Vollenhoven Newsletter 1 (2003)

8/11/2019 Vollenhoven Newsletter 1 (2003)

1/9


2/9

Vollenhoven NewsletterNo. 1, July 2003, this issue consists of 9 pages. Page 2

philosophy at the Free University, took overthe chair. Sander has been a board memberfrom the start. Two other members completethe board: Kornelis (Kor) Bril, who is itssecretary, and Anthony (Tony) Tol, treasurer.

In 2000 the first publication appeared un-der the auspices of the Foundation, D.H.Th.Vollenhoven, Schematische Kaarten(De ZaakHaes, Amstelveen; ISBN90-805180-2-6), byK.A. Bril and P.J. Boonstra. These schematiccharts present Vollenhovens overview ofphilosophical conceptions in the history ofphilosophy in terms of a grid of systematictypes and historical currents of thought. This

work began as a revision of the originalcharts Vollenhoven made available in 1962,consisting of 62 folio-sized pages. On thebasis of later publications and manuscripts,these charts are brought up to date. An in-troduction and an extensive lexicon wereadded, resulting in a volume of 422 pages. Tothe pleasant surprise of the editors, the bookreceived the Herman Dooyeweerd Prizegiven during the International SymposiumCulture and Christianity of the Associationfor Reformational Philosophy in 2001 (seeBeweging, March 2002, p.13).At present various activities are taking place

on different continents involving Vollenho-vens thought and work, either directly orindirectly. In order to promote such activi-ties, the board of the Foundation has decidedto sponsor a Newsletter. Its aim is to an-nounce and inform about work in progressrelated to Vollenhoven studies and to be amedium for interested scholars and studentsto interact with respect to whatever mightadvance Vollenhoven studies and their owninterest in these studies. The board is verypleased to have found John Kok and BobSweetman willing to be on the editorialcommittee, thereby securing its internationalstatus.To give the Newsletter a broader outreach,

we have decided to use English throughout.The editorial committee anticipates at leastone, perhaps two issues per year of modestscope. Material forwarded for inclusion in theNewsletter will be the primary responsibilityof its sender. Electronically mailed versionsof the Newsletter are free of charge.

Kor Bril & Tony Tol

Report on work in progress

Publications to appear bearing on the Problem-His-

torical Method; An overview of work in progress

Dr. Kornelis A. Bril.

Four publications are planned to appear un-der the auspices of the Vollenhoven Founda-tion. They are currently in an advanced stateof preparation. Some may hopefully, deo vo-lente, appear this year.

I The first is a volume, in Dutch, whichwill contain two previously published ar-ticles by Vollenhoven and two items (asyllabus and lecture notes) not previ-ously published. The working title is:D.H.Th. Vollenhoven, De consequent-

probleemhistorische methode en de geschiedenisvan de wijsbegeerte(approximately 135pgs.).

I.1 Conservatisme en progressiviteit in dewijsbegeerte. Originally published inConservatisme en Progressiviteit in de Weten-schap(Kampen: Kok, 1959), pp. 35-48.

I.2 Kort overzicht van de geschiedenis van dewijsbegeerte; a syllabus of Vollenhovenslast complete overview of the history ofphilosophy; made available in mimeo-graph form by Theja, Amsterdam, 1956,44 pgs.

I.3 De consequent probleemhistorischemethode originally published in Philoso-

phia Reformata26 (1961), pp. 1-34.I.4 Referaat Gnostiek(not previously pub-

lished lecture on Gnosticism, held in1965; 12 pgs.)Each of these texts will be annotated.

The sequence of these items reflects anincrease in specialization. The indicatedsize of the volume does not include theintroduction, tables, a bibliography andthe indexes.

II A translation of I, provisionally entitled:D.H.Th. Vollenhoven, The Problem His-torical Method and the History of Philosophy,translated by the Rev. John DeKievit(approximately 135 pgs.)

II.1 Conservatism and Progressiveness in Philoso-phy.

II.2 Short Survey of the History of Philosophy.


3/9


II.3 The Problem-historical Method.II.4 Gnosticism. Notes of a lecture

Remarks pertaining to I and II.1 The Dutch text of Short SurveyII.2., i.e.

I.2., was initially made available on acomputer diskette by John Kok and hisassociates of Dordt College, and placedon the website of the Centre for Refor-mational Philosophy [Centrum voor Re-formatorische Wijsbegeerte:http://home.wxs.nl/~srw] in Amers-foort. The Dutch text has been edited,and the English translation is com-pleted.

2 While the work was in progress, Ste-phen Francke quite unexpectedly madea copy available of an earlier translationof the text of I.1 Conservatism and Progres-sivenessby himself and Bob Sweetman.

3 The text of I.3. was scanned by PeteBoonstra. His help has been much ap-preciated.

4 The texts I.1. and I.3 still need to beannotated. The fact that I.2. (the ShortSurvey) is also to appear will greatly fa-cilitate the required annotation of I.1.and I.3. Many of the notes can be lim-ited to intertextual references. The an-notations will also be translated and in-corporated into the English edition.

5 Vollenhoven revised the text of I.3. in aprivatissimum session in September1966. Rev. Dr. Henk van der Laan madeaccurate notes of the changes. These

will be incorporated into the text.6 I.4., the lecture on Gnosticism, was edited

some time ago. The text was initiallybased on notes made by K.J. Popma,

who attended the lecture. Dr. JohanStellingwerff found Vollenhovens ownnotes of the lecture when setting up the

Vollenhoven archives for the HistoricalDocumentation Centre of the Free Uni-

versity. These notes were a reliable aidin checking and editing Popmas notes.

The editor has included a comparison ofVollenhovens conclusions with those ofrecent research of dr. A.P. Bos and oth-ers. This text of 12 pages is now beingtranslated by the Rev. DeKievit.

7 Suggestions made by the translator haveresulted in the addition of numerous,more expansive annotations for the

English version of the Short Survey ofthe history of philosophy (I.2. / II.2.)

These have yet to be included in theDutch edition.

III D.H.Th. Vollenhoven Wijsgerig Woorden-boek[Philosophical Dictionary] (ca. 350pgs.)

This volume collects the philosophicalarticles that Vollenhoven wrote for the(15 volume) Oosthoek Encyclopedie. PeteBoonstra scanned most of the articles,only about a dozen of volume 15 remainto be done. Where necessary for pur-poses of clarification, an article has beenannotated. Some topics, germane to theproblem-historical method, were not in-cluded in separate articles by Vollenho-

ven. This lacuna has been filled by theeditor, who has composed the articleshimself. For example, he has written thearticles on inter aliaandrological dual-ism, Arabian/Islamic philosophy,Hippocratizing thought, cosmogono-cosmological thought, mythologizingthought, semi-mystical thought. A fi-nal check will be made of all the 15 vol-umes to ensure that no article, identifi-ably by Vollenhoven, is overlooked.

The volume will include a summaryoverview of all the types and currentsthat occur in the method. The volume

will probably not require an extensiveintroduction.

IV K.A. Bril, Vollenhovens Problem-HistoricalMethod; Introduction and Explorations,translated and augmented by Ralph W.

Vunderink (Amstelveen: De ZaakHaes).

This is a translation of Probleemhis-torische verkenningen, in A. Tol andK.A. Bril, Vollenhoven als Wijsgeer(Am-sterdam, 1992), pp. 215-299. The writerand the translator will co-author an in-troduction to this volume.

The translator, Ralph Vunderink (Jeni-son, USA), has cited the original Englishtexts of passages that had been trans-lated into Dutch, or the existing Englishtranslations of French passages that hadbeen translated in the Dutch edition.

The translator was able to make use ofthe translation of pages 217-222 by Pete


4/9


and Jean Boonstra. The whole transla-tion is now being checked and edited.Dr. Vunderink was in the Netherlandsearlier this year. He visited the author in

Amstelveen for a second time. Theywere now able to discuss the completionof the project. The manuscript shouldbe ready in the course of this year. It

will consist of about 120 pages, includ-ing a new introduction by Bril en

Vunderink, a bibliography and indexes.

In conclusion: marketing

The four projects, mentioned above, are inan advanced state of preparation. Publishing

via the better known publishing companieswill probably result in a prohibitive costprice. It seems advisable to use the facilitiesof J.F. Seijlhouwer of De Zaak Haes andReprohouse. Seijlhouwers marketing of Vol-lenhovens Schematische Kaarten, in 2000 (ISBN90-805180-2-6), was very satisfactory.

Report on work in progress

Vollenhovens Introduction to Philosophy

Anthony Tol

For more than 20 years (from 1926 to 1948)Vollenhoven gave an introduction to phi-losophy course that was a required course forall first year students of the Free University.He took the opportunity which this coursepresented to develop the main contours ofhis idea of Christian philosophy. Initiallythere was no literature available for the stu-dents. Vollenhoven therefore arranged to

have his notes typed up as a syllabus, whichhe titled Isagoog Philosophiae (the Greekequivalent of Introduction to Philosophy).

The first complete version of this syllabusappeared in 1930. Vollenhoven continued todevelop his thought, and so over the yearsmany versions of the Isagoge appeared.(According to my Webster, isagoge is anacceptable English rendering of introduc-tion.) The last syllabus-version of the Isa-goge is from 1943, later (in 1967) retyped,

without alterations, to keep the text in sup-

ply. But in his own copy Vollenhoven madeconsiderable changes until 1945.This personal copy of the Isagoge is in fact

the most definitive version of the text, and itis now being made available via the Vollen-hoven site of the Centre for ReformationalPhilosophy (http://home.wxs.nl/~srw).(There are some technical difficulties causedby the drawings, but they should soon beresolved.) This version of the Isagoge is alsothe basis of an English translation by JohnKok, that can hopefully soon be published.

Given the importance of this document forunderstanding Vollenhovens thought, butalso its historical value in terms of the devel-opment of reformational thought, a criticaledition of the text has been completed in

which all the distinct editions (ten in all) priorto 1945 have been incorporated. This edition

will make it possible to (finally) initiate athorough study of Vollenhovens contribu-tion to reformational thought.This critical edition, I should add, will be

entirely in the Dutch language. With a defini-tive Dutch text available, possible transla-tions of (parts of) Vollenhovens older textscan always be entertained. The supportingmaterial of the editor (myself) is also inDutch. The last phase, now underway, is the

writing of an extensive introduction in whichthe main features of Vollenhovens thoughtand its development, as attested by this mate-rial between 1930 and 1945, are discussed.Along with this editorial work, the under-

signed continues his own study of Vollenho-ven (in English). He hopes to complete sev-eral papers on Vollenhoven now in the mak-ing. One is on the development of Vol-lenhovens thought between 1926 and thebeginning of the Isagoge, which essentiallycontinues where John Koks thesis, Vollenho-ven, His Early Development(Sioux Center:Dordt College Press, 1992) left off; another ison the ontology of the Isagoge; and one onthe structure of reality and religion in Vollen-hoven.


5/9


A Vollenhoven consideration

On translating Vollenhovens term: Consequent-

probleemhistorische methode

Anthony Tol

With various projects of translating Vollen-hovens work currently under way, and per-haps others to be undertaken, it might beappropriate to discuss what the best transla-tion is of consequent-probleemhistorischemethode. This term is the name that Vollen-hoven gave to his approach to the history ofphilosophy. Clearly it is a term we ought to

try to get right. In particular, the term con-sequent is challenging, since, despite theidentical spelling, the Dutch and the Englishmeanings are not precisely identical in use.

Consistent problem-historical method?The usual rendition in English of the title inquestion has been consistent problem-his-torical method. A case in point is H.Dooyeweerd in the volume of PhilosophiaReformata(1973), that contains essays dedi-cated to Vollenhoven on the occasion of his

eightieth birthday. This rendition, however, isnot quite satisfactory. The term consistenthas a distinctly logical connotation, asDooyeweerd did not fail to point out (p.6).One would appear to be saying that the prob-lem-historical method is basically of a logicalnature or elucidates logical connections. Now

Vollenhoven did think that a scientific disci-pline applies, as part of its method, logicalanalysis to the disciplines subject matter.

Vollenhoven wanted his own historical workto be scientifically responsible, hence there is

definitely a logical interest involved. But thesubject matter here is philosophy in its his-torical development. Vollenhoven neveragreed with Hegel in taking this historico-philosophical subject matter to be primarilyof a logical nature.Another objection to choosing consistent

is the implicit assumption (or at least possi-bility) of an inconsistent problem-historicalmethod. Now there may well be inconsistentmethods in practice, but you would not ex-pect anyone to actually propagate an incon-

sistent method. In that light, the qualificationconsistent doesnt have much point.

Finally one could mention that, if Vol-lenhoven meant consistent, he could haveused its Dutch equivalent, also written con-sistent. There really is no significant differ-ence in the English and the Dutch uses here.

It seems we must turn to Vollenhovensown work to try to get at his meaning. How-ever, this takes some effort, for Vollenhovenpreferred to demonstrate the method by itsresults, not by extensive explanatory exer-cises. (The best proof of this is Vollenhovenarticle De consequent probleemhistorischemethode in Philosophia Reformata26 (1961),pp.1-34, which is primarily a demonstrationin use, and offers explanations only margin-ally.)

Which qualification?

Though Vollenhoven published historicalresults related to what he came to call theconsequent probleem-historische methodefrom 1945 on, the first occurrence of theterm would appear to be in the Preface of hisHistory of Philosophy, volume I (on pre-Platonic thought, published in 1950). To dateno earlier use has been found. But this occur-rence in the preface (dated 1 January 1950,implying that this was the last part of thebook to be written) appears to have been anafter-thought. I cannot find the term any-

where else in the body of this 600 page book,not even in the Introduction (pp.13-16),

where Vollenhoven specifically discusses themethod he uses. It is also not listed in theindex. The after-thought, so it seems, did nottake immediately. In 1951 he spoke of gen-eral [algemeen] problem-historical research(Phil. Ref.16 (1951), p.24) and in 1954 hetwice used the term universal [universeel]problem-historical method (Phil.Ref. 19(1954), p.165, and Correspondentiebladen18,

July 1954, p. 21). But the Preface of the His-tory volume is still the best text to discernhis meaning. So to the Preface we turn.

Let me add that H. Evan Runner did notinclude the Preface in the part of the His-tory volume he translated. Given his closerelation to Vollenhoven at the time when this

volume was written, his translation wouldhave carried considerable weight. In his dis-sertation on Aristotle, published in 1951, hespeaks of the new method (pp.37, 46), Vol-lenhovens method (p.50), and twice prob-lem-historical method (p.46, 155). Actually,


6/9


the full reference on page 46 is: generalproblem-historical method.

The problem-historical method as such

In the Preface of History of Philosophy, theterm in question occurs twice, or almosttwice. The first time Vollenhoven speaks ofprobleemhistorische methode (p.5), andonly the second time is it consequent-probleemhistorische methode (p.6). Is therea difference here?Vollenhoven uses the term probleemhis-

torische methode here in reference to thekind of historical research he has been con-ducting. He focuses primarily on philosophi-cal conceptions. He speaks of a philosophicalconception (which we may think of as thesystematic core of a philosophers thought)as being composed of a multiplicity ofthemes. These themes first need to be re-searched separately, he claims, so as to be ina better position to be able to sketch howthey interweave. Here, already, we can recog-nize the problem part and the historicalpart of the descriptive term probleemhistor-isch, for the problem-part is linked totheme, while the historical-part is related tothe interweaving.A themeis said to consist of a problem (of

philosophy) and its various solutions. Forexample, we could take the theme of univer-sal-individual. The problem implicit in thistheme is: What is the relation between theuniversal (or universality) and the individual(or individuality/particularity)? Vollenhovendiscovers various solutions, ranging from anextreme universalism (holism) to an extremeindividualism (solipsism), with various medi-ating solutions in between (partial universal-ism, macro- and microcosm). The themesthat Vollenhoven in particular focuses on arethose that highlight the understanding ofreality. Besides that of universal-particular,he also selects: monism (!holism)-dualism(or pluralism of being), genesis-structureand the nature and place of the law. In con-nection with each of these themes, under-stood as problems, a variety of solutions hasarisen historically. When a philosophersconception (of reality) is said to consist of anumber of themes, then it is the particularsolutions of the problems which the themesfocus on that delineate (or constitute) thatparticular conception.

We note that in Vollenhovens listing ofthemes, he also includes that of mytholo-gizing and non-mythologizing thought. Inuse, this merges with that of genesis andstructure, for the two themes together givesrise to three possibilities: theogono-cos-mogonic thought (i.e. primarily genetic),cosmogono-cosmological thought (i.e. ge-netic and structural) and purely cosmologicalthought (i.e. primarily structural). The first ofthese is mythologizing, the other two arenon-mythologizing.The interweavingpertains to how these

themes interrelate. A specific philosophicalconception is of itself already an interweaving(systematic grasp) of chosen solutions of theproblems implicit in themes. Such a concep-tion needs to be actually formulated, and tothat extent it is a historical reality. But Vol-lenhoven has something broader in mind. Hespecifically states in this preface that he is notgoing to apply a monographic method, in

which only one specific theme (say, like A.O.Lovejoys the great chain of being), or aspecific solution of a problem implicit in atheme (say, the history of individualism) ishighlighted. This would not yield an adequaterepresentation of the history of philosophy.

Vollenhoven wanted rather to trace the ob-jective order (zakelijke orde) of all thosethemes and problems of philosophy which,in the course of centuries, had influenced

Western European thought (p.6). Here thephrase all those themes and problems needsto be read against the background of Vollen-hovens thesis that problems in epistemology,anthropology, social philosophy, and the like,are rooted in themes or problems pertainingto the nature of reality (ontological and/orcosmological). [Note: The all-inclusive natureof the method kept words like universeel oralgemeen in the running as an alternative toconsequent.] Thus, the interweaving ofthemes that Vollenhoven wished to trace,comes down to the study of the waywardcourse of the main (ontological and cosmo-logical) themes of Western Europeanthought, as evidenced by the philosophicalconceptions of Western thinkers. Essential tosuch a study is comparing philosophical con-ceptions so as to grasp the nature and theextent of the agreement or difference be-tween the solutions regarding the determin-ing problems of a conception.


7/9


This tracing of the objective order ismarked by a two-dimensional grid of (timebound and successive) currents and (timeresistant and contemporaneous) types ofthought. The theme of the nature and placeof the law governs the currents, in the sensethat the solutions to the problem that thattheme addresses occur sequentially in thecourse of the development of thought. Thefocus of this theme concerns the source of

what is normative, and the solutions of theproblem involved are the normative strate-gies (my term; TT) defended and abided byat a particular period of time. [We cannotsimply focus on the law, for its essential real-ity is to impinge. Thus any consideration ofthe law involves some measure of responseto it, a response that formulates an ought,

whether as scientific procedure, social norms,principles of morality and justice, etc., hencemy term normative strategy. When a re-sponse, being human work, doesnt hold up,new solutions are sought.] The remainingthemes all concern structural features of aconception. The alternatives of the solutionsof the problems inherent in these themes aremore enduring in the sense that they canrecur in later thought and thus form a type ofthe conception involved.

In later years, after current (1950) hadunobtrusively become time (bound) current(1956, in the Dutch version of Short Survey,p.40), Vollenhoven tended to look upon theproblem-historical method as addressing twomain problems, namely that of the law andthat of the complex vertical structure ofthings. Since the latter phrase pulls thethemes that pertain to a type of conceptiontogether, in speaking of two main problems

Vollenhoven essentially links the themes aslisted above more explicitly to the two-di-mensional grid of currents and types.

Consequent probleemhistorischemethode

So much for the term probleemhistorisch.Vollenhoven continues his Preface by re-porting what his experience has been while

working with this method. Naturally the con-ceptions of the important or influentialthinkers have to be given their due. But, Vol-lenhoven reports, to his surprise he oftenfound that thinkers, who are merely of sec-ondary importance, appeared to mediate

between the more prominent thinkers. Theyare the missing links (de ontbrekendeschakels) between them, and this placesthese (prominent) thinkers in a new light.

Vollenhoven then states: In this way, gradu-ally, the historical connections (historische

verbanden) were successively exposed, andthis made the ideal attractive of presenting anorienting lay-out of the whole labyrinth, ini-tially so confusing, of philosophical concep-tions (p.6). In speaking of his method in

which this is carried out, Vollenhoven nowspeaks of deze [this(!)] consequent-probleemhistorische methode.

It would be difficult to miss what the addedword consequent (in Dutch) is meant toconvey here. It relates to the missing links,and hence to the possibility of seeing thehistory of philosophy as being more thanmerely dotted by (the few) prominent ororiginal thinkers. It is a history of an ongoingreflection on problems and their possiblesolutions, and this history also involves sec-ondary figures. Their importance in terms ofhistorical study lies in their making evidentthat the philosophical themes, or the varioussolutions of problems pertaining to thesethemes, delineate traditions, showing that aninfluence of the past is historically pickedup, transformed, and, in being representedanew, becomes an inheritance for the future.Hence the labyrinth of philosophical con-ceptions, that Vollenhoven speaks of, be-comes more amenable to an overview bymeans of an orienting lay-out of traditions in

virtue of the historical relevance of the con-ceptions of secondary figures, who are notedin terms of both their type(s) of thought andthe current(s) of their time. It is in this waythat the problem-historical method attemptsto be historically complete with respect to priorthought that is passed oninsofar as this thoughtpertains to philosophical conceptions con-cerning the nature of reality. Thus the Dutchterm consequent, as used here, has the con-notation of being thorough, all inclusive and witha view to historical consequences. The term con-sistent does not deny any of this, but it alsodoes not suggest it.What we see Vollenhoven doing, which is

also very evident in the above mentionedarticle, De consequent probleemhistorischemethode, is studying the history of philoso-phy as philosophy progresses. From the time


8/9


that philosophical thought is first recogniz-able (for Vollenhoven this is in Musaeus andHesiod), there has been an internal influenceof its further progress. Each phase of phi-losophys existence formulates conceptualpossibilities which, in part at least, reflect theinheritance of the past, but which in turnmay be of influence for the future. Vollenho-

vens time currents specify the phasesthrough which philosophy historically passes,

while the types indicate those solutions toproblems that (more or less) persist, despitechanges in phases. Nothing here is rigid orpredetermined. The phases in which thoughtis renewed reflect the changes that occur inthe cultural-historical bedding of philosophy,requiring an adaptation of its normative as-sumptions, while the type of thought seizedfrom the past may be varied or even rejectedin favour of a new type. Vollenhovensmethod invites and allows the historian ofphilosophy to be historically consequentialintracing the genealogy of thought in its re-newal, its variations and its repetition.We note in passing that tracing the histori-

cally consequential genealogy of conceptionsis not the same thing as tracing the historicalinfluence of one thinker upon other thinkers.However Vollenhoven does give the impres-sion of attributing the consequential geneal-ogy of conceptions, at least in part, to a pre-sumed actual personal influence of the think-ers involved. But personal influences areoften very difficult to trace, short of explicitautobiographical information. Hobbes for-mulated a (more or less) materialist concep-tion of thought. Was he influenced by hisreading of prior materialists, or does it derivefrom his critique of, and reaction to, Des-cartes res cogitans? One may well formulatenovel solutions to problems without beingaware of historical precedents. I think we canmaintain that, while a consequential geneal-ogy may indeed involve personal influences,it need not necessarily do so. Also we maynot be able to determine what the actual linesof influence were. We learn much philosophyfrom reading the classical texts of the primaryfigures without always being aware of thesecondary figures between us and the pri-mary figures. Perhaps Vollenhoven exagger-ated the presumed relevance of secondary ormediating figures. But he is certainly right ininsisting that a systematic study of the history of

philosophyneeds to mention and elucidate theroles of these secondary figures. Surely noone can be satisfied historically with, say, a

view of philosophy in the Middle Ages as (ifI may simplify) consisting primarily of Pla-tonic, Aristotelian and Augustinian influ-ences. A lot of absorption and transforma-tion of thought was going on in the Middle

Ages, which in turn made philosophicalthought during the Renaissance such a com-plex historical phenomenon. And without themany secondary Renaissance thinkers therise of Modern philosophy is quite unintelli-gible. Agreement and differences betweenconceptions of thought can be ascertained

without knowing who was read approvinglyby whom, and still be looked upon as histori-callyrelevant.

So my considered suggestion is to translateconsequent-probleemhistorische methodeas consequential problem-historical method.

Admittedly, this sounds cumbersome in Eng-lish. Vollenhovens own alternatives, such asgeneral or universal, at least soundbetter.(Kor Bril has suggested integral.) But Vol-lenhoven was a stickler for precision. Once

we grasp what he means to say, the wordconsequential seems the adequate conceptu-al choice. Many of the terms he minted donot roll easily from the tongue, so in thatrespect this suggestion follows suit. To coun-terbalance this handicap, we could, also inthis respect, conform to Vollenhovens prac-tice of using the full title selectively and spar-ingly, and limiting most occurrences to simp-ly problem-historical method.

Postscript

The (Dutch) terms consequent and incon-sequent also occur within the typology of themethod, namely in the characterization of thetwo (main) types of empiricism. Here a logi-cal element is more directly involved in theuse of these terms than in the import of themethods name. Thus one could translate:consistent empiricism and inconsistentempiricism. In fact, that would be the pre-ferred translation here. Empiricism, as hereused ontologically by Vollenhoven, denotes adualistic conception involving a higher prin-ciple, that is individual, and a lower principle,that is universal (general). The lower principleis somatic, and this is taken to have onlygeneral characteristics. The higher principle is


9/9


mental and specific. In the conception calledconsistent (consequent) empiricism thehigher principle is psychical; via the bodilyorgans it registers sense-data as immediateknowledge. In inconsistent (inconsequent)empiricism, the lower principle has its ownpsychical form as is fitting for a (general)animal body. Here impressions are first re-flected before becoming ideas. The ideas are

entertained by the higher principle of person-ality, being an entity in its own right, with itsown intuition, and serving as principle ofindividuation of mental functions. The as-sumption here of a substantial personality isdeemed by Vollenhoven to be inconsistent

with the empiricism of a common sense thatis defended here.

Vollenhoven Newsletter 1 (2003)

Documents

Transcript of Vollenhoven Newsletter 1 (2003)