자크 엘륄의 기술 사상과 그 사상에 대한 평가 Technological Thought of Jacques ...

54
신앙과 학문. 24(1). 5-58. https://doi.org/10.30806/fs.24.1.201903.5 자크 엘륄의 기술 사상과 그 사상에 대한 평가 Technological Thought of Jacques Ellul and Reflections on This Thought 1) [ 이상민 (Sang Min Lee) * Abstract The thought of Jacques Ellul, French sociologist and theologian, is distinctly separated into the sociological aspect and the theological one, but the characteristic of his thought is that as these two aspects constitute the whole, they maintain the unity and the consistency. The two sources of his thought are the Marxist ideology and the biblical Revelation. This double influence is both clearly distinguished from his overall thought and is materialized into two parts which are corresponding to dialectics. By the overall method, he analyses the technological phenomenon in the modern society and raises the problem of the human status in the technological system, regarding the technology as ‘system’. Furthermore, he not only denounces the false ideology concerning the technological society, but also criticizes the discourses which defend and sacralize the technology, and justify the fact that the technological society is accepted to the human being. Through the reflections concerning his analysis on the technological society and the technological system and his criticism on the technological discourse, the strong aspects and the status of his technological thought in the modern era are revealed as followings. First, his thought on the criticism of the technology still becomes the matter of interest in the present. Second, his thought on the technology is the power of liberating the human being. Third, his thought concerning the technology is the foundation of the ‘de-growth’ theory. Fourth, he is regarded as an excellent pioneer who analysed ‘the technological totalitarianism’ with the deep insight concerning the technology. Key Words : Jacques Ellul, technology, technological society, technological system, technological discourse, de-growth *서울국제고등학교 교사(Seoul Global High School), 서울특별시 종로구 성균관로13길 40, [email protected] 2018년 12월 03일 접수, 2019년 02월 12일 최종수정, 02월 13일 게재확정

Transcript of 자크 엘륄의 기술 사상과 그 사상에 대한 평가 Technological Thought of Jacques ...

<303031C0CCBBF3B9CE28C0DBBEF7292E687770>Technological Thought of Jacques Ellul and
Reflections on This Thought 1)[
(Sang Min Lee)*
Abstract
The thought of Jacques Ellul, French sociologist and theologian, is distinctly separated into the sociological aspect and the theological one, but the characteristic of his thought is that as these two aspects constitute the whole, they maintain the unity and the consistency. The two sources of his thought are the Marxist ideology and the biblical Revelation. This double influence is both clearly distinguished from his overall thought and is materialized into two parts which are corresponding to dialectics. By the overall method, he analyses the technological phenomenon in the modern society and raises the problem of the human status in the technological system, regarding the technology as ‘system’. Furthermore, he not only denounces the false ideology concerning the technological society, but also criticizes the discourses which defend and sacralize the technology, and justify the fact that the technological society is accepted to the human being. Through the reflections concerning his analysis on the technological society and the technological system and his criticism on the technological discourse, the strong aspects and the status of his technological thought in the modern era are revealed as followings. First, his thought on the criticism of the technology still becomes the matter of interest in the present. Second, his thought on the technology is the power of liberating the human being. Third, his thought concerning the technology is the foundation of the ‘de-growth’ theory. Fourth, he is regarded as an excellent pioneer who analysed ‘the technological totalitarianism’ with the deep insight concerning the technology.
Key Words : Jacques Ellul, technology, technological society, technological system, technological
discourse, de-growth
* (Seoul Global High School), 13 40, [email protected]
2018 12 03 , 2019 02 12 , 02 13
6 . 24(1).
(Jacques Ellul) , , ,
. 1912 1 6 (Bordeaux)
(Pessac) 1994 5 19 82
. , (Marx)
,
, .

, .

. ,
. 1)
, .
,
.
, ,
, 18 , 22
8 ,
.

,
. (Strasbourg)
(Vichy) (Pétain) ,

1) (José Bové). ‘ ’
.
. 2009
.
7
.
.

, (Aquitaine)2)
. ,
,

.
,
.
20
, 60
. ,
.
‘ ’3)
,
. 10
, ,
, . “
. !”(Troude-Chastenet,
1994: 55) , . ,
. “
”(Ellul, 2004c: 297) ,
,
.
2) . 5 ‘’(le département) ‘’(la région)
.
3) 1964 Le
vouloir et le faire, 1974 Éthique de
la liberté, 1984 Les combats de la liberté
8 . 24(1).

La Technique ou l'Enjeu du siècle, Le système technicien, Le bluff technologique 3
4). 1954
,
. ,

.
.
1977 ‘’
,
. 1988
,
. ,
,
.
(Frédéric Rongon) (Rognon, 2007: 27-28),
, ‘ ’ Propagandes
, ‘’ L'Illusion politique
. ‘’
Métamorphose du bourgeois
, ‘ ’ Autopsie de la Révolution, De la Révolution aux Révoltes, Changer de
Révolution . ‘’
( la croyance) La foi au prix du doute ‘’ , ‘ ’
4) (Patric Troude-Chastenet) “
(Heidegger) ” (Troude-Chastenet,
2005: 358).
9
L'Empire du non-sens ,
‘’ La parole humiliée ‘’
.
,
. ,

, .
,
, ,
.
.
1.
“ ()
”(Troude-Chastenet, 1994: 40) ,
,
() . , “
, .
,
.”(Troude-Chastenet, 1994: 40) ,

. ,
,
. , , , , ,
,
. , , , , ,
10 . 24(1).
, , , , ,

. ,
, ‘ ’ .
,
.

5).

,
, ‘ ’
.
,
. ,
.
,
6). ,
, ,
, ,
.
“ ,
, .
5) , ,
,
. , ,

. ,

.
6) (Marx) ,
‘ ’ , .
11
,
.”(Garrigou-Lagrange, 1981: 162) , ‘’
. ,
,
.
. , ,
,
(Troude-Chastenet, 1994: 12).
,
‘ ’7) . ,
, , , , ,
, ,
.

. “ , ,
··
.”(Ellul, 1984: 9) ,
3
. ,
.
,
.
‘’ ‘’ .
, ,
,
(Ellul, 1988a: 123-136).
(Karl Barth)
7) ‘ ’(la réalité matérielle)
‘ ’ ‘ ’(la réalité spirituelle) .
12 . 24(1).
. ,
(Kierkegaard)
.
‘’ ‘’ ,

.
.
,
. ,
.
,
(Rordorf, 1988: 5-13).
, . ,
,
,
.
.
, , ‘ ’
. “
.”(Troude-Chastenet, 1994: 40)
, ,
‘ ’ , .
2.

,
.
.
13
(Blanc, 1990:
35-45). 20
, .
‘’
. Das Capital
,

.
, . ,
‘ ’ ,
.
“ ,
.”(Ellul, 1987a: 44) ,
.

,
. , (Calvin)
.
,
. ,
.
,
(Garrigou-Lagrange, 1981: 20-21).

. ,
19 ,
8), .
8) . “
, , ,
14 . 24(1).
,
9).
,
.
, .

,
(Vanderburg, 1981: 15).

,
,
. ,
.
(), (), ()
,
.
,
(Ellul, 1987a: 45-47). ,
‘’() ‘’()
.

.
.
.”(Ellul, 2006: 15)
9) (Willam H. Vanderburg) ,
,
. ,
,
.
,
(Vanderburg, 1981: 15-16).
.”(Vanderburg, 1981: 17-18) ,
,
. ,
,

. ,
, .
. ,

. ,

(Vanderburg, 1981: 17-18).

, .
,
. ,
.
,
,
(Ellul, 1987a: 158-159). , 20
.
,
,
(Ellul, 2003: 35-36). “ ,
.”(Ellul, 1987b: 42) , ‘ ’
,
.

. ,
16 . 24(1).

. ,
, . ,
.
, , ,
. ,
,
. ,
.

. ,
, .
,
.
, ,
(Ellul, 1987a: 60-62).
‘’() ‘ ’ ,
.
, ‘’()
. , ,
.
,
, .
,
.
,
,
. ,
‘ ’
17
. , ‘ ’ . ‘’ ‘
’ , ‘ ’ ‘’ ,
. ,

(Ellul, 1987a: 62-63).
,
. ,

,
. , Politique de Dieu politique de
l'homme , , L’espérance oubliée ,
(Rognon, 2007: 174).
,
. ,
.
, . ,
,
. , .
,
, . ,
, ‘ ’ ,
.
, .

.
, .
, . ,
,
18 . 24(1).
,
.
. ,
. ,
, ‘ ’ .
‘ ’ , ‘ ’

. , ‘’ ‘’ ,
, ‘ ’
‘ ’ (Ellul, 1987a: 63-65).
.
1.
10),

, 20
.
“ .
.
”(Garrigou-Lagrange, 1981: 155) ,
.
10) La société technicienne ,
.
La Technique ou l'Enjeu du siècle . ,
10 , The Technological
Society .
19
,

. ,
.
“ .

.”(Ellul, 2008: 18-19)
. , ‘ ’(l’enjeu du siècle) .
,
1950 ,
.
, , , ,
, , , , .

. ,
. .
, .
,
. ,
,
. , , , , , , ,
.
. ,
, .
, , , ,
. , ‘ ’11)
11) ‘ ’. 2 1945 1 1974
‘ (OECD)’
.
20 . 24(1).
.
, .

.

”(Ellul, 2008: 20) ,
, , . ,
,
, .
, ‘’ ‘ ’ . ‘
’ . ,
,
. , ‘ ’
.
.
(Ellul, 2008: 57-74).
. ‘’
(l'automatisme). ‘’
. ‘’ ‘’
. ‘
’(l'autoaccroissement).
,
. ‘ ’ .
.
.
, .
‘’(l'unicité) ‘’( l'insécabilité).

. .
21
,
, .
‘ ’(l'entrainemet des techniques).
‘’. ,
, ,
. ‘’(l'universalisme).
,
,
. ,
. ,
,
. ‘’(l'autonomie). , , ,
. ,
, , , ,
, .
, .
,
.
(Ellul, 2008: 74-135).
. ()
. , ,
. ,
, ,
. ,
,
. ,
, ,
.
.
22 . 24(1).
, ,
.
,
. ‘ ’
‘ ’ .
,
.
. ,
, (Ellul, 2008: 138-232).
,
.
.
, .
, .

.
, “ ”
. ,
, ,
.
‘ ’
.
‘ ’ . ,

, . ,
.

. ,
.
23
,
. ,
,
,
(Ellul, 2008: 289-392).
2.
,
. , ‘’ , ‘’ , ‘
’ , ‘’ .
,
, , , , , , ,
.
,
. ,
,
. 20 ‘ ’
, ,
‘ ’ ‘ ’
, ‘ ’ .
‘ ’ , ‘ ’ ‘ ’
. , ‘ ’
. ‘ ’
‘’ , ‘ ’ ‘ ’
. ,
, ‘ ’
(Ellul, 2012: 13-31).
“ ?” , .
24 . 24(1).
, ‘’ .
, ‘’ .
‘’(la Technologie) , ,
, ‘’(la Technique) ‘’
. , ‘’ .
‘ ’
, . ‘ ’
,
‘ ’ . , ‘ ’
.
, ‘
’ . , ‘’ .
()
,
. ,
,
12). ,
.
. ,
,
(Ellul, 2012: 35-117).
. , ‘
’, ‘ ’, ‘ ’, ‘ ’, ‘
12)
, ‘ ’
. ,
, ,
,
. , ,
(Ellul, 2012: 98-99).
25
’ .
,
. , .

, .
,
.
, . ,
.
, ‘ ’ ‘ ’
‘ ’ .
, .

.
, ,
(Ellul, 2012: 117-125).
. ‘’.
‘’ ,
. ‘’ . ,
,

13). ‘’(l'unité)14).
13) ‘’ . ,
, . ,
. , ,
. , .
, . ,
.
.
. ,
,
26 . 24(1).
, ‘’
. ,
,
. ‘’(l’universalité)
. ‘’ .
‘’. ,
, .
. ,
.
‘ ’.
. , ‘’
,
‘’ . ,
,
, . ,
,
. ,
. ‘
’(la totalisation). ‘ ’
. , ‘ ’
. ‘ ’

. ,
,
. ,
, .
,
(Ellul, 2012: 152-162).
14) ‘’ ‘’ ‘’() ,
‘’ ‘’ .
27
(Ellul, 2012: 137-211).
. ‘ ’(l'autoaccroissement)
. ‘ ’ .
,

.
,
. ‘’(l'automatisme). ‘’
.

, . ,
,
, .
‘’
, .
‘’ ‘’ . ,
,
. ‘ ’(la progrssion
causale) ‘ ’(l'absence de finalité).
,
. ‘
’ ,
.
, ,
. ,
.
‘ ’ ,
,
. ,
28 . 24(1).
. ‘’(l'accélération).
, .
. ,
, ‘’

, .
,
. ,
,
.

. ,
, .
,
. ‘’
(Ellul, 2012: 217-318).
, .
,
.
, .
,
, .

,
. ,
,
. ,
, ,
.
29
,
.
,
.
. ,
, , ,
,
.
. ,
,
(Ellul, 2012: 319-328).
, ‘ ’(la
croissance technique) ‘ ’(la décroissance technique)15)
,
. ,
. , ,
.
,
, ,
. ,
. ,
, ,
15) ‘’ ‘la décroissance’, ‘, ’ .
(Serge Latouche)
‘the decreasing growh’( ) . ‘la décroissance’
‘ ’ , ‘’ ‘la
décroissance’ ‘’ . (Latouche, 2010a: 15-16), ‘’
,
. ‘’
, ‘ ’. ‘ ’, ‘’ ‘’
.
30 . 24(1).
.
,
, . ,
, . ,
,
. , ,
.
. ,
,
. .
, ,
(Ellul, 2012: 328-334).
3.
,
‘ ’(la technologie)
, .
‘ ’ .
.
, . .
, ‘ ’ ‘ ’ . ,
,
‘ ’ . , ‘ ’
. ‘ ’ ‘la technologie informatique’
‘ ’ ‘la technologie spatiale’
(Ellul, 2004a: 25).
,
Le bluff technologique .
31
, ‘ ’
.
. ‘ ’(le bluff technicien)
, ‘ ’(le bluff technologique) . ,

. ,
(Ellul, 2004a: 25-26).

.
,
,
. , “
, ,
,
.”(Ellul, 2012: 328) . 1977
1988 10, , , ,
, . 1980
,

.
,
. , ‘’(l'ambivalence).
, .
,
.
, 16). , ,
, ,
16) ,
.
.
32 . 24(1).
, .
, ‘ ’
. ,
, ‘ ’
, (Ellul, 2004a: 89-162).

, “ ,
, ”(Ellul,
2004a: 152) .
, ‘
’(l'imprévisibilité) .
, .
, ,
. .
,
,
. 1962
,
, (Ellul, 2004a: 163-200). ,
‘ ’ , “
”(Ellul, 2004a: 196) .
, ‘’ . 1977 ‘’ , 5 1982 “

.”(Ellul, 1982: 224) ,
‘’ . 6 , “,
. ,
.”(Ellul, 2004a: 203) ,
. , ‘’ . ,
33
‘’, ,
‘’. ,
,
,
(Ellul, 2004a: 201-212).
,
‘ ’
. , ,
.
, ‘’ ,
,
,
.
. , ()
(Ellul, 2004a: 243-253). , 3

. 3 ,
3 3
(Ellul, 2004a: 425-427). “ 3
,
, ‘ ’
.”(Ellul, 2004a: 428) , .
, ,
, . ,
, .
,
. , , ‘
’ .
,
34 . 24(1).
.
(Ellul, 2004a: 581-683). ,
, ,
.

, (Ellul, 2004a: 686-712).
, ,

, .
. ,
, .
,

. “ ?”
,
. , ,
. ,
. ,
,
. ,

.
35
.
1.
(Pascal Chabot) ‘()’(l’anti-conformisme)
50 ,

. , ,

. , ‘ ’(le cadre de référence)
. ,
. , L’homme et l’argent
, ‘ ’
. , ‘ ’
. ,
,
.
, . ,
. (Gilbert Simondon)
. 4 1958
Du mode d’existence des objets
techniques ,
(Chabot, 2005: 276-278).
(Chabot, 2005: 278-279),
. , ,
, .
,
.
36 . 24(1).
,
, .

. ,
. , .
.

, , , , , ,
, , , . ,
, .
Les nouveaux possédés,

(Ellul, 2003: 308-310).
.
, , ,
, 1950
‘ ’, ‘ ’ . ,
.
,
. ,
, .
,
.

. , , , , ,
.
,
(Chabot, 2005: 279-280).
“ ,
37
”(Ellul, 2003: 316)
,
.
, ,
20 . ,
“ ”(seul un dieu peut encore nous sauver)
17).
. , ‘’
. ,
, .
.
,
.

‘ ’(l’éco-résistance) .
,
(Chabot,
2005: 280-282).
1984 L’Encyclopédie des Nuisansces 20 , , ,
, . ,

.
, , (Jean-Luc
Porquet)
(Porquet, 20012: 300-301, 304).

17) ‘ ’(un dieu) ‘un’
‘d’ ‘D’ ‘’(Dieu) .
38 . 24(1).
.
.
,
. (Theodre Kaczinsky)
, . ,

. ,
. ‘’ ,
‘ ’ , ‘ ’
.


.
18). , ‘ ’19)
.
,
. ,
.
(Porquet, 20012:
301-302).
, ,
18) 2000
. , , 3 , ,
(Ellul, 2004a: 688).
19) ‘ ’
, ‘ ’ .
,
, ‘ ’ ‘ ’ .
, .
‘’ ‘ ’ ‘ ’
‘’ , ‘ ’ .
39
. ,
,
, ,
,
(Porquet, 20012: 302, 305).
2.
(Lucien Sfez)
, (Theodor Adorno),
(Max Horkheimer), (Jürgen Habermas)
. 1
(Sfez, 1992: 161), . ,

?”(Sfez, 1992: 166) ,
.
.

, (Porquet,
2012: 273-274).

’(l’hyper-déterminisme de la technique) ,
. , ‘ ’
(Marshall McLuhan) .
‘ ’
, ‘ ’ . ,
‘ ’(le politique) .
,
.
40 . 24(1).
, .
, , ,
. , .
, , , , , ,
, , . ,

,
, (Sfez, 2005: 33-37).
,

. ‘’(la technque) ‘’(la technologie)
, ‘’ ,
‘ ’(le
discours supérieur) . ‘’ ‘ ’(la culture
technologique) , . , ‘’
.
,
. , ‘’ ‘ ’
.
‘’(le
fait). ‘ ’
,
, , ‘ ’
‘’ (Sfez, 1994: 243-249).
, .
,
()
. , .

41
.
. ,
.
, , .
, .
, ,
‘’ .
‘’ ‘’
, 20).
‘’ ,
.

,
(Sfez, 2005: 42-44).
3. ‘’

(Dominique Bourg) (Porquet, 2012: 277-281),
L’Homme-artifice
(Bourg, 1996: 10, 40, 47-48, 56-57, 90-113, 120-123).
,
.
,

20) ,
.
.
, .
42 . 24(1).
. , ,
,
. ,
‘’ ,

.
,
(Rognon, 2012: 38-39).
, ,
,
. ,
,
. ,
, .
,
, 1980
.

. ,
,
. ,
.
‘ ’ , ‘ ’
, .(Rognon, 2012:
39-40).
,
,

43
.
. , ,
. ,

, . ‘ ’
. ,
.
,
‘ ’ . ,
, ‘’
(Porquet, 2012: 277-278).

.
,
.
, ,
.
, . ,

. ,
‘’ ,
‘’ . ‘ ’(le principe de précaution),
‘ ’, ‘
’, ‘
’ ,
. ,
, , 20
(Porquet, 2012: 279-281).
, 2006 .
44 . 24(1).
‘ ’ ‘’ , 2010
. ‘ ’
, ‘’
, ‘’ ‘’
. , ‘ ’
, ‘ ’ ,
, , ,
.
, .

.
, ‘
’ ,
.
, ,
. ,
,

(Rognon, 2012: 41-47).
‘’ ‘’
(Serge Latouche)
.
, .
‘ ’
,
. ,
45
. , ,
,
3 .
L’occidentailisation
du monde (Latouche, 1991: 7-8, 75, 78, 136, 166). 2003
Le Monde diplomatique Pour une
société de décroissance , ,
.
“ 1981
2 .”(Latouche, 2003: 19) .
‘ ’ (Latouche,
2010a: 231).
(Latouche, 2013: 9-11), ‘’
, 21) .

. ‘ ’ ‘
’ ‘’ .
,
. ,
. ,
21) (Bernard Charbonneau)
(Emmanuel Mounier) Esprit .
, 20
.
,
Directives pour un manifeste personnaliste
. ,
.
, ,
,
(Garrigou-Lagrange, 1981: 27).
46 . 24(1).
‘’
.
, .
,
, .
,
, ‘’ . ,
. ,
, .
, ,
. ,
. , ,
.
, ,
. ,
,
.
(Porquet, 20012: 281-282).
‘ ’
.
. , 1952 4
,
, .

,
. ‘ ’ ,
‘ ’
. ,
, ,
47
, .
‘ '(la décroissance conviviale).
, ,
,
(Porquet, 20012: 283-284).
(Lewis Mumford)
, La Mégamachine (Latouche:
2004). , ‘ ’,
22). ,
. ‘ ’
.
, ‘ ’
‘ ’ .
, .

, ‘ ’
.
,
(Porquet, 20012: 282-283).
‘ ’
,
, ‘ ’(le rationnel)
.
‘ ’ ,
, , ‘’
. ,
‘’
22) ‘ ’ (Latouche,
1994: 103).
48 . 24(1).
.
, ,
.
,

.
,
, . ,
,
.
.
,
.
. ,
,
(Latouche, 1994: 103-105).
‘ ’
, .
, ‘’
.
, ‘’ .
, ,
. ,
. , , ,
(Latouche,
1994: 110-111).
,
,
. ,
49
,
. ,
,
. ,
,
. ‘ ’
. ‘ ’ , ‘
’ ‘ ’ .
, ,
‘’ (Rognon,
2012: 218-219).
.

,

. , ,
.
,
.
.
, .
,
. ‘’ ‘la technique’
‘la Technique’ , ,
‘la Technique’ ‘ ’ . “
”(Ellul, 2003: 316)
50 . 24(1).
. , “ ‘’(la technique)
‘ ’(la Technique)” .
,
. , ‘’
.
, ‘ ’ .
, ‘ ’ ,
‘ ’ , , ,
.
,
.
, .
,
,
. ,
23). ‘’ ,
,
.
. .
,
,
.
, ,
23) . ,
, .
, .
,
. ,
. , ,
(Ellul, 2004b: 17).
51
. , ,
.
,
. ,
, . ,
.
,
. ,
, ‘ ’(le bluff technologique) . ,

.
, .
,
. ,
,
, .
, ,
. ,
, ,
, , ,
. , ,
.

. “ ?”
, .

(Ellul, 1988b: -).

,
52 . 24(1).
. ,
.
.
,
.
‘ ’
.
. ,

. ,
,
, .
, 20
. ,
,
, . ,
, ‘ ’ ,
‘ ’
, .
, . ,
,

, .
,
. ,

,
. ,
. ,
53
.
, ‘’ . ,

. ,
, . ,

,
. , .
, ,
.
. ,
,
‘’ . , ‘ ’
‘’ ,
,
. ‘’ , ‘’
‘’ . ,
‘ ’ , ‘ ’
.
,
,
. ,
, ‘’
.
, ‘ ’ ‘
’ . ,

.
,
54 . 24(1).
. ,
,
.
,
, . ,
,
, ‘ ’
. ,

. , ‘ ’ ‘ ’
‘’ 24). ,
2 ,
. ‘’
.

,
.
. , ,
,
24)
. , ,
. ,
. , ,
, 21 2°C
, , , ,
. , 2008
‘ ’ , ‘ ’
. 2030
. 2040
. 2070
(Latouche, 2010b: 31-33, 39-40).
55
. , ,
.
,
. , (ICT)
‘4 ’
, ,
. ,
.
,
.
,
,
.

,
.
“ .”
56 . 24(1).
Ellul, J. (1982). Changer de Révolution, L’Inéluctable prolétariat. Paris: Éditions
du Seuil.
. (1987a). Ce que je crois, Paris: Grasset & Fasquelle.
. (1987b). La raison d’être, Méditation sur l'Ecclésiaste, Paris: Éditions
du Seuil.
Paris: Economica, pp. -.
. (2004a). Le bluff technologique, Paris: Hachette.
. (2004b). L’espérance oubliée, Paris: La Table Ronde.
. (2004c). L'Illusion politique, Paris: La Table Ronde.
. (2006), L'idéologie marxiste chrétienne: Que fait-on de l’Evangile?, Paris:
La Table Ronde.
______. (2012). Le système technicien, Paris: Le Cherche Midi.
Blanc, J. L. (1990). “Jacques Ellul et la dialectique” in La Revue Réformée, vol.
41, n° 165, pp. 35-45.
Bourg, D. (1996). L’Homme-artifice: Le sens de la technique, Paris: Gallimard.
Chabot, P. (2005). “La Technique ou l'enjeu du siècle: cinquante ans après” in
Jacques Ellul, penseur sans frontières, Le Bouscat: L’Esprit du Temps, pp. 276-282.
Garrigou-Lagrange, M. (1981). À temps et à contretemps, Entretiens avec Madeleine
Garrigou-Lagrange, Paris: Le Centurion.
Latouche, S. (1991). L’occidentailisation du monde. Essai sur la signification, la
portée et les limites de l’uniformisation planétaire, Paris: Éditions La Découverte.
. (1994). “Raison technique, raison économique et raison politique” in
Sur Jacques Ellul, Le Bouscat: l’Esprit du Temps, p. 103.
. (2003). “Absurdité de productivisme et des gaspillages. Pour une
société de décroissance”, Le Monde diplomatique, novembre, p. 19.
. (2004). La Mégamachine, Paris: Éditions La découverte.
57
. (2010a). Le pari de la décroissance, Paris: Librairie Arthème Fayard/Pluriel.
__________. (2010b). Sortir de la société de consommation : Voix et voies de la
décroissance, Paris: Les liens qui libèrent.
. (2013). Jacques Ellul contre le totalitarisme technicien, Neuvy-en-
Champagne: Le passager clandestin.
Porquet J.-L. (2012). Jacques Ellul. L’homme qui avait (presque) tout prévu.
Nucléaire, nanotechnologies, OGM, propagande, terrorisme…, Paris: Le
Cherche Midi.
Rognon, F. (2007). Jacques Ellul - Une Pensée en dialogue, Genève: Labor et Fides.
. (2012). Générations Jacques Ellul. Soixante héritiers de la pensée de
Jacques Ellul, Genève: Labor et Fides.
Rordorf, B. (1988). “Préface” in : Jacques Ellul, Présence au monde moderne, Paris:
Presses Bibliques Universitaires, pp. 5-13.
Sfez, L. (1992). Critique de la communication, Paris: Éditions du Seuil.
. (1994). “Technique et communication” in Sur Jacques Ellul, Le Bouscat:
L’Esprit du Temps, pp. 243-249.
. (2005). “Les stratégies paradoxals de Jacques Ellul” in Jacques Ellul,
penseur sans frontières, Le Bouscat: L’Esprit du Temps, pp. 33-44.
Troude-Chastenet, P. (1994). Entretiens avec Jacques Ellul, Paris: La Table Ronde.
. (2005). “Biographie de Jacques Ellul (1912-1914)” in Jacques
Ellul, penseur sans frontières, Le Bouscat: L’Esprit du Temps, p. 358.
Vanderburg, W. (1981). Perspectives on our age, Jacques Ellul speaks on his
life and work, Toronto: Canadian Broadcasting Operation.
58 . 24(1).
()
(Jacques Ellul)
,
.
. ,
.
, ‘’
. ,
,
.
,
. ,
. ,
. , ‘’
. , ‘
’ ‘ ’ .