Open main menu
Home
Random
Recent changes
Special pages
Community portal
Preferences
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Incubator escapee wiki
Search
User menu
Talk
Dark mode
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Editing
Herman Dooyeweerd
(section)
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
==Dooyeweerd's cosmonomic philosophy== Dooyeweerd's cosmonomic philosophy is different from most extant philosophy in at least three ways, which intertwine: First, it takes seriously the pre-theoretical attitude of thought, as a starting point from which to begin to understand what makes theoretical thought possible. Most other philosophical thinking begins by presupposing a theoretical attitude and either ignores everyday experience or attempts to explain it theoretically, either way presupposing the possibility of theoretical thought as a way to knowledge. In making the possibility of theoretical thought a philosophical problem to address, Dooyeweerd went deeper and further than [[Immanuel Kant|Kant]], [[Husserl]] and [[Heidegger]] and others.<sup>(too rhetorical of a statement)</sup> Second, it is rooted in different presuppositions ('[[religious ground motive|ground motives]]') about the nature of reality, which are religious in nature. Whereas [[Greek philosophy]] is rooted in the Form/Matter divide, [[Scholasticism|Scholastic]] thinking of medieval Christianity in the Nature/Grace divide, and [[Humanistic philosophy]] in the Nature/Freedom divide, Dooyeweerd began from the biblical idea of Creation, Fall and Redemption. He may be said to have explored the philosophical (rather than theological) implications of this idea. He called his philosophy '[[Christian philosophy]]', though what usually claims that label is of a Scholastic nature and very different. Third, it posits that ''Meaning'' is more fundamental than Being or Process. Dooyeweerd expressed it: {{Quote |Meaning is the being of all that has been created and the nature even of our selfhood. It has a religious root and a divine origin.<ref>{{Citation | last = Dooyeweerd | first = H | year = 1955 | title = A New Critique of Theoretical Thought | volume = I | page = 4}}</ref>}} Meaningfulness originates from the Creator (God) rather than from sovereign human attribution. All things, not just those linked with humanity, are meaningful. Strictly, Dooyeweerd says, things ''are'', rather than ''have'', meaning. Thus, meaning is like an ocean in which we swim, an enabler of all our existence and functioning, rather than a property we attribute to things or words. ===Diversity of science=== This has implications for science. Science β whether mathematical, natural, human or social sciences - is seen as the abstracting of certain aspects for study. For example, even though a lawyer and a biologist might study the same things β for example, fingerprints β they are interested in different aspects. They are looking at the meaning of a thing with different focus, though equally concerned with what is real. Perceptions of reality through this kind of scientific attitude, selecting one aspect as distinct from others for study, will necessarily be governed by fundamental assumptions about how these various kinds of meaning are related to one another in a coherent whole, belonging within the total range of all experiences.<ref>{{Citation | url = http://www.dooy.info/science.html | title = Science | publisher = Dooy info}} for different kinds of science from a Dooyeweerdian perspective.</ref> Likewise, in everyday life, we can be aware of distinct aspects, though most of the time we function in them tacitly. ===Aspects=== The positing of meaning as fundamental, and the priority given to our pre-theoretical experience of diverse meaning, prompts the thinker to ask, "what ways are there of being meaningful, which cannot be reduced to each other?" Or, in other words, what different aspects are there of things? He delineated fifteen, which are not mere categories, but modalities (ways of being, functioning, etc):<ref>{{Citation | url = http://www.dooy.info/aspects.html | title = Aspects | publisher = Dooy info}}</ref> * Quantitative aspect: amount * Spatial aspect: continuous extension * Kinematic aspect: flowing movement * Physical aspect: energy, matter * Biotic/Organic aspect: life functions, self-maintenance * Sensitive/Psychic aspect: feeling and response * Analytical aspect: distinction, conceptualization * Formative aspect: formative power, achievement, technology, technique * Lingual aspect: symbolic communication * Social aspect: social interaction * Economic aspect: frugal use of resources * Aesthetic aspect: harmony, surprise, fun * Juridical aspect: due (rights, responsibility) * Ethical aspect: self-giving love * Pistic aspect: faith, vision, commitment, belief Dooyeweerd claimed that since the discovery of these is addressed by our theoretical functioning, which is fallible, no suite of aspects, including his own, can "lay claim to material completion".{{Sfn | Dooyeweerd | 1997 | p = II.554}} ===Implications of the aspects=== Briefly, aspects are ways of being meaningful and are the 'law side' of created reality. All that occurs does so by 'answering to' the laws of each aspect (i.e. being subject to their laws). e.g. physical waves or particles occur by the laws of the physical aspect, poetry occurs by the laws of the aesthetic aspect. Thus, each aspect or 'law sphere' may be seen as defining a distinct kind of possibility. Earlier aspects are determinative; later ones are normative. Human beings function as subject in or to all aspects, animals as subject up to the sensitive aspect, plants up to the biotic, and non-living things up to the physical. As you are reading this, you are functioning lingually by understanding it, analytically by conceptualizing, sensitively by seeing or hearing, etc. In fact, all our functioning is multi-aspectual, though some aspects might be latent.<ref>{{Citation | url = http://www.dooy.info/functioning.html | title = Dooyeweerd's notion of functioning | publisher = Dooy info}}</ref> Things exist by reference to each aspect. For example, a car exists physically as a load of steel, plastic, etc., kinematically as a mode of transport, socially as a status symbol, economically as a dent in our finances, aesthetically as a thing of beauty, biotically as a polluter, pistically as an idol, and so on. The being of things is multi-aspectual in principle.<ref>{{Citation | url = http://www.dooy.info/entities.html | title = Entities | publisher = Dooy info}} on how things 'exist' in relation to aspects.</ref> Knowledge may be seen as multi-aspectual knowing. For example, analytical knowing gives categories and theories, formative knowing gives skills, lingual knowing gives 'bodies of knowledge' as found in libraries, and so on.<ref>{{Citation | url = http://www.dooy.info/knowing.html | title = Knowing | publisher = Dooy info}}</ref> Each aspect defines a different rationality. In this way, Dooyeweerd echoes Winch and Habermas, though with more precision.<ref>{{Citation | url = http://www.dooy.info/rationality.html | title = Rationality | publisher = Dooy info}} on aspectual types of rationality.</ref>
Edit summary
(Briefly describe your changes)
By publishing changes, you agree to the
Terms of Use
, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the
CC BY-SA 4.0 License
and the
GFDL
. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license.
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)