Comparison between Dooyeweerd and Vollenhoven

Similarities

• Both believed in irreducible aspects or functions.
• Both believed in the religious root of all reality.
• and so on ... to be written
• In an email from S.B. recently (June 2006), there is the following useful information that someone might like to follow up: "DeGraaff has a splendid essay in the first festschrift for Runner, Hearing and Doing (edited by Tol and Kraay) on the history of theories development stages of the person, usable both in philosophical anthropology and psychology. The essay is something of a unificaiton of Vollenhoven's problem-historical method with Dooyeweerd's philosophical anthropology in regard to the problem of the unity, dualism, or trichotomy of the human person."

Differences

Dooyeweerd's philosophy has frequently been associated with that of his brother-in-law D.H.Th. Vollenhoven, who taught philosophy at the Free University. For a long time it was assumed that the philosophies of Dooyeweerd and Vollenhoven were similar, or at least compatible with each other. In fact they differ on almost every key point. For study purposes, Dr. Friesen has translated the following three articles by Vollenhoven showing Vollenhoven's own disagreements with Dooyeweerd:

• Divergentierapport ['Report of Divergences I']
• Problemen van de tijd in onze kring ['Problems about time in our group']
• "Problemen rondom de tijd" ['Problems about time']

Vollenhoven's disagreements with Dooyeweerd are not widely known, and they will no doubt surprise many reformational philosophers. Dr. Friesen lists more than 50 key philosophical differences between Dooyeweerd and Vollenhoven. By understanding these differences, the distinct ideas of each of these philosophers can be better understood.

Created: 16 May 2005 Last updated: 7 July 2006 bit from S.B.