History
phuphantastic
blog_.docxThe Most Important Educational Theories of John Calvin
Here is the most eight important educational theories of John Calvin, a French theologian and also well known for his development of Calvinism.
- Theory of Value:
Knowledge for Calvin is divided into two parts: knowledge of God and knowledge of self. The knowledge of God is gained form the New and Old Testament, and the burden of education is placed on the church. The goal of this Christian education is to instruct people to live a life in keeping with Christian virtue and value. In the arena of self-knowledge, Calvin displayed a keen interest in the humanist learning of his time.
- Theory of Knowledge
The foundation of knowledge for Calvin comes from God. In fact, Calvin believed knowledge about self could only be realized by “contemplating the face of God”. Because God is foundational to knowledge, and the ability to know God is innate, Calvin seems to make no distinction between knowledge and belief. For Calvin, there is no knowledge without belief.
- Theory of Human Nature
Calvin's basic reform theology sees man as a sinful, fallen creature created by God. The forgiveness of sin comes through the martyrdom and resurrection of Christ, God’s son, and subsequent belief in Christ’s ability to forgive sins. Contrary to popular notion, Calvin’s doctrine of election interprets Christ’s death as a sacrifice for all people. The assurance of election for Calvin is proven through faith in Christ
- Theory of Learning
Calvin's own educational training was very much based in humanism. He emphasized strong training in the liberal arts, preferring these to the study of law or medicine. He reorganized the existing primary schools in Geneva, stressing disciplined behavior, cleanliness and promptness. The curriculum was typical of the Renaissance thinking. It included drilling Latin grammar and vocabulary, as well as planned times for physical exercise.
- Theory of Transmission
Calvin had an elaborate theory of government. He separated the church into four offices: pastor; doctor or teacher; presbyter or elder; and deacon. Teachers were mainly to be in charge of schools and ministers in charge of Sunday schools. He viewed the main function of the church as being educational. An intimate knowledge of the subject was gained by frequent repetition, such as the daily singing of the psalms. Calvin also considered expositional teaching and preaching integral to the learning process.
- Theory of Society
Calvin put society squarely under the sovereignty of God. For Calvin, God should be the president and judge of all our elections. Yet Calvin did not interpret the state as the kingdom of God, rather as an opportunity for good government and to help people. He believed the state should order all functions of life, including the church. In the government he set up in Geneva, magistrates interpreted the law. Calvin accepted Roman law in the secular arena.
- Theory of Opportunity
While in Geneva, Calvin set up a government whose citizens pledged to maintain a school to which all would be obliged to send their children including the children of the poor, who would attend free of charge. It is not entirely clear whether girls were included in this pledge, though there was a school for girls in Geneva. Of course, the right to schooling was only available to those who were citizens of Geneva. Calvin also heavily encouraged the building, through private donations, the building of the Geneva Academy.
- Theory of Consensus
Within Christianity, the only framework Calvin knew, he believed in consensus building. He frequently exchanged ideas with other reformers, carefully supporting his view through scripture. He was even willing to have the pope preside over the council, provided he would submit to the decisions of the council.
Martin Luther
Martin Luther's Reformation ended a period of dominance and unity in Europe under the Roman Catholic Church. This unity lasted for more than 1,000 years. The Protestant reformers influenced artists who became inspired by the new ideas of faith, forgiveness, a personal relationship with God through Jesus Christ, and the powerful stories in the Holy Bible.
This painting is fairly unique in that it depicts specifically the raising of the cross rather than the typical crucifixion. Rembrandt painted in the realist style, and used intense contrast between light and darkness to create a somber and dramatic mood. A ray of light coming from the top of the image illuminates Jesus, whose face is contorted in suffering, displaying His Passion. The beam also makes visible a shovel, reminding the viewer of the grave that awaits Jesus when He dies. The same light also shines on the face of a man in a blue beret, a representation of Rembrandt himself, who lifts the cross with the Roman soldiers, who perhaps represent Rembrandt’s assistants. His struggle to raise the cross symbolizes not only a personal struggle to depict this religious and momentous scene, but also his battle against sin as a human being. Rembrandt stands at the foot of the cross and seems to suggest that his sin, like the sin of mankind, put Jesus on the cross and He died to forgive him and grant him salvation. Rembrandt also appears to be looking at the cross, but not at the face of Jesus. Perhaps he is avoiding facing the anguish which Jesus experienced for the sake of all people. Maybe Rembrandt feels ashamed or unworthy of such sacrifice, conscious of his shortcomings as a sinner in the eyes of God.
The message that Jesus died to redeem every individual is a key tenet of Protestant, especially Lutheran, theology. The reformers emphasized the importance of a personal relationship with God, who by His grace grants salvation through faith in Jesus Christ.
In the background stands another representation of Rembrandt in a turban. He seems to direct the Roman soldiers like a master instructor. He also appears to look out from the canvas at the viewer, pulling the outside world into this scene. As Rembrandt painted this, he would have been looking into his own eyes, which inspire deep self- reflection on the part of observers regarding their sinfulness, faith, and the meaning of Christ’s death and resurrection to them.
The Society of Jesus
Catholic religious order of men founded in 1540 by Ignatius of Loyola and a small group of his multinational "friends in the Lord," fellow students from the University of Paris. They saw their mission as one of being available to go anywhere and do anything to "help souls," especially where the need was greatest (e.g., where a certain people or a certain kind of work were neglected).
The Society of Jesus was approved by Pope Paul III in 1540 and thus became an official Catholic religious order. Ignatius was elected their first leader. He declined after the first vote. He felt unworthy for the position because of the vanity and licentiousness of his earlier life and because he felt that others were more theologically knowledgeable. After much discernment, he accepted the position and served until his death sixteen years later.
As the Superior General, he sent companions all over Europe and around the world. He called them to "hurry to any part of the world where...the needs of the neighbor should summon them." And he counseled them to serve "without hard words or contempt for people's errors." In addition to writing the Constitutions of the fledgling order, with the help of his assistant Juan Polanco, he wrote nearly 7,000 letters. He wrote to high and low in church and state and to women as well as men. But most of these letters were to his Jesuit companions, thus forming a vast communication network of friendship, love, and care.
The emergence of secularism in the Renaissance
Throughout the Middle Ages, religion was a strong, pervasive force in society. Most individuals were more concerned with God and the possibility of the afterlife than they were with current human affairs, says Encylopedia Britannica. By the time the Renaissance occurred, this social attitude was beginning to change. Religion was still practiced, but people began to be more focused on secular or humanist values, rather than spirituality, at this time human affairs were no longer viewed as distasteful or inferior to the otherworldly possibility of Heaven. Instead, people began to appreciate their own humanity. A great cultural obsession began with human accomplishment and people began to feel more optimistic about their own short lives on earth, rather than their future eternal lives in Heaven.
At first, the rise of secularism disturbed theologians and religious leaders. They saw it as anti-religious and possibly even heretical in nature. This view continued until the 20th century, when theologians began to acknowledge that religious teachings could very easily be applied to modern existence, even enhancing the experience of human life. The secularist movement also allowed people during the Renaissance to explore other worldviews. Secular humanists felt free to rebel openly against the Church. It is fitting, perhaps, that the word "Renaissance" means "rebirth," as this was a time when traditional Greek and Roman culture was uprooted and replaced with a freethinking alternative.
When the renaissance first started the fact that god was the one who created everything and was the only one that will create amazing things was popular. However that started to change as people especially artists believed that man could achieve things that others could not. Artists started to look into humanism and believed that they could start painting something new. They no longer had to paint all of their paintings for the church or contain a certain meaning relating back to religion. The artists started to become free and they started to paint self-portraits and they even sculpted a man out of marble. As people started to be more interested in the individual rather than the church great people such as Leonardo started to look into the structure of man and how it functioned. He even had notebook filled of human drawings and he was fascinated on how the individual worked. Michelangelo’s famous David was also an example of individualism as it depicted the perfect body and the perfect mind. Also the renaissance was the era that sparked creativity and people did not follow the ways that painters had done in the middle ages. While in the middle ages uniqueness was discouraged however in the renaissance people decided that the individual was more important than the church. As more people were aware of this they started to follow their footsteps and became more aware as themselves as individuals.
The Influence Of Montaigne On Shakespeare
Michel de Montaigne (1533-1592) was a French Renaissance writer who pioneered the form of writing known as the essay. He is one of the few writers that historians can confirm as being an influence on Shakespeare thanks to his essay ‘On Cannibals’ which was used as a direct source for The Tempest. One may go further than this to argue that from around at least the time when he wrote Hamlet his plays contain elements of Montaigne’s thought.
The first man to translate his works into English was John Florio who had been a tutor to Shakespeare’s patron, the Earl of Southampton. In 1603 he published the Essays in three volumes. Montaigne made it clear in the introduction to his Essays that he would make himself the subject in his writings. While this may seem innocuous to the modern reader, his contemporaries felt that his focus on the self was an eccentric weakness. Nevertheless, in Hamlet, the main protagonist is constantly attempting to read himself and the situation in which he has become embroiled. Like Montaigne he demonstrates a degree of skepticism in the world around him and the events unfolding before him. There is a clear sense of self in Hamlet which is reinforced by the large number of soliloquies which he has in the play, and he also philosophizes more than any other character in the works of Shakespeare.
Montaigne also believed that as physical contagion existed there was also a moral kind of contagion which could afflict people. This belief would have had a significant resonance among Shakespeare’s contemporaries as in the early years of the 1600s the playhouses were rife with plague. Philip D. Collington uses this premise as the basis for his argument that Montaigne’s essay ‘Of Solitarinesse’ was a strong influence on King Lear. Instead of quiet retirement and solemn contemplation, Lear may have retired from his position, but is wholly unwilling to give up his status in society. His actions throughout the play are the antithesis of the recommendations made by Montaigne in his essay. Collington goes as far as to say that, ‘It is as if Shakespeare's use ‘Of Solitarinesse’ [was] source material but inverted its core contents so as to produce a kind of negative exemplum in dramatic form.’
In 1925 George Coffin Taylor examined the plays of Shakespeare and matched passages in them to Montaigne’s writings. He detected fifty-one passages in Hamlet, twenty-three in King Lear, seven in Antony and Cleopatra, and four in Othello that could have had their origin in the Essays. However, the critic Alice Harmon rightly pointed out that many of these observations were merely circumstantial and had no basis in fact.
The truth of the matter is that there are almost as many arguments against the direct influence of Montaigne’s Essays on Shakespeare as there are in favor of it. Nevertheless, the fact that his works had recently been translated into English by a man who had such close ties with his patron in the early 1600s, the volume of material that can be attributed to Hamlet and King Lear, and the fact that there is direct use of ‘On Cannibals’ in The Tempest illustrate that Montaigne would have been a source that Shakespeare would have recourse to in the composition of his plays
Jacques Benigne Bossuet
Jacques-Benigne Bossuet (1627-1704) reinforced medieval notions of kingship in his theory of the Divine Right of Kings, a theory which argued that certain kings ruled because they were chosen by God to do so and that these kings were accountable to no person except God. Not only did God bestow power on certain monarchs, but the bestowal of this power legitimated autocracy. The king ruled by virtue of God's authority; therefore he should be obeyed in all things. No group, whether they be nobles, or a parliament, or the people in the street, have a right to participate in this rule; to question or oppose the monarch was to rebel against God's purpose. This doctrine of absolutism would follow a tortured course through the eighteenth century culminating in the French Revolution of 1789-1792 and the beheading of Louis XVI, the king of France .
The origins of the theory are rooted in the medieval idea that God had bestowed earthly power to the king, just has He had given spiritual power and authority to the church, centering on the pope. With the rise of nation-states and the Protestant Reformation however, the theory of Divine Right justified the king's absolute authority in both political and spiritual matters. The theory came to the fore in England under the reign of King James I (1603–25). King Louis XIV of France (1643–1715), though Catholic, strongly promoted the theory as well.
The theory of Divine Right was abandoned in England during the Glorious Revolution of 1688–89. The American and French revolutions of the late eighteenth century further weakened the theory's appeal, and by the early twentieth century, it had been virtually abandoned.
A concept of Divine Right is also found in ancient and non-Christian cultures including Aryan and Egyptian traditions. In non-European religions, the king was often seen as a kind of god and so became an unchallengeable despot.
The Jewish tradition limited the authority of the Israelite kings with reference to the Mosaic Laws and the oversight of the prophets, who often challenged the kings and sometimes even supported rival claimants to the throne in the name of God. The ancient Roman Catholic tradition dealt with the issue of royal absolutism with the doctrine of the "Two Swords," promulgated by Pope Gelasius I.
Thomas Aquinas allowed for the overthrow of a king when the king was a usurper and thus no true king; but he forbade, as did the Church, the overthrow by his subjects of any legitimate king. The only human power capable of deposing the king was the pope. Toward the end of the Middle Ages philosophers such as Nicholas of Cusa and Francisco Suarez propounded similar theories. The Church was the final guarantor that Christian kings would follow the laws and constitutional traditions of their ancestors and the laws of God and of justice.
During the Renaissance national powers asserted increasing independence from the papacy, and the Protestant Reformation further exacerbated the need of kings to justify their authority apart from the pope's blessing, as well as to assert their right to rule the churches in their own realms. The advent of Protestantism also removed the counterbalancing power of the Roman church and returned the royal power to a potential position of absolute power.
Louis XIV and Ballet
The mid-17th to early 18th centuries brought about the birth of Classical Ballet. King Louis XIV of France brought ballet de cour (court ballet) to it’s most brilliant pinnacle. The Sun King – as he was dubbed after his most memorable dance performance as Apollo – was a talented and nimble dancer himself, and appeared in many court ballets over an eighteen year period
In 1653, a pivotal moment in the development of ballet, King Louis XIV brought a man into his service by the name of Giovanni Baptista Lulli – later redubbed Jean Baptiste Lully for his work in France. Jean Baptiste served the king as the composer for his court ballets, helping to catapult the ballet de cour into an even brighter limelight. The King soon had his court composer working with the famed French poet and playwright, Moliere, to create the court ballets.
In 1661, the year of Louis XIV’s ascension to absolute power, the King showed the world his dedication to the art of dance by establishing the world’s first ballet school, the Academie Royal de Danse, in a room at the Louvre. Thirteen of the most experienced Dance Masters were appointed to set standards for teaching and training the dancers for the court ballets.
In 1669, the King established the Academie d’Opera, which would produce and perform French opera under the direction of a man named Pierre Perrin. Remember this, it’s important in the history of ballet.
In 1670, past his physical prime, King Louis XIV hung up his dance shoes, and handed control of the ballets over to Jean-Baptiste Lully. The King’s dedication to dance as an art form may have catapulted ballet de cour to new heights, but it also ultimately brought about its demise as the new Academie Royal de Danse as well as Lully’s vision for the ballets soon turned them from a court spectacle into a performing art executed by trained professionals.
In 1672 Perrin was imprisoned for debt, swindled by his composer, Robert Cambert. Here is where another incredibly important event took place. The king appointed Jean-Baptiste Lully to the position of director of the Academie d’Opera. Lully renamed it the Academie Royal de Musique, and established a dance academy within the Academie Royal de Musique.
Ballet continued to be developed and refined over the next few decades. Dance productions under the Academie Royal de Musique would be moved from the middle of a ballroom floor to a stage with a proscenium. Professional dancers would continue to refine their technique. Choreography would become more and more specialized.
In 1713, the Paris Opera established its own dance school, with technique based on the writings of Raoul Auger Feuillet, who penned the first treatise on dance technique a few years earlier. The Paris Opera’s ballet school is the oldest, continually run ballet school in existence today.
Galileo’s Telescope
The History of Galileo’s Telescope
In the late summer of 1608, a new invention was all the rage in Europe – the spyglass. These low power telescopes were probably made by almost all advanced opticians and the very first was credited to Hans Lippershey of Holland. These primitive telescopes only magnified the view a few times over. Much like our modern times, the manufacturers were quickly trying to corner the market with their invention, but Galileo Galilei’s friends convinced his own government to wait – sure that he could improve the design.
When Galileo heard of this new optical instrument he set about engineering and making improved versions, with higher magnification. Galileo’s telescope was similar to how a pair of opera glasses work – a simple arrangement of glass lenses to magnify objects. His first versions only improved the view to eighth power, but Galileo’s telescope steadily improved. Within a few years, he began grinding his own lenses and changing his arrays. Galileo’s telescope was now capable of magnifying about 10 times more than normal vision and but it had a very narrow field of view.
What Galileo Saw With His Telescope
One fine fall evening, Galileo pointed his telescope towards the one thing that people thought was perfectly smooth and as polished as a gemstone – the Moon. Imagine his surprise to find it “”uneven, rough, full of cavities and prominences.” Galileo’s telescope had its flaws, such as a narrow field of view that could only show about one quarter of the lunar disk without repositioning, but a revolution had begun.
