I have finally finished reading Jacques Ellul's The Technological Society. It was not a very cheerful read. The thrust of Ellul's diagnosis of western culture is that it has completely fallen prey to technique. Things that were designed to make our lives easier have in fact taken over our lives. Ends have disappeared; everything is about means. We are becoming more and more efficient, more and more technically adept... But why? For what purpose? We no longer know. Everything truly human is suppressed in the rush to turn ourselves into part of the great machine.
As a sort of antidote, I have begun re-reading Eugene Peterson's book The Jesus Way. My main practical concern reading Ellul has not been for society as a whole. I find his picture sadly compelling, and it genuinely grieves. But what troubles me more is the way the church has fallen prey to the same tendencies. Peterson sets out the problem: "More often than not, I find my Christian brothers and sisters uncritically embracing the ways and means practised by the high-profile men and women who lead large corporations, congregations, nations and causes... But these ways and means more often than not violate the ways of Jesus... Doesn't anybody notice that the ways and means taken up, often enthusiastically, are blasphemously at odds with the way Jesus leads his followers? Why doesn't anyone notice?"
Peterson's point is that Christians so often try to do the work of Jesus - Kingdom work - in ways which stand in sharp contradiction to the Kingdom. Why doesn't anyone notice? I would suggest it is because these ways and means get things done. Too often for our liking, Jesus' way looks like a meandering, long-way-round, slow, rough path. We can apply a few simple techniques to get things done better. We still have the same goals in mind, of course; we just have a better way of getting there. And without a doubt, our ways and means work. They grow churches, they stabilise lives, they increase knowledge. Still the same goals...
Or are they? What if Kingdom goals are not the sorts of things you can pursue any which way? What if it is only Jesus' slow, wandering path that will actually get us there? What if 'getting there' isn't really the point anyway; what if it's all about the way?
Inside my head there are thoughts. The thoughts are shiny. Their orange shiny-ness shows through in my hair.
Showing posts with label Jacques Ellul. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jacques Ellul. Show all posts
Sunday, November 02, 2014
Saturday, October 18, 2014
Performance
Here is some more joy from Jacques Ellul. Painful to read, but important I think.
"Public opinon... is completely oriented in favour of technique; only technical phenomena interest modern men. The machine has made itself master of the heart and brain both of the average man and of the mob. What excites the crowd? Performance..."
In other words, getting things done is all that counts. Efficiency and achievement rule the day.
"What is important is to go higher and faster; the object of the performance means little. The act is sufficient unto itself. Modern man can think only in terms of figures, and the higher the figures the greater his satisfaction. He looks for nothing beyond the marvellous escape mechanism that technique has allowed him, to offset the very repressions caused by the life technique forces him to lead. He is reduced in the process to a near nullity."
The means has become the end, and everything genuinely human is in danger of being lost. As Ellul goes on to say, when the increase in performance becomes the measure of all things, the individual human is lost; he becomes part of the mob, because only the whole can drive performance on. Collective performance expresses the will to power of the mob, to which the individual will is sublimated.
The results are two-fold. On the one hand, a mystical devotion to technique, expressing itself in absolute faith in progress; on the other, a "deep conviction that technical problems are the only serious ones. The amused glance people give the philosopher; the lack of interest displayed in metaphysical and theological questions...; the rejection of the humanities which comes from the conviction that we are living in a technical age and education must correspond to it; the search for the immediately practical, carrying the implication that history is useless..."
Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury, I submit to you that this is indeed the world we live in. And I want out.
"Public opinon... is completely oriented in favour of technique; only technical phenomena interest modern men. The machine has made itself master of the heart and brain both of the average man and of the mob. What excites the crowd? Performance..."
In other words, getting things done is all that counts. Efficiency and achievement rule the day.
"What is important is to go higher and faster; the object of the performance means little. The act is sufficient unto itself. Modern man can think only in terms of figures, and the higher the figures the greater his satisfaction. He looks for nothing beyond the marvellous escape mechanism that technique has allowed him, to offset the very repressions caused by the life technique forces him to lead. He is reduced in the process to a near nullity."
The means has become the end, and everything genuinely human is in danger of being lost. As Ellul goes on to say, when the increase in performance becomes the measure of all things, the individual human is lost; he becomes part of the mob, because only the whole can drive performance on. Collective performance expresses the will to power of the mob, to which the individual will is sublimated.
The results are two-fold. On the one hand, a mystical devotion to technique, expressing itself in absolute faith in progress; on the other, a "deep conviction that technical problems are the only serious ones. The amused glance people give the philosopher; the lack of interest displayed in metaphysical and theological questions...; the rejection of the humanities which comes from the conviction that we are living in a technical age and education must correspond to it; the search for the immediately practical, carrying the implication that history is useless..."
Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury, I submit to you that this is indeed the world we live in. And I want out.
Thursday, October 02, 2014
Homo Economicus
Here is some cheery analysis of the subordination of human beings to economic techniques, from Jacques Ellul, writing originally in 1954:
The bourgeois morality was and is primarily a morality of work... Work purifies, ennobles; it is a virtue and a remedy. Work is the only thing that makes life worthwhile; it replaces God and the life of the spirit. More precisely, it identifies God with work: success becomes a blessing. God expresses his satisfaction by distributing money to those who have worked well... This attitude was carried so far that bourgeois civilization neglected every virtue but work.
Sound at all like the Conservative Party Conference?
For the proletariat the result was alienation... It might be thought that the primacy of the economy over man (or rather the possession of man by the economy) would have come into question. But unfortunately, the real, not the idealized, proletarian has concentrated entirely on ousting the bourgeoisie and making money... For the proletariat, as for the bourgeoisie, man is only a machine for production and consumption.
Sound at all like the modern Labour Party?
The counterpart of the necessary reduction of human life to working is its reduction to gorging. If man does not already have certain needs, they must be created. The important concern is not the psychic and mental structure of the human being but the uninterrupted flow of any and all goods which invention allows the economy to produce.
In summary:
Money is the principal thing; culture, art, spirit, morality are jokes and not to be taken seriously. On this point there is once again full agreement between the bourgeoisie and the Communists.
Here's the thing - modern life is not characterised by the conflict between right and left. That just sits on top of a very substantial agreement over ends and means. The end is the efficient functioning of the economy, and the means is the efficient marshalling of human capital and the efficient exploitation of natural and artificial resources. If there is some difference as to how these means are to be established, they are relatively trivial. Capitalism and Communism are both examples of economic techniques which dehumanise man and turn him into a machine - and therefore each individual into a very small cog in the machine.
How is one to fight against this? Surely not by planning a better economic or political life; this is just to replace the current technique with another. We must refuse the invitation to be inhuman, even if that means refusing the invitation to be wealthy and comfortable. We must live for other things - really live for them, not just use them as distraction and refreshment around the edges of our work. For Christians and for churches, I think it means resisting the encroachment of technique in the Church. We are not there to be efficient, or to utilise people, or to complete the plan, but to know and enjoy the living God.
And that is revolutionary.
The bourgeois morality was and is primarily a morality of work... Work purifies, ennobles; it is a virtue and a remedy. Work is the only thing that makes life worthwhile; it replaces God and the life of the spirit. More precisely, it identifies God with work: success becomes a blessing. God expresses his satisfaction by distributing money to those who have worked well... This attitude was carried so far that bourgeois civilization neglected every virtue but work.
Sound at all like the Conservative Party Conference?
For the proletariat the result was alienation... It might be thought that the primacy of the economy over man (or rather the possession of man by the economy) would have come into question. But unfortunately, the real, not the idealized, proletarian has concentrated entirely on ousting the bourgeoisie and making money... For the proletariat, as for the bourgeoisie, man is only a machine for production and consumption.
Sound at all like the modern Labour Party?
The counterpart of the necessary reduction of human life to working is its reduction to gorging. If man does not already have certain needs, they must be created. The important concern is not the psychic and mental structure of the human being but the uninterrupted flow of any and all goods which invention allows the economy to produce.
In summary:
Money is the principal thing; culture, art, spirit, morality are jokes and not to be taken seriously. On this point there is once again full agreement between the bourgeoisie and the Communists.
Here's the thing - modern life is not characterised by the conflict between right and left. That just sits on top of a very substantial agreement over ends and means. The end is the efficient functioning of the economy, and the means is the efficient marshalling of human capital and the efficient exploitation of natural and artificial resources. If there is some difference as to how these means are to be established, they are relatively trivial. Capitalism and Communism are both examples of economic techniques which dehumanise man and turn him into a machine - and therefore each individual into a very small cog in the machine.
How is one to fight against this? Surely not by planning a better economic or political life; this is just to replace the current technique with another. We must refuse the invitation to be inhuman, even if that means refusing the invitation to be wealthy and comfortable. We must live for other things - really live for them, not just use them as distraction and refreshment around the edges of our work. For Christians and for churches, I think it means resisting the encroachment of technique in the Church. We are not there to be efficient, or to utilise people, or to complete the plan, but to know and enjoy the living God.
And that is revolutionary.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)