You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
A review by zkendall
How Should We Then Live? The Rise and Decline of Western Thought and Culture by Francis A. Schaeffer
Stars: 3.5/5
I enjoyed the book. Did a good job of doing a surface level survey of the history of western thought philosophy. It was particularly interesting how the philosophies were reflected in the arts.
I think it's worth noting that he doesn't take ad hominen attacks on those he mentions. In fact I find it rather cool that he is honest and doesthe opposite. As he is analyzing a philosophy and its members he will mention [some artist:] and say somethign like "who's music [or artwork:] many of us still enjoy today] or while talking about the drug culture he mentions Jimi Hendrix poinging out (the obvious) that he was extremely talented. Schaeffer does not say Christians make great art and non-Christians sucks. That would be silly and foolish. And though how Schaeffer treats these people is what we should expect, it should also still be acknowledged and appreciated.
The book was kind of argumentative, saying that most worlviews are not viable and we need the Reformation as a basis of a world view. He did a fine job of showing the importance of worldviews and where beliefs are derived, but I found the book benifitial on more of an informative level than an argumentative level which I don't think was very strong. He criticized others for social / pragmatic methods but I think that was laced in his own argument aswell, though he denied it atleast once, he didn't back it up.
Again, informative read. Shaeffer has spent time and more soaking up history and thought and synthesizing it. He references hundreds of authors, artists, leaders, dates, events, etc. There are things to be learned here.
I enjoyed the book. Did a good job of doing a surface level survey of the history of western thought philosophy. It was particularly interesting how the philosophies were reflected in the arts.
I think it's worth noting that he doesn't take ad hominen attacks on those he mentions. In fact I find it rather cool that he is honest and doesthe opposite. As he is analyzing a philosophy and its members he will mention [some artist:] and say somethign like "who's music [or artwork:] many of us still enjoy today] or while talking about the drug culture he mentions Jimi Hendrix poinging out (the obvious) that he was extremely talented. Schaeffer does not say Christians make great art and non-Christians sucks. That would be silly and foolish. And though how Schaeffer treats these people is what we should expect, it should also still be acknowledged and appreciated.
The book was kind of argumentative, saying that most worlviews are not viable and we need the Reformation as a basis of a world view. He did a fine job of showing the importance of worldviews and where beliefs are derived, but I found the book benifitial on more of an informative level than an argumentative level which I don't think was very strong. He criticized others for social / pragmatic methods but I think that was laced in his own argument aswell, though he denied it atleast once, he didn't back it up.
Again, informative read. Shaeffer has spent time and more soaking up history and thought and synthesizing it. He references hundreds of authors, artists, leaders, dates, events, etc. There are things to be learned here.