Research to be Carried Out
This is a new page, in which we identify research that could or should be carried out within the Dooyeweerdian framework. At present, it is only a list of links to where such possible research is mentioned in the main text.
Research that Enriches Other Thinkers
- New overviews of fields. Take a Dooyeweerdian aspect as a 'lens' to view a field and see to what extent a wide range of extant thinkers or paradigms in that field can be brought together into an integrated rich picture, especially when, from the point of view of the field, those thinkers seem to be incommensurably opposed to each other. This involves not only Dooyeweerd's understanding of the kernel meaning of the aspect, but also how the aspect relates to, and recognises, other aspects. Often, different paradigms are pointing to different other aspects. An example where this has been attempted is by Basden , for research paradigms (positivist, interpretivist, critical-social). Another example where it could be employed is in relation to the pistic aspect. Each aspect has a section with initial ideas from those working in the field. Such Dooyeweerdian research could serve to help dignify and define disciplines [Basden 2010].
- Research into the Hermeneutic Circle. The two-way circular interpretation of texts investigated by Gadamer (understanding of whole emerges from parts and their relationships, whereas understanding of parts is in light of the whole) may be affirmed, critiqued and enriched by reference to Dooyeweerd's aspects, especially in his clear distinction between the lingual and social and other aspects, which often get mixed up. Also, the extension of the idea of hermeneutic circle to the whole of life and reality can be explored by reference to Dooyeweerd's distinction between the meaning carried by symbols (which is lingual functioning), and the broader meaningfulness that is reality, because Dooyeweerd based his thought on a different ground-motive.
- Carry Stephen Toulmin's project further. He asked  "What is necessary for a good argument?" and found that good argumentation involves claim, data, warrant, backing, rebuttal and qualifier working in harmony. In this way, he was opening up the potential of our lingual functioning to serve the analytical aspect. This may be widened to lingual functioning serving other aspects. So the research question would be: "What is necessary for good lingual functioning employed in the service of xxx aspect?" for each xxx.
- Research in knowledge representation.
- Enrich Donald Davidson's thoughts especially on actions, reasons and causes, with Dooyeweerd's aspects and his idea of multi-aspectual human functioning.
Research that Advances Dooyeweerdian Ideas
- Research into the notion of Gegenstand, in other aspects. Dooyeweerd explored the analytical Gegenstand inherent in theoretical thought, in which our analytical functioning 'stands over against' what it is thinking about. Need this be the only kind of Gegenstand relationship? Might we not have a formative Gegenstand, in which our trying to shape things stands over against what we are trying to shape, especially when we are trying to control human beings as though there were objects? Might we not have a lingual Gegenstand, especially when we are under pressure to explain things, such as giving reasons for our actions in court? (See also Davidson's ideas.)
- Research into Roles of Aspects. Because of confusion therein, Dooyeweerd's ideas of qualifying, founding, leading and internal-leading aspects requires a major rethink. It seems unfinished business in Dooyeweerd's writings, and we should carry it on. It should be rethought, not by a religious-apologetic approach that takes Dooyeweerd's writings almost as scripture, but by trying to think Dooyeweerd's thoughts, and see where he was heading. This is likely to be philosophical research, but preceded perhaps by reflections on everyday life assisted by sociological and anthroplogical studies.
- Research into Breadth and Depth of Dooyeweerd's Aspects. Frances Bell suggested that Dooyeweerd's aspects are too broad. Especially when used if masters students projects and in PhD research, if the researcher tries to cover all aspects (as suggested is necessary by multi-aspectual human functioning and the Shalom Principle) then the research lacks depth because it is too broad. There are perhaps two research projects here: Methodological research to find a methodology that maintains the diversity of aspects while enabling and encouraging appropriate depth, and philosophical research to explore the nature of breadth versus depth in relation to aspects.
- Research into Intuitive Grasp of Aspectual Meaning. This ensures some basis intuitive mutual understanding between people (e..g. between researcher and researched) even across cultures, though the shaps and limits of this have not yet been fully explored. This is likely to require both philosophical research to understand more clearly what is meant by intuitive grasp, and emppirical research probably of an anthropological or sociological kind to find out to what extent people across many cultures and times have an intuitive grasp of aspects, and in what ways their cultural background affects this intuitive grasp.
- Research into Ways of Knowing. To identify and discuss aspects of knowing, ways in which we know. For example, multiple aspects of tacit knowing. It is likely to require applied philosophical research. (4 October 2013: Research of this kind has started at the University of Salford by Alex Kimani.)
- Research into the functioning of the pistic aspect, such as:
See Research section in pistic aspect.
- Using Dooyeweerd as a lens for integrating extant thought and paradigms within the field of vision, inspiration, spirituality, etc.
- Understanding meaningfulness.
- How the worldview of Christians coming out of persecution shifts, e.g. from being-faithful to one of seeking-prosperity.
- How to discern pistic directions in people, given that these are usually deeply hidden.
Basden, A. (2010) On Using Spheres of Meaning to Define and Dignify the IS Discipline. International Journal of Information Management, 30, 13-20. (For full paper see http://aisel.aisnet.org/ukais2009/10.)
Basden A. (2011). Enabling a Kleinian integration of interpretivist and critical-social IS research: The contribution of Dooyeweerd's philosophy. European Journal of Information Systems. 20, 477-489.
Toulmin, S.E. (1958) The Uses of Argument. UK: Cambridge University Press.
This is part of The Dooyeweerd Pages, which explain, explore and discuss Dooyeweerd's interesting philosophy. Questions or comments are very welcome.
Compiled by Andrew Basden. You may use this material subject to conditions.
Number of visitors to these pages: . Written on the Amiga with Protext.
Created: 3 March 2003.
Last updated: 21 November 2005 unets. 5 July 2011 Toulmin, and also split into two types of research: enriching and advancing. 22 August 2013 hermeneutic circle. 23 August 2013 pistic research. 28 August 2013 more research. 31 August 2013 intuitive grasp. 4 October 2013 various researchers linked to critiques, including aspectual roles and breadth; added whether the research is philosophical or empirical; new .nav. 7 November 2013 Gegenstand. 6 September 2014 .nav better.