# The philosophy of Dooyweerd



## jwright82 (Apr 9, 2010)

Here are some good links to understand this complex thinker. 
The Dooyeweerd Pages
Introduction

I can't say exactlly where I stand with regard to Dooyweerd but I do see a lot of value inthe study of him and Vollenhoven. Enjoy.


----------



## sastark (Apr 9, 2010)

I would also advise you to read Van Til on Dooyeweerd.


----------



## jwright82 (Apr 9, 2010)

sastark said:


> I would also advise you to read Van Til on Dooyeweerd.


In the vain of your response here are some good critical assesments by John frame on Dooyweerd.
Dooyeweerd and the Word of God
THE AMSTERDAM PHILOSOPHY:
These should balance out the ones I originally posted.


----------



## sastark (Apr 9, 2010)

Thank for the links, James. It seems Dooyeweerdianism is experiencing a bit of a come back. Or at least, I seem to be reading more and more about him in the last few years. I believe Nancy Pearcey is a fan of his.


----------



## jwright82 (Apr 9, 2010)

sastark said:


> Thank for the links, James. It seems Dooyeweerdianism is experiencing a bit of a come back. Or at least, I seem to be reading more and more about him in the last few years. I believe Nancy Pearcey is a fan of his.


 Another fan of his that I really like is James K. A. Smith, associate proffesor of philosophy at Calvin College. His book Introducing Radical Orthodoxy is a must read for anyone, but it is full of technical language so reader beware. 

Yeah I really enjoy studying Dooyweerd but I agree to a degree with the criticisms of him as well. I meant to ask you where exactlly Van Til gave his analysis of him, in Christianity and Barthianism he gives a very sympathetic view of him but where does he give a critical review of him? Oh in Smith's book I mentioned he gives some really good analysis of Dooyweerd.


----------



## sastark (Apr 9, 2010)

I am scratching my brain trying to remember where it was I read of Van Til critiquing Dooyeweerd. I'm fairly certain that "Van Til's Apologetic" by Greg Bahnsen covers Van Til's views on Dooyeweerdianism, but I can't be sure until I go home and check my copy.

In the meantime, I found this article by John Frame which references an article by Van Til. Frame says it was "Van Til's first serious written criticism of Herman Dooyeweerd." Here's the link: Reformed Apologetics

The citation for the article by Van Til is: C. Van Til, "Bavinck the Theologian, A Review Article," _Westminster Theological Journal_ XXIV, 1 (November, 1961), 1-17.


----------



## ValiantforTruth (Apr 9, 2010)

*Van Til on Dooyweerd*

I believe the article you are thinking of is in "Jerusalem and Athens", the festschrift for Van Til. Dooyweerd wrote an article in it, and I believe Van Til responded. As I understand, he was very sympathetic to Dooyweerd and Vollenhoven early on, but became much more critical of them later in his career. If you cannot find this essay, send me a PM and I can send along that excerpt from the Van Til CD.


----------



## yeutter (Apr 14, 2010)

Many of Dooyweerd's followers deny the perspicuity of Scripture in any meaningful sense of the word. The way they talk about the relationship between Scripture and Faith they make Scripture a book of faith. The basic propositional truths of Scripture can not be rightly understood unless one is grounded in faith that shapes ones outlook.


----------



## jwright82 (Apr 14, 2010)

yeutter said:


> Many of Dooyweerd's followers deny the perspicuity of Scripture in any meaningful sense of the word. The way they talk about the relationship between Scripture and Faith they make Scripture a book of faith. The basic propositional truths of Scripture can not be rightly understood unless one is grounded in faith that shapes ones outlook.


 Yeah if I remember correctly they also revolted against the conffessions as well. James K. A. Smith describes the reasons as this, he says that Dooyweerd made a distinction between Theology, that perfect set of knowledge revealed by God, and Theology1, our finite attempts to systematize that knowledge, and based on this he and his followers revolted. Now if I were to talk to one of them I would ask 2 questions:
1. Can't the Holy Spirit lead the church into all truth?
2. Can't christians even accidentally get their Theology1 in line with Theology?
Even James K. A. Smith, who is basically a Dooyweerdian, criticizes him at this point.


----------

