Craig G. Bartholomew: Contours of the Kuyperian Tradition: A Systematic Introduction (2017)

It won’t be available until next February, but it looks like a good addition to any enthusiastic Kuyperian’s library. Here’s the description:

Abraham Kuyper was, by any standard, one of the most extraordinary figures in modern Christian history. He was a Dutch Reformed minister, a gifted theologian, a prolific journalist, the leader of a political party, the cofounder of the Free University of Amsterdam (where he was professor of theology), a member of the Dutch Parliament, and eventually prime minister of the Netherlands. Kuyper’s remarkable legacy lives on today in the tradition of Dutch Calvinism that he developed. As his writings become more widely available, this tradition continues to find new adherents attracted by his comprehensive vision of Christian faith. But what defines the Kuyperian tradition? Renowned South African theologian and philosopher Craig Bartholomew has written the first systematic introduction to this tradition. Drawing on Kuyper’s entire corpus, Bartholomew has identified the key themes and ideas that define this tradition, including worldview, sphere sovereignty, creation and redemption, the public square, and mission. He also goes beyond Kuyper to show how later thinkers developed these ideas. They include, among others, Herman Bavinck, J. H. Bavinck, Gerrit C. Berkouwer, and Herman Dooyeweerd. Widely known but little read, Kuyper is now receiving the global recognition that his fertile and influential thought deserves. Contours of the Kuyperian Tradition is an indispensable guide to one of the most significant schools of thought in the modern age.

Claudia Jefferies and Andy Denis: “Was the School of Salamanca proto-Austrian?”

An interesting-looking critique of Murray Rothbard’s reading of late Medieval economic thought:

In this paper we challenge Murray Rothbard’s interpretation of the School of Salamanca as proto-Austrian. We argue that Scholasticism is in goals and methods profoundly different from any modern school of economics, and that it is mistaken to use the Austrian school as a standard against which the Salamancans are to be appraised. Further, Rothbard’s interpretation is vitiated by a misconception of the specificity of the Austrian School: while the Salamancans bequeath a lasting heritage for 21st century economists, it is a broad contribution, one for many schools, and not at all one specific to the Austrian standpoint. Finally, the natural law tradition, which has been correctly identified as a continuity between early modern, classical and Austrian thought, far from an anticipation of scientific thinking in the Salamancans, constitutes a residue of religious thinking in the Austrians.

Gregory Baus: Dooyeweerd’s Conception of Societal Sphere Sovereignty

Abstract: Abraham Kuyper’s conception of societal sphere sovereignty has received various interpretations. Herman Dooyeweerd’s interpretation of sphere sovereignty develops Kuyper’s conception in terms of its being rooted in and motivated from a distinctly Christian religious orientation, and results in a view of society that is neither individualistic, nor collectivistic. In this paper Dooyeweerd’s philosophically elaborated account is examined in terms of his notions of a basic creational diversity; modality and individuality structures; societal communities; sovereignty over-against autonomy/decentralization, and subsidiarity; distinct inner structural principles, the intrinsic limit of state power, and non-individualism. A consistent application of Dooyeweerd’s conception of sphere sovereignty to the question of the status of education as a sovereign sphere, and the propriety of its tax-based support, results in the conclusion that, according to Dooyeweerd’s view, the state does not properly possess the competence to fund schooling through taxation in any form.

You can find several version of Baus’ paper here.

Choi’s Dialogue and Antithesis now on Audible

(I’m a little late on this one.) Yong-Joon Choi’s doctoral dissertation on the application of Dooyeweerd’s thought to social theory, Dialogue and Antithesis: A Philosophical Study on the Significance of Herman Dooyeweerd’s Transcendental Critique, can now be purchased and listened to as an audio book through Audible.

Should we now expect audio book versions of Kalsbeek’s Contours and Verburg’s Herman Dooyeweerd?

The Review of Metaphysics on Vincent Brummer’s Critique of H. Dooyeweerd

Brummer repeatedly presents Dooyeweerd’s criticism of Kant, that a critical philosophy, to be thorough, must not leave any of its presuppositions unaccounted for and that Kant’s dogmatic assumption of certain positions vitiates the rest of his philosophy. Dooyeweerd opposed Kant’s absolutization of logic, and presented instead a cosmological basis for the transcendental criticism of philosophical thought. Dooyeweerd’s own philosophy appears to be quite complex and elaborately systematic; in principle, nothing is left out. Brummer does show, however, that some areas of Dooyeweerd’s work need further elaboration, notably that of philosophical anthropology. – C. D.

“Books Received: Summaries and Comments,” The Review of Metaphysics 18, No. 1 (Sept. 1964), p. 172. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20124048

divineeconomytheory: Is Subjective Valuation Misunderstood?

Subjective valuation is totally misunderstood all of the time in these, the Dark Ages of economics. The empirical ‘economists’ have convinced people that choices are selfish not subjective. They cannot allow the idea of subjectivism (that would undermine their incorrect methodology) and so the only way they can explain choices by individuals is to call it […]

via Is Subjective Valuation Misunderstood? — divineeconomytheory