Robert D. Knudsen's Calvinistic Philosophy lectures (Disks 10)

This is a continuation of the class lectures on Calvinistic Philosophy given by Robert D. Knudsen at Westminster Theological Seminary.  As before, the information in the audio recordings have not been validated for accuracy (use at your own risk).
 

Vollenhoven, part 4 (disk 10)

Vollenhoven began to distinguish between cosmic unities and modal differentiations that intersect the cosmic unities.  There are cosmic unities such as man, animals, etc which intersect the cosmic unities.  These unities are ordered in a particular order and may not be subordinated to another.

Vollenhoven attempted to develop his own understanding of the world and he came on stream with this in October 1930 in his syllabus in which he developed his Isagoge Philosophiae (Introduction to Philosophy).  He distinguishes between philosophy as an act and philosophy as a result.  Philosophy is a human effort and the result of the human effort and he makes a sharp distinction between ontology and epistemology and ontology has the primacy.  Now he took the position that his method had to be thetic.  It had to present his own thesis and only then critical.  Furthermore, one must take into consideration also the position of those who have gone before and position of contemporary, on must see whether they see the problems correctly.

In this writing Vollenhoven said that philosophy is not the only kind of theoretical knowledge, there is also knowledge of the special sciences, but all theoretical knowledge is distinguished between the pre-theoretical knowledge.  Theoretical knowledge presupposes the pre-theoretical and is dependent upon it.  Vollenhoven opposed the position that everything must be explained in terms of theoretical knowledge.

Philosophy may not be considered apart from the special sciences.  Neither may it come into conflict with pre-theoretical knowledge.  Now to the latter belongs the knowledge of faith.  Faith is a pre-theoretical insight, it may be refined theoretically, but is not dependent upon it.  For a Christian belief in God’s word revelation and rejection of any other revelation, is a pre-theoretical matter.  Now a Christian philosophic system is required to include thoughts about scriptural beliefs, but it must be completely in agreement with that faith and scriptural in character.

Scriptural faith is presented with the following problems

1.     Who is the creator?  The answer is God who is sovereign in his creation, revelation and providence.

2.     What is the creation in relation to God?  The answer is the creation is dependent upon the creator and is subordinate to his sovereign law, revelation and providence.

3.     Where does the boundary between the two lie?  The law is the boundary between God and the cosmos.

Only God is the sovereign lawgiver and the creation is subject to his law.

Now the task of philosophy is to think about the creation.  Philosophy may not deny the states of affair of creation.  The field of the investigation of philosophy is the entire extent of the cosmos and may not transgress the boundary or the law.  Philosophy must retain its own character and it may not pass over into theology or empty speculation.

What is the relationship of Theology and Philosophy?  Theology is among the special sciences, it is among the other special sciences and must explore its philosophical foundations.

Vollenhoven distinguishes between the heavenly creation and the earthly creation and he investigated the distinction and connection between these spheres.

H.G. Stoker believed that one may philosophize about parts of the creation that is unseen.  Stoker and Vollenhoven differ between Dooyeweerd on this point.  Dooyeweerd thinks of the limits of science within our experience.  The method that has come out of Dooyeweerd’s thought is an empirical transcendental method.

Vollenhoven maintained that there are unseen things that we may philosophize about (heaven, angels, etc.). 

In reference to the earthly creation, Vollenhoven attempted to make the least complicated distinctions to build up to more complicated distinctions by making further distinctions.  The primary distinction is the “thus-so” distinction.  You talk about an earthly being in a particular way, and we refer to it arithmetically, spatially, physically, organically…thus and so.  Now Vollenhoven originally distinguished 15 modal aspects of the created cosmos.  Each of the aspects were irreducible to the other.  If one does not keep this in mind he falls into anatomies, that is into logical contradictions that cannot be resolved by being more clear, the boundaries are being transgressed and can only be resolved by making proper distinctions within the sphere.

Vollenhoven’s original 15 aspects

1.     Arithmetic

2.     Spatial

3.     Mechanical

4.     Physical

5.     Organical

6.     Psychical

7.     Analytical

8.     Historical

9.     Linguistic

10.  Social

11.  Economic

12.  Aesthetical

13.  Juridical

14.  Ethical

15.  Pistical

Over the course of time, by various individuals in this school these have be changed, rearranged, deleted etc.

There is the idea that when we examine the created cosmos we have to give attention to the states of affairs and we may not impose distinctions or take the place of the difficult effort of ferreting out truths that exist within the cosmos as God has created.  This is different from the task of the Theologian who’s job it is to engage in the special science of Theology.

Now if a particular subject exists in a particular mode we must also hold that there is a corresponding particularity of law.  You have the law side and a subject side.  A psychical subject must have a psychical law that applies to it.  It implies that there are particular laws that hold for the particular law spheres. 

Now here we find the outworking the principle that the logical is not considered an all embracing a common denominator.  It too is embedded in the cosmic diversity.

The second simplest distinction in the cosmos is the ‘this-that’ distinction.  This occurs in all the modal aspects of reality.  All the ‘this-that’ for which the same law pertains constitutes a sphere of the particular law.  Since there are many laws there are many law spheres. 

The ‘thus-so’ and the ‘this-that’ may be distinguished from one another and yet intersected with modal distinctions.  A particular number has the characteristics of number.  You have the number and it is this-that number.  There are connections within and between the modes.  You can have relationships within the arithmetical between the numbers 3 and 4.  Another case in the Analytical is a conclusion following from two premises.  Vollenhoven calls such a relationship samenhang   (My note: I don’t know if this is the correct Dutch word, the online translator I used translated this as connection).  There are relationships between the modes because there are a natural order of subject functions.  Spatial characteristic presupposes the Arithmetical.  Analytical thought presupposes emotional relationship.  The more complex relationship presuppose the less complex relationships.  The functions that are presupposed are the substrate (all functions have substrate, except the arithmetical).