samedi 14 avril 2018

J. Glenn Friesen: New Research on Groen van Prinsterer and the idea of Sphere Sovereignty

(Also called Aspects/ Modes of Consciousness/ Modalities/ Meaning-sides) 
New Research on 
Groen van Prinsterer 
and the idea of 
Sphere Sovereignty
by J. Glenn Friesen
PDF Download HERE (26 pages)

Historians of reformational philosophy often claim that Abraham Kuyper obtained the idea of “Sovereignty in its own sphere” from Guillaume Groen van Prinsterer. But very little historical research has been done on Groen’s sources for and development of this idea. The first use of the Dutch phrase “souvereiniteit in eigen sfeer” is much earlier than previously thought; it was used in 1853 by J.I. Doedes, an associate of the “ethical theologian” Chantepie de la Saussaye. Groen became aware of the ideas of Franz von Baader through journals founded by them, and by reading and corresponding with them and others like J.H. Gunning Jr., and Friedrich Fabri. Groen himself owned copies of some of Baader’s books. Groen also relied strongly on the work of the jurist Friedrich Julius Stahl, who was 37 years younger than Baader, but taught for a while at the same Munich university, and shared Baader’s anti-revolutionary ideas.

Sphere sovereignty or "souvereiniteit in eigen kring"; church, state and school; G. Groen van Prinsterer; Abraham Kuyper; Friedrich Julius Stahl; Anti-Revolutionary; Franz von Baader; Herman Dooyeweerd

From pdf page 22:
"12. To say that institutions A and B have sphere sovereignty in relation to each other, we need some kind of organicist model of head and limbs, of center and periphery. Just as all modes of consciousness relate to a central selfhood or heart, all institutions relate to a central Body of Christ, or New Root. These ideas of heart and root are not found in classical Calvinism. They are found in Baader (Friesen 2015, 82-3).

13. Dooyeweerd, following Baader, insists that the organic center is above time so that it may (as supratemporal selfhood) govern the refracted temporal and peripheral modes of consciousness and (as supratemporal Body of Christ) govern temporal institutions. Classical Calvinism does not have Dooyeweerd’s distinctions of time, supratemporal and eternal. They are found in Baader (Friesen 2015, 36-38, 52-55)." 
Visit also Dr J. Glenn Friesen's webpages:

J. Glenn Friesen's

mardi 10 avril 2018

Herman Dooyeweerd: The Radical Cosmic Fall

Alexander the Great at the Battle of Issus

(Also called Aspects/ Modes/ Modalities/ Meaning-sides) 
Herman Dooyeweerd:
The Radical Cosmic Fall

1. Sin and the dialectical conception of guilt in Greek ('Form versus Matter') and Humanistic ('Nature versus Freedom') philosophy.
The Greek religious consciousness only recognized the conflict between the principles of form and matter in humanity. Humanism only acknowledged the conflict between sensory nature (determined by the mechanical law of causality) and the "rational autonomous freedom" of human personality. This latter opposition, even in its Kantian conception, only arrived at the recognition of an evil moral inclination of man to substitute in place of the moral law (the categorical imperative) the sensory desires as a motive for action.

Both the Greek and the Humanistic oppositions do not touch the religious root of human existence, but only the temporal branches of human life. They are only absolutized here in a religious sense. Their concept of guilt, in consequence, is of a merely dialectical character. It consists of a depreciation of an abstract complex of functions of the created cosmos over against another abstracted and deified complex.

In its revelation of the fall, however, just like in that of creation, the Word of God penetrates to the root, to the religious centre of human nature.

The fall is the apostasy of this centre, of this radix of existence, it is the falling away from God. This was spiritual death, because it is the apostasy from the absolute source of Life. Consequently the fall was radical. It involved the whole temporal cosmos, since the latter had its religious root only in mankind. Every conception which denies this radical sense of the fall, (even though it uses the term "radical" as in KANT'S conception of the "radical evil" in man), is diametrically opposed to the basic motive of Holy Scripture. Since, as we have seen, the revelation of the fall does not in any way mean the recognition of an antithetic principle of origin which is opposed to the Creator, sin cannot be thought of as standing in a dialectical relation to the creation.

And because of the radical character of sin, redemption in Christ Jesus must also be radical.

The Divine Word, through which, according to the pronouncement of John's gospel, all things were made, became flesh in Jesus Christ. The Word has entered into the root and the temporal ramifications, in body and soul, of human nature. And therefore it has brought about a radical redemption. Sin is not dialectically reconciled, but it is really propitiated. And in Christ as the new root of the human race, the whole temporal cosmos, which was religiously concentrated in man, is in principle again directed toward God and thereby wrested free from the power of Satan. However, until the return of Christ, even humanity which is renewed in Him still shares in the apostate root of mankind. Consequently, the struggle of the Kingdom of God continues to be waged against the kingdom of darkness until the "consommatio saeculi".

God maintains the fallen cosmos in His gratia communis (common grace) by His creating Word. The redeemed creation shall finally be freed from its participation in the sinful root of human nature and shall shine forth in a higher perfection.

2. Once again the inner reformation 
of philosophic thought.
When the central motive of the Christian religion, which we have just described, rules theoretical thought, this must, as we stated in the Prolegomena, necessarily lead to an inner reformation of the theoretical vision of temporal reality. The integral and radical character of this ground-motive destroys at its very roots any dualistic conception of the coherence and mutual relation of the theoretically abstracted modal aspects.

There is no longer room for a so-called dichotomy between the pre-logical aspects on the one hand, and the logical and post-logical on the other. There is no place for a dichotomy between "sensory nature" and "super-sensory freedom" or for a hypostatizing [absolutizing] of the so-called natural laws in opposition to norms which are set in contrast with each other without any mutual coherence and deeper radical unity.

On the contrary, in the structure of every aspect of reality is expressed the unbreakable integral coherence with all the others. This is explained by the fact that the aspects are one in their religious root and Origin, in accordance with the Biblical motive of creation.

And this motive will constantly stimulate theoretical thought to the discovery of the irreducible peculiar nature of the modal aspects, as well as of the total structures of individuality, because God also created the former according to their own nature.

The motives of the fall and redemption, which cannot be understood apart from the creation, shall then operate in the theoretical vision of reality, in the struggle against every absolutizing of the relative, by which the apostate religious motives withdraw thought from the radical unity and integral Origin of the temporal cosmos. They shall also find expression in the complete recognition of the conflicts in temporal reality which exist because of sin, and which cannot be cloaked or reasoned away by any rationalistic theodicy.

However, these conflicts shall never be ascribed to the cosmic order, as is done by dialectical irrationalism under the influence of an irrationalist turn of its dialectic ground-motive. The law of creation has remained the same in spite of sin. In fact, without the lex, sin would not be able to reveal itself in the temporal cosmos.

And finally the motive of sin will guard Christian philosophy from the ὑβρίς (pride) which considered itself to be free of theoretical errors and faults, and which believes itself to have a monopoly on theoretical truth.

Because of the solidarity of the fall and of the conserving operation of common grace, philosophical schools dominated by apostate ground-motives must be taken seriously. And in general the Biblical ground-motive will stimulate philosophic thought to an extremely critical attitude against the disguising of apostate super-theoretical prejudices by clothing them in the form of universally valid theoretical axioms.

If the central ground-motive of creation, the fall and redemption is to have the above-sketched reforming influence upon philosophical thought, this motive must, as we have shown in our transcendental critique, determine the content of our cosmonomic Idea and must exclude all dialectical motives which lead thought in an apostate direction. However, Christian philosophy did not follow this course in the patristic or medieval period. In the very first centuries of the Christian church, the latter had to wage a life-and-death struggle in order to save the Biblical ground-motive from being strangled by that of the Greeks. In this struggle was formulated the dogma of the Divine essential unity (homoousia) of the Father and the Son (this was soon to include the Holy Spirit) and the dangerous influence of gnosticism in Christian thought was broken.

3.The speculative logos-theory.
Before this period, we find in various apologists, especially in the Alexandrian school of CLEMENS and ORIGEN, a speculative logos theory derived from the Jewish Hellenistic philosophy of PHILO. This logos-theory basically denaturalized the Biblical motive of creation (and so also the motives of the fall and redemption). It conceived of the divine creating Word (Logos) as a lower divine being which mediates between the divine unity and impure matter. The Alexandrian school thereby actually transformed the Christian religion into a high ethical theory, into a moralistically tinged theological and philosophic system, which as a higher gnosis was placed above the faith of the Church. Similarly, Greek philosophical theology had placed itself above the pistis of the common people.

It is in this period that the Church maintained unequivocally the unbreakable unity of the Old and New Testament in opposition to the gnostic division (which was also defended by MARCION in the second century A.D.). It thus overcame the gnostic religious dualism which had driven a wedge between creation and redemption, and thereby had fallen back into a dualistic principle of origin.
(Herman Dooyeweerd, New Critique of Theoretical Thought, Vol I, pp 175-177)
See also -
Herman Dooyeweerd:
Key of knowledge - Question of life and death
Herman Dooyeweerd thought that the ultimate origin of our temporal Cosmos is scientifically unfathomable. Consequently, humility (from all sides) is the only appropriate stance. Dooyeweerd held that the core plain communication of Scripture precedes theorisation, propositionalisation, theologisation. This has been dismissed as "mysticism", but is actually no more mystical than unrefracted sunshine. Dooyeweerd rejected any rationalist-irrationalist dualism as a reductionism into disembodied theoretical abstraction - a characteristic he detected both in humanism and in much theology. Dooyeweerd rejected any dualism between the Word of God as manifest in Scripture and the Word of God as manifest in Nature. Despite such provisos, however, I do suggest we can yet profit from a "Young Earth" analysis such as:
by Jonathan Sarfati 

mercredi 4 avril 2018

Dooyeweerd: Supra-temporal heart of humankind

Supra-temporal heart of humankind
God created humankind in His image. In the heart of humankind, the religious root, the center of its being, God concentrated all of creation toward His service; here He laid the supra-temporal root of all temporal creatures. This human heart, from which according to Scriptures flow the wellsprings of life, transcends all things temporal in the service of God. The whole religious sense (meaning) of God's creation lies in our heart, our entire ego, our complete self. This heart, in which according to the Word eternity has been laid, is the true supra-temporal center of human existence. At the same time it is the creaturely center of all of God's creation. The apostasy of this heart, of this root of creation, necessarily swept with it all temporal creation. In Adam not only all humankind fell, but also that entire temporal cosmos of which humankind was the crowned head. And in Christ, the Word become flesh, the second Covenant Head, God gave the new root of His redeemed creation, in Whom true humanity was implanted through self-surrender, through surrender of the center of existence, the heart.
(from "The Christian View of the State" by Herman Dooyeweerd)
See also 
Dr J. Glenn Friesen's 
Dooyeweerd Glossary entry 

Herman Dooyeweerd: Excerpts from 'De Wijsbegeerte der Wetsidee' ('Philosophy of the Law-Idea')(Translation with study notes by J. Glenn Friesen)

“To the question, what is understood here by religion? I reply: the innate impulse of human selfhood to direct itself toward the true or toward a pretended absolute Origin of all temporal diversity of meaning, which it finds focused concentrically in itself." 
(Herman Dooyeweerd, Prolegomena
New Critique of Theoretical Thoughtp57)
Herman Dooyeweerd: 
Extracts from 
'De Wijsbegeerte der Wetsidee'
('The Philosophy of the Law-Idea') 
Translation with study notes by J. Glenn Friesen
 "Aanvankelijk sterk onder den invloed eerst van de Neo-Kantiaansche wijsbegeerte, later van Husserl's phaenomenologie, beteekende het groote keerpunt in mijn denken de ontdekking van den religieuzen wortel van het denken zelve, waardoor mij een nieuw licht opging over de doorloopende mislukking van alle, aanvankelijk ook door mijzelf ondernomen, pogingen een innerlijke verbinding tot stand te brengen tusschen het Christelijk geloof en een wijsbegeerte, die geworteld is in het geloof in de zelfgenoegzaamheid der menschelijke rede.  
Ik ging verstaan, welke centrale beteekenis toekomt aan het ‘hart’ dat door de Heilige Schrift telkens weer als de religieuze wortel van heel het menschelijk bestaan wordt in het licht gesteld.  
Vanuit dit centrale Christelijk gezichtspunt bleek mij een omwenteling in het wijsgeerig denken noodzakelijk van zoo radicaal karakter, dat Kant's ‘Copernicusdaad’ daartegenover slechts als een periphere kan worden gequalificeerd. Want hier is niet minder in het geding dan een relativeering van heel den tijdelijken kosmos zoowel in zijn zgn. ‘natuur’-zijden als in zijn zgn. ‘geestelijke’ zijden tegenover den religieuzen wortel der schepping in Christus. Wat beteekent tegenover deze Schriftuurlijke grondgedachte een omwenteling in de beschouwing der werkelijkheid, welke de ‘natuur’-zijden der tijdelijke realiteit relativeert ten opzichte van een theoretische abstractie als Kant's ‘homo noumenon’ of zijn ‘transcendentaal denksubject’?  
In het licht der Schrift bleek de geheele instelling van het wijsgeerig denken, welke dit laatste als zelfgenoegzaam proclameert, een standpunt in den af-val van de ware menschelijke zelfheid, wijl het in wezen het denken aftrekt van de goddelijke openbaring in Christus Jezus.  
De eerste consequentie van het Schriftuurlijk gezichtspunt in zake den wortel van heel de tijdelijke werkelijkheid was een radicale breuk met de wijsgeerige realiteitsbeschouwing, welke in het door mij zoo genoemde immanentie-standpunt wortelt." (Herman Dooyeweerd: Boek I. De wetsidee als grondlegging der wijsbegeerte, Voorwoord, pp VI,VII) 
*     *     * 
"At first I was strongly under the influence of neo-Kantian philosophy, and later of Husserl’s phenomenology. The great turning point in my thought was the discovery of the religious root of thought itself. This discovery shed a new light on the continuing failure of all attempts, including my own, to bring an inner connection between Christian belief and a philosophy that is rooted in the belief of the self-sufficiency of human reason. 
I came to understand the central significance that Holy Scripture repeatedly places on the 'heart' as the religious root of all human existence. 
From out of this central Christian viewpoint, it appeared to me that a revolution was necessary in philosophic thought, a revolution of so radical a character, that, compared with it, Kant’s 'Copernican revolution' can only be qualified as a revolution in the periphery. For what is at stake here is no less than a relativizing of the whole temporal cosmos in what we refer to as both its 'natural' sides as well as its 'spiritual' sides, over against the religious root of creation in Christ. In comparison with this basic Scriptural idea [grondgedachte], of what significance is a revolution in a view of reality that relativizes the 'natural' sides of temporal reality with respect to a theoretical abstraction such as Kant’s 'homo noumenon' or his 'transcendental subject of thought?' 
In the light of Scripture, the whole attitude of that kind of philosophic thought that proclaims thought to be self-sufficient, appears to be one that takes its standpoint in a falling away [af-val] from our true human selfhood, since it essentially withdraws human thought from the divine revelation in Jesus Christ. The first result of the Scriptural viewpoint in relation to the root of the entire temporal reality was a radical break with the philosophic view of reality rooted in what I have called the 'immanence standpoint.'" (Herman Dooyeweerd, Vol I, The Law-Idea as Foundation for Philosophy, Foreword (1935).
De Wijsbegeerte der Wetsidee
J. Glenn Friesen's TRANSLATED EXCERPTS from 
De Wijsbegeerte der Wetsidee -
(PDF 113 pages)
J. Glenn Friesen's STUDY NOTES for 
De Wijsbegeerte der Wetsidee
(PDF 62 pages)

(NOTE #1 = p1; #2 = p2; #3 = p8; #4 = p11; #5 = p11; #6 = p12; #7 = p13; #8 = p14; #9 = p14; #10 = p15; #11 = p16; #12 = p16; #13 = p17; #14 = p17; #15 = p17; #16 = p17; #17 = p19;  #18 = p19; #19 = p20; #20 = p20; #21 = p20; #22 = p21; #23 = p22; #24 = p22; #25 = p23; #26 = p23; #27 = p24; #28 = p24; #29 = p24; #30 = p25; #31 = p27; #32 = p27; #33 = p28; #34 = p29; #35 = p29; #36 = p29; #37 = p30; #38 = p30; #39 = p30; #40 = p31; #41 = p32; #42 = p33; #43 = p33; #44 = p34; #45 = p34; #46 = p35; #47 = p35; #48 = p36; #49 = p36; #50 = p37; #51 = p37; #52 = p37; #53 = p38; #54 = p39; #55 = p39; #56 = p39; #57 = p40;  #58 = p40; #59 = p40; #60 = p40; #61 = p40; #62 = p41;  #63 = p41; #64 = p41; #65 = p41; #66 = p43; #67 = p45; #68 = p46; #69 = p47; #70 = p48;  #71 = p48; #72 = p48; #73 = p49; #74 = p49; #75 = p49; #76 = p50; #77 = p50; #78 = p51; #79 = p51; #80 = p52; #81 = p52; #82 = p53; #83 = p53; #84 = p54; #85 = p54; #86 = p55; ; #87 = p55; #88 = p55; #89 = p55; #90 = p55; #91 = p56; #92 = p56; #93 = p56;  #94 = p57;  #95 = p57; #96 = p57; #97 = p58; #98 = p58; #99 = p59; #100 = p60; #101 = p61.
Visit also Dr J. Glenn Friesen's webpages:


mercredi 28 mars 2018

Herman Dooyeweerd: 'Center and Periphery: 
The Philosophy of the Law-Idea in a Changing World'

Center and Periphery: 

The Philosophy of the Law-Idea 
in a Changing World 
Lecture by Herman Dooyeweerd (1964) 
Translation by Dr. J. Glenn Friesen 
"The Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Christ became man. Jesus Christ, and lived among us. And God’s Word has spoken in our human language and in our human world and has thereby also entered our human horizon of experience. And just as man, who was created by God, with a great diversity of functions and structures with respect to his bodily existence, but with one central unity. The heart of his existence, that religious center, out of which are the issues of life, and which according to the order of creation was destined to concentrically direct all the powers that God had placed in the temporal world. These were to be directed in the service of love to God and to our neighbour as the bearer of the image of God. For our neighbour, too, is created according to the image of God.  
"When you see that, then it is no longer strange that Holy Scripture also has a center, a religious center and a periphery, which belong to each other in an unbreakable way. That center is the spiritual dunamis, the spiritual driving force that proceeds from God’s Word in this central, all-inclusive motive of: 
 creation, revelation of the fall into sin, redemption through Jesus Christ in the fellowship of the Holy Spirit. 
And naturally, we can also speak about creation as an article of faith, a doctrine, and that is also clear. Naturally. And one can theologize about that. Of course that can occur. It is also necessary. But when it concerns true knowledge of God and true knowledge of self, then we must say: 
'There is no theology in the world and no philosophy in the world that can achieve that for man. It is the immediate fruit of the working, the central working of God’s Word itself in the fellowship of the Holy Spirit, in the heart, the radix, the root unity of human existence.'
(70 pages)
(67 pages)
Visit J. Glenn Friesen's

lundi 12 mars 2018

‘Friedrich Nietzsche: Saol agus Smaointeachas’ le Diarmuid Ó Gráinne

‘Friedrich Nietzsche: 
Saol agus Smaointeachas’ 
le Diarmuid Ó Gráinne 
Coiscéim, 1997
Litríocht €6.34

Tá nócha bliain ann i mbliana ó foilsíodh Ecce Homo Friedrich Nietzsche, ocht mbliana tar éis don údar féin bás a fháil. Sa bheathaisnéis gearr seo cuireann Diarmuid Ó Gráinne (comheagarthóir An Fhealsúnacht agus an tSíceolaíocht [Coiscéim 1993] smaointeachas agus cúlra an fhealsaimh os ár gcomhair.

“Ba shíceolaí Nietzsche chomh maith le bheith ina fháidh fealsúnta. Bhí sé frithShócraiteach, toisc gur chuir Sócraitéas béim ar an réasún. B’é an fealsamh réamhShócraiteach, Hearaiclítéas, a rogha. Mar sin, roghnaigh sé Diníosas in áit Apolló, an taghd cruthaitheachta in áit an réasúin. Ní hiontas go raibh col ar leth aige le scoláirí a chaith a gcuid ama ag scríobh faoi thuairimí a bhí oibrithe amach ag daoine eile. Dhearc sé orthu mar chluanairí meata, a bhí lán formaid agus éada, nach raibh sé de mhisneach iontu briseadh amach thar bhallaí na hollscoile, agus an saol a fheiceáil mar a bhí. Ní hiontas gur mhol Nietzsche an saol faoin aer, agus is minic a dúirt nár chóir iontaoibh a chur i smaoineamh ar bith nach dtagann chugainn sna sléibhte faoin aer folláin. […] Ba dhíol trua an duine nua-aoiseach, dar leis, feithid bhocht éidreorach nár chuir an iomarca stró air féin faoi rud ar bith, a raibh lá crua oibre thar a acmhainn, a raibh an tseirbhís féin thar a chumas cluanach, spreas díbheo a bhí coillte go hintleachtúil, go fisiciúil agus go spioradálta.”
(‘Friedrich Nietzsche: Saol agus Smaointeachas’ le Diarmuid Ó Gráinne, Coiscéim, 1997, leath. 17,18.)

vendredi 9 mars 2018

Herman Dooyeweerd: Nietzsche

Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche
(Photo by F. Hartmann, 1875)


'The religious [ultimate] ground-motives in the development of Western civilization are basically the following:

1. The "form-matter" ground-motive of Greek antiquity in alliance with the Roman power motive (imperium).

2. The Scriptural ground-motive of the Christian religion: creation, fall, and redemption through Jesus Christ in communion with the Holy Spirit.

3. The Roman Catholic [Thomistic] ground-motive of "nature-grace", which seeks to combine the two mentioned above.

4. The modern humanistic ground motive of "nature-freedom", in which an attempt is made to bring the three previous motives to a religious synthesis concentrated upon the value of human personality.' 

(Herman Dooyeweerd, Roots of Western Culture: Pagan, Secular, and Christian Options, Paideia Press, 2012, p15) 
Herman Dooyeweerd: Nietzsche
The transformation of historicism into naturalistic evolutionism.
     At about the middle of the 19th century historicism took a new turn in evolutionism. The dogma of evolution spread from biology to all the branches of science. Thus there began a new triumphal march of the classic deterministic science-ideal in its historical transformation. Since ROUSSEAU and KANT religious primacy had been ascribed to the motive of freedom. But now the religious dialectic again led Humanistic thought to the acceptance of the primacy of the nature-motive. Freedom-idealism began to collapse. Marxist sociology transformed the idealistic dialectic of HEGEL into a historical-materialism. The latter explained the ideological super-structure of society in terms of a reflection of the economic mode of production. Marxism and Darwinism united, but they, too, did not carry historicism to its extreme relativistic conclusions. Both still believed in a final goal of development which is itself outside of the historical relativity. The religious ground-motive of Humanism dominates the trust of both in objective science and in its freeing activity for humanity.

The first expression of the spiritual disintegrating process in Historicism. NIETZSCHE's religion of power.
However, in the latter half of the 19th century the process of spiritual uprooting began to reveal itself in historicism in an almost pathological form. NIETZSCHE'S gospel of the super-man is the first manifestation of this process.

In his first period NIETZSCHE was under the influence of German Romanticism and idealism from which he fell under the domination of Darwinian evolutionism. In the third and final phase of his thought, however, he developed a religion of power which completely broke away from the Humanistic motive of nature and freedom in its original religious sense.

The view of NIETZSCHE is based upon the Darwinian basic tenets and upon a radical historistic vision of reality. Proceeding on this foundation he views man only as an "animal", which is not yet "fixed", and whose sole superiority to other species of animals consequently consists in the fact that man is not bound to static instincts and to a statically circumscribed "Umwelt".

In the historical development of culture man has his destiny in his own hands, and thereby displays an absolutely dynamic nature. NIETZSCHE wishes to build his anthropology exclusively upon the positive data of "nature and history". He fulminates against the fact that man overestimates his own importance, views the whole cosmos as related to himself, and imagines himself to be a free rational personality, radically elevated above the animals.

Man is a "phantastic animal" that from time to time has the need of reflecting upon the goal of his existence and thus posits ideologies concerning God and morality. However, science has progressed so far that man has killed his gods, and now only retains his own historical future. But history — in spite of all Christian and Humanistic ideologies — is nothing but a struggle for power (2).
(2) In our analysis of the modal structure of the historical aspect in Vol. II, we shall see that domination or power is indeed the nuclear moment of this aspect.

Thus the "Wille zur Macht" is the only existential escape for man from the nihilism to which historicism leads.

The kingdom of the "super-man", of the "blond beast", in which this will to power will assume super-human forms, can only be established through an "Umwertung aller Werte" (transvaluation of all values) on the ruins of Christian and Humanistic ideologies.

The ideal of science and the ideal of personality of Humanism are both rejected. NIETZSCHE considers science only as a biological aid in the struggle for existence. It only has a pragmatic value. Consistent historicism can no longer have faith in scientific truth. Nor can it believe any longer in the Idea of humanity which was rooted in the religious motive of freedom. Thus NIETZSCHE introduced into Humanistic philosophy the great process of religious decay. And this would soon enough lead to a radical spiritual crisis in the culture of the West, accelerated by the two world-wars.

(Herman Dooyeweerd, New Critique of Theoretical Thought, Vol I/ Part 2/ Chapt 1 /§4 pp 207ff)
*  *  *  *  *  *
The tension of the ideals of science and personality in NIETZSCHE's development. Biologizing of the science-ideal (DARWIN).
The Humanistic ideal of personality in its irrationalist turn was confronted with a new development of the natural science-ideal which, since the second half of the nineteenth century under the mighty influence of DARWIN's evolution-theory, pervaded the new "historical mode of thought". As we shall presently show, this new "historical mode of thinking" originated in the irrationalistic turn of the Humanistic freedom-idealism. This dialectical struggle between the two basic factors of the Humanistic transcendental ground-Idea in their new conception discloses itself in a truly impressive manner in the dialectical development of NIETZSCHE, whose final phase, as we observed in an earlier context, is the announcement of the beginning of the religious uprooting of modern thought as a result of a dialectical self-destruction of the Humanistic ground-motive in a radical Historicism.

We have only to compare NIETZSCHE's first romantic-aesthetic period, influenced strongly by SCHOPENHAUER and RICHARD WAGNER, with the second positivistic phase beginning in 1878, in which the biological ideal of science gains the upper-hand, and the last period of the culture-philosophy of the "Superman", beginning in 1883. In this last period, the science-ideal has been entirely depreciated. Henceforth, science is viewed as a merely biological means in the struggle for existence, without any proper truth-value. BERGSON and other modern philosophers of life took over this pragmatist and biological conception of the theoretical picture of the world, created by scientific thought.

It would be false to suppose that the irrationalist philosophy of life preached chaos. On the contrary, it does not intend to abandon order. But, as the rationalist types of Humanist philosophy make the concept of the subject a function of the concept of the law in a special modal sense, and thus dissolve the former into the latter, so, in a reverse manner, the irrationalist types reduce the "true" order to a function of individual subjectivity. [Maar, gelijk de rationalistische typen der humanistische wijsbegeerte het subjectsbegrip tot een functie van het wetsbegrip maken en de subjectsidee in diepste wezen in een rationalistische wetsidee opheffen, zoo herleiden omgekeerd, de irrationalistische typen de ‘ware’ wetmatigheid tot een functie der individueele subjectiviteit. Hier is de zelfstandigheid der wet ten bate van de subjectieve individualiteit opgeheven: de wetsidee is in een irrationalistische subjectsidee overgegaan! (WdW Boek I p 433)]
(Herman Dooyeweerd, New Critique of Theoretical Thought, Vol I/ Part 2/ Chapt 6/§2 pp 462-467)

See also: