1887

n Journal for Juridical Science - Dooyeweerd's legal and political philosophy : a response to the challenge of historicism

USD

 

Abstract

A look at the penetrating and encompassing nature of Dooyeweerd's political and legal philosophy makes it understandable why Georgio Del Vecchio, a reputable Italian philosopher of law, appreciated Dooyeweerd as "the most profound, innovative, and penetrating philosopher since Kant". Dooyeweerd's laid the foundation for uncovering the deepest dialectical motivation of modern philosophy, namely the (dialectical) basic motive of nature and freedom (science ideal and personality ideal). Dooyeweerd rejected the idea of a "pure theory of law" because in spite of its uniqueness, the meaning of the jural aspect of reality comes to expression only in its coherence with other irreducible aspects. In opposition to the relativistic claims of historicism, Dooyeweerd emphasises the irreducibility of each aspect of reality. Dooyeweerd exercised immanent criticism on the impasse of a theory of the state without the state and a theory of law without law. Despite his continuing an element of natural law, Dooyeweerd's approach avoids the antinomous stance of historicism by realising that change can only be established on the basis of . The article concludes with a brief sketch of his systematic programme, as it unfolds in his multi-volume .


Wie die indringende en omvattende aard van Dooyeweerd se politieke filosofie en regsfilosofie betrag, sal begryp waarom Georgio Del Vecchio, 'n gerespekteerde Italiaanse regsfilosoof, Dooyeweerd waardeer as "the most profound, innovative, and penetrating philosopher since Kant". Dooyeweerd se Intreerede het die grondslag gelê vir die blootlegging van die diepste dialektiese motivering van die moderne filosofie, naamlik die (dialektiese) grondmotief van natuur en vryheid (wetenskapsideaal en persoonlikheidsideaal). Dooyeweerd het die idee van 'n "suiwere regsleer" verwerp omdat die sin van die regsaspek van die werklikheid slegs tot uitdrukking kom in die samehang daarvan met ander onherleibare aspekte. In teenstelling tot die relativistiese aansprake van die historisme het Dooyeweerd die onherleibaarheid van elke werklikheidsaspek beklemtoon. Hy het immanente kritiek uitgeoefen op die impasse van 'n staatsleer sonder die staat en 'n regsleer sonder die reg. Ten spyte daarvan dat hyself nog 'n element van die natuurregsleer kontinueer, het Dooyeweerd se benadering die antinomiese posisie van die historisme vermy op basis van die insig dat verandering slegs op die basis van konstansie vasgestel kan word. Die artikel sluit af met 'n oorsigtelike skets van Dooyeweerd se program soos wat dit in sy meerdelige ontvou.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/juridic/39/1/EJC169405
2014-06-01
2016-12-09
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error