DOOYEWEERD: Philosophy, special science, and naive experience.

MaYuanCeumBeinne2“By being bound to a special scientific viewpoint, a special science loses the vision of the whole with respect to empirical reality, and consequently the integral empirical reality itself is lost from its grasp. If special science were to be entirely autonomous, this void could never be filled and special science would be impossible for lack of a veritable view of reality. […] Naïve (ie “everyday”) experience has an integral vision of the whole […]. Furthermore, so far as it is rooted in the ground-motive of the Christian religion, naïve experience also has the radical and integral view of temporal reality by which the latter is concentrically conceived in its true religious root and in its relation to its true Origin. [….] The concrete unity of things is not a problem to naïve experience. […] Only philosophy has the task of grasping in the view of totality the different modal aspects of meaning as they are set asunder by theoretic thought. In this way, philosophy has to account for both naïve experience and special science.”

(Herman Dooyeweerd, A New Critique of Theoretical Thought, Vol I: pp 82-85)

DOOYEWEERD: ‘Paper Decrees’

“The formal abolishing of paternal authority by the first wave of the French Revolution was one of the many ‘paper decrees’ which, as an expression of human hubris, were swept away by what is very inadequately termed the logic of the facts. By setting aside the normative principles of law, morality, or culture, human arbitrariness can create a social chaos; it cannot create juridical, moral or historical norms in this way.” (Herman Dooyeweerd: ‘A New Critique of Theoretical Thought’, Vol II, p 336)

See also:

Taming Leviathan

DOOYEWEERD: The Primary Lie

True selfknowledge opens our eyes to the radical corruption of fallen man, to the radical lie which has caused his spiritual death. It therefore leads to a complete surrender to Him Who is the new root of mankind, and Who overcame death through his sufferings and death on the cross.

In Christ’s human nature our heavenly Father has revealed the fulness of meaning of all creation (Ephes. 1:10), and through Him according to His Divine nature, God created all things as through the Word of His power (Hebr. 1:2,3).

The primary lie obfuscating the horizon of human experience is the rebellious thought that man could do without this knowledge of God and of himself in any field of knowledge, and could find the ultimate criterion of truth in ‘autonomous’, i.e. absolutized theoretical thought.” (A New Critique of Theoretical Thought, Vol 3:563)

DOOYEWEERD: Cross of Christ as Cornerstone of Epistemology

Aberlemno_Pictish_Stone
        Aberlemno Pictish Cross:                     From photo by Anne Burgess (Wiki)

“At this point, many a reader who has taken the trouble to follow our argument will perhaps turn away annoyed. He will ask: Must epistemology end in a Christian sermon or in a dogmatic statement? I can only answer by means of the question as to whether the dogmatic statement with which the supposed autonomous epistemology opens, viz. the proclamation of the self-sufficiency of the human cognitive functions, has a better claim to our confidence as far as epistemology is concerned. Our philosophy makes bold to accept the ‘stumbling block of the cross of Christ’ as the corner stone of epistemology (1 Cor 1:23) . And thus it also accepts the cross of scandal, neglect and dogmatic rejection.”

(Herman Dooyeweerd, ‘A New Critique of Theological Thought’, Vol 2 p562)