Chapter 2
Reading: Chapter 2 - The Pretended Autonomy of Philosophical Thought - II, pp. 27 - 60.
Dooyeweerd at the end of his first lecture (Chapter 1) introduces his theme for this lecture by posing some questions:
- What is the nature of the enigmatical I?
- How can we arrive at real self-knowledge?
Read this chapter with these questions in mind.
The Enigmatic Character of the Ego, pp. 27-30
Chapter 2 takes up where chapter 1 ended: the enigmatic character of the human I. All attempts to understand the central human ego appear to be failures.
Buber’s I–thou relation is examined – the reference to the humanist science ideal will be explained later – as well Binswanger’s concept of ‘meeting in love. Both are found to be ‘empty in themselves’.
Buber was an Austrian/ Jewish philosopher, theologian and thinker. He is best know for his work I and Thou (1923).
Ludwig Binswanger (1881 - 1966)
Binswanger was a Swiss psychiatrist and philosopher influenced by existentialism and personalism. He is the author of Being-in-the-World (1963)
The Relation to the Divine Origin, pp. 30-33
In order to explain the human ego it must be considered in relation to its divine origin. This means we have to go beyond the boundaries of philosophical thought. Nevertheless this is necessary, for the supra-theoretical central motive is of a religious character. The religious impulse of the ego takes its content from religious basic motives. These basic religious motives can either turn the ego towards or away from its true origin.
The Religious Basic Motive, pp. 33-35
The religious basic motive is communal. It rules us even if we are unaware of it. It is bound to two conditions; it must:
- give rise to a common belief within the faith aspect
- gain a socio-cultural power within the historical aspect of human society; it forms that culture.
The Four Religious Basic Motives, pp. 35-38
There are four religious basic motives: the Greek form-matter; the biblical creation-fall-redemption; the scholastic nature-grace; and the modern humanistic nature-freedom.
All these, apart from the biblical one, are dualistic – two motives are held in opposition to each other.
The Form-Matter Motive, pp. 38-41
This is the fundamental motive of Greek thought. It originates from a meeting of two conflicting views the pre-Homerian natural religion – corresponding to matter – and the Olympian gods’ cultural religion – corresponding to form.
Creation, Fall, and Redemption, pp. 41-44
This is the biblical motive. It is the motive of the creation, the radical fall due to sin, and redemption in Jesus Christ. This is the genuine starting point for a Christian philosophy.
Nature – Grace, pp. 44-45
The nature-grace motive was introduced by Catholicism. It was an attempt to reconcile the opposed religious motives of Greek and Christian thought.
Modern Humanism: Freedom-Nature Motive, pp. 45-51
The fourth ground motive is that of nature and freedom. Modern Humanism introduced it. It takes two forms: the freedom-motive, with its emphasis on liberty and autonomy; and the nature-motive with its emphasis on the domination of nature through science and mathematics.
Natura naturans means creative nature
Deus sive natura means God is not distinguishable from nature
Threefold Basic Idea, p. 52
This Dooyeweerd calls the ‘cosmonomic idea’.
Two Key Questions, pp. 52-3
Dooyeweerd poses two important questions and then goes on to answer them:
- How can this criticism have any conclusive force for those who do not accept your religious starting point?
- what may be the common basis for a philosophical discussion between those who lack a common starting-point?
The First Question Answered, pp. 53-54
The criticism of theoretical thought exposes facts that are of a transcendental significance and can be accepted by all, whatever their philosophical starting point.
Common grace means that truths are contained in all philosophies, despite the fact that operate from apostate basic motives.
The Second Question Answered, pp. 54-7
Dooyeweerd claims that the radical transcendental critique of theoretical thought is of universal value for all philosophy students. Only when we can get to the supra-theoretical presuppositions can we critique each others philosophy.
Unsolvable Antinomies, pp. 57-
When one modal aspect is reduced to another unsolvable antinomies occur. For example: Zeno’s paradox. The problem arises when length (a spatial aspect) is reduced to a numerical aspect.
Key Terms
(aka heart, I-ness, selfhood) the concentration point of a human's existence, 'the religious root unity' of humanity.
Ananke
This is the Greek term for 'fate'
Central human ego
Origin
One part of the nature-freedom ground motive. It emphasises the freedom aspect.
Personality ideal
One part of the nature-freedom ground motive. It emphasises the freedom aspect.
Religious basic motives
(aka religious ground motives) a driving force, a fundamental motivation.
Science ideal
One part of the nature-freedom ground motive. It emphasises the nature aspect. It comes from the desire to dominate nature.
Review Questions
-
What does Dooyeweerd mean by the ‘concentric direction of human thought’?
-
Why are Buber’s and Binswanger’s attempts to explain the human self ‘empty in themselves’?
-
Why does the relation between the human ego and God ‘exceed the boundaries of philosophical thought?
-
Why is the religious ground motive the real starting point of philosophical thought?
-
What effects do the faith-power and the socio-cultural power, which the religious basic motive has, have?
-
In what ways is the nature-grace motive a mutual accommodation of the Christian and Greek religious motives?
-
How does the freedom-nature motive show its ‘central religious character’?
-
How does the ‘inner religious dialectic of the Humanistic basic motive’ show itself?
-
What are the different emphases of the freedom-motive and the nature-motive?
-
How does the science-ideal give rise to a ‘historicistic view of the temporal world’?
-
Why is Christian philosophy a fallible human activity?
-
Why is the cosmonomic idea described as being three fold?
-
If someone doesn’t accept Dooyeweerd’s starting point, how can his criticism have any force?
-
How has Dooyeweerd ‘clearly revealed’ ‘the central influence of the different religious basic motives upon theoretical thought’?
-
Why does a transcendental critique of philosophical thought not result in a general relativism?
Study Questions
-
Examine other concepts of the central human ego? Are they also ‘empty in themselves’?
-
How does a religious basic motive enable understanding between different philosophical trends?
-
Why the necessity of a radical transcendental critique of philosophical thinking?
-
How does Descartes’ philosophy illustrate science-ideal?
-
How is the freedom-motive evident in Romanticism?
-
Is there a common basis for a philosophical discussion?
-
What does the term ‘Word of God’ mean for Dooyeweerd?
Taking it Further
-
Dooyeweerd. 1979: Roots of Western Culture. Deals in more depth with religious ground motives.
-
Kalsbeek. 1975: Contours of a Christian Philosophy. Chapter 5 is on "Ground motives of western thought".
-
Glenn Friesen's glossary page on Ground Motives.
-
The Dooyeweerd Pages: "Dooyeweerd's Theory of Ground Motives and Religious Presuppositions"; "Dooyeweerd's Four Ground Motives".
-
Yong-Joon Choi. 2000: Dialogue and Antithesis. Available at The Dooyeweerd Pages here. It includes a study of Korean religious Ground Motives which identifies the following:
Korean Shamanism has a ground motive of Hananim-Nature, but is not as dialectical as the ancient Matter-Form motive because Nature spirits acknowledged the supremacy of Hananim (supreme God).
Korean Buddhism has a ground motive of Kyo-Son (doctrine-meditation).
Korean Confuscianism has a ground motive of I-Ki (li-chi in Chinese), in which I is the universal patterning or forming principle while Ki is the concretizing material and energizing vital force.