years later when in visited again, the Chamber of Horrors exhibits were gone.

When I asked why, I was told they’d been removed in a gesture to political correctness.

Must we moderns be so sheltered from death?

– Hiroshi Sugimoto


In this video from 5:45 to 8:00 he visited Duchamp’s art and then said how much he was influenced by him

Hiroshi Sugimoto on Memory


Related Posts:

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 10 “Final Choices”

E P I S O D E 1 0 How Should We Then Live 10#1 FINAL CHOICES I. Authoritarianism the Only Humanistic Social Option One man or an elite giving authoritative arbitrary absolutes. A. Society is sole absolute in absence of other absolutes. B. But society has to be led by an elite: John Kenneth […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 9 “The Age of Personal Peace and Affluence”

E P I S O D E 9 How Should We Then Live 9#1 T h e Age of Personal Peace and Afflunce I. By the Early 1960s People Were Bombarded From Every Side by Modern Man’s Humanistic Thought II. Modern Form of Humanistic Thought Leads to Pessimism Regarding a Meaning for Life and for Fixed […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 8 “The Age of Fragmentation”

E P I S O D E 8 How Should We Then Live 8#1 I saw this film series in 1979 and it had a major impact on me. T h e Age of FRAGMENTATION I. Art As a Vehicle Of Modern Thought A. Impressionism (Monet, Renoir, Pissarro, Sisley, Degas) and Post-Impressionism (Cézanne, Van Gogh, Gauguin, […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 7 “The Age of Non-Reason”

E P I S O D E 7 How Should We Then Live 7#1 I am thrilled to get this film series with you. I saw it first in 1979 and it had such a big impact on me. Today’s episode is where we see modern humanist man act on his belief that we live […]

Taking up for Francis Schaeffer’s book Christian Manifesto

I have made it clear from day one when I started this blog that Francis Schaeffer, Milton Friedman, Ronald Reagan and Adrian Rogers had been the biggest influences on my political and religious views. Today I am responding to an unfair attack on Francis Schaeffer’s book “A Christian Manifesto.” As you can see on the […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 6 “The Scientific Age”

E P I S O D E 6 How Should We Then Live 6#1 I am sharing with you a film series that I saw in 1979. In this film Francis Schaeffer asserted that was a shift in Modern Science. A. Change in conviction from earlier modern scientists.B. From an open to a closed natural system: […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 5 “The Revolutionary Age”

E P I S O D E 5 How Should We Then Live 5-1 I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Francis Schaeffer noted, “Reformation Did Not Bring Perfection. But gradually on basis of biblical teaching there was a unique improvement. A. […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 4 “The Reformation”

How Should We Then Live 4-1 I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer makes three key points concerning the Reformation: “1. Erasmian Christian humanism rejected by Farel. 2. Bible gives needed answers not only as to how to be right with […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 3 “The Renaissance”

How Should We Then Live 3-1 I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer really shows why we have so many problems today with this excellent episode. He noted, “Could have gone either way—with emphasis on real people living in […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 2 “The Middle Ages”

How Should We Then Live 2-1 I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer points out that during this time period unfortunately we have the “Church’s deviation from early church’s teaching in regard to authority and the approach to God.” […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 1 “The Roman Age”

How Should We Then Live 1-1 Today I am starting a series that really had a big impact on my life back in the 1970′s when I first saw it. There are ten parts and today is the first. Francis Schaeffer takes a look at Rome and why it fell. It fell because of inward [..

At Berkeley the Free Speech Movement arose simultaneously with the hippie world of drugs. … but rather a call for the freedom to express any political views on Sproul Plaza. … followed the teaching of Herbert Marcuse (1898-). Marcuse was a German professor of philosophy related to the neo-Marxist