But Dooyeweerd's notion of Law is very different from that of liberal humanism, that sees law as constraint. Instead, Dooyeweerd saw Law as that which enables meaningful happenings, and that which defines which happenings are meaningful and good. Things happen, not by virtue of being-caused but by virtue of entities responding as subject to this framework of law. By this means entities have genuine Freedom.
This kind of Law is the Gift of the Creator to the Creation to enable it to Exist and Occur apart from (though always depending on) himself. This Law is not just "You should do X" but rather takes the form of "If you do X then Y will result". In this sense, Law is more like Promise. Hence I like to refer to it as 'law-promise', though Dooyeweerd himself did not use that term.
By means of response to aspectual Law things come into being; see our discussion of Dooyeweerd's entity theory.
The subject side is subject to the law side and it is that very subjection to law that constitutes being a subject in the other sense, as a centre of action.
Note: this emphasis on the Law Side of the cosmos explains the rather clumsy name 'Cosmonomic' that was given to the philosophy. In fact, law is seen as boundary between God and the cosmos. See also our discussion of the philosophical implications of the notion of creation.
(For this, Klapwijk (2008, p.120, note 10) uses the term 'idionomic' (having laws of its own) rather than `autonomous' (setting its own laws): the latter term suggests not only the intended irreducibility of the laws, but also an independence that runs counter to the interrelatedness of reality.)
The laws of earlier aspects are determinative, while those of later aspects are normative. They latter provide basic kinds of norms for living. In general it may be said that the human aspects (from analytic to pistic) are normative, while the first four aspects are largely determinative. The determinativity of the physical aspect is what gives rise to reliable causality.
Law implies norms, and the difference between Good and Evil. In the normative aspects, we have freedom both within the laws of an aspect and also to go against it. The former is Good and the latter, Evil. This is the basis for a Dooyeweerdian theory of ethics and is discussed further under the Shalom Principle.
"For there are 'made' laws, 'discovered' laws, but also laws - a truth for all time. These are more or less hidden in the reality which surrounds us and do not change. Not only science but art also, shows us that reality, at first incomprehensible, gradually reveals itself, by the mutual relations that are inherent in things."
In terms of Dooyeweerd's own thought, we might explain the differences in types of law and norm as follows:
Copyright (c) 2004 Andrew Basden. But you may use this material subject to conditions.
Number of visitors to these pages: . Written on the Amiga with Protext.
Created: 13 September 2004. Last updated: 6 January 2005 link to 2sides. 1 April 2005 link to Mondrian. 5 January 2010 idionomic. 27 April 2012 a couple of examples in Intro. 15 May 2013 link to de Saussure.