|Chapter 1. Introduction: To Help You Read This Book
|Chapter 1 prepares readers to gain most from the book. It introduces the topic of the book (Foundations, Practice, Research and Dooyeweerd). It explains how various terms and concepts are used throughout the work, so that we are not talking at cross-purposes. Like many introductory chapters, it may be skipped until precise understanding is required (e.g. during critique of the book), but readers will benefit from the overview of the topics.
|§1-1. ADVENTURES WITH DOOYEWEERD'S PHILOSOPHY
|The adventure is that Dooyeweerd's philosophy has helped research.
|What we treat as research
|§1-2.1 The Mandate of Research
|To contribute theoretical understanding to humanity's bodies of knowledge.
|§1-2.2 Clarifying Concepts Used in This Book
|Terms to do with research, such as theory.
|§1-2.3 Some Requirements for Research
|Research involves things like generality and reliance-worthiness.
|§1-2.4 Research Content, Activity and Application
|Three realities about research.
|§1-2.5 Range of Fields
|We cover a wide range of fields in this book.
|Everyday experience and the pre-theoretical attitude of thought are central in this book; here are some related concepts we will use.
|Like foundations of a building, the hidden foundations of research determine its quality and robustness.
|§1-4.1 Foundations of Research
|Philosophy is important.
|What philosophy is and how it's developed.
|§1-4.3 Dooyeweerd and Philosophy
|Why Dooyeweerd's philosophy is useful.
|Where to find materials about Dooyeweerd's philosophy.
|§1-5. GUIDE FOR READERS
|Explaining the book.
|§1-5.1 The Structure of the Book
|Its four parts and 12 other chapters.
|§1-5.2 Some Tips on Reading
|So readers will know.
|Chapter 2. Research and Everyday Experience
|Chapter 2 shows how research cannot be divorced from everyday experience but is a distinct kind of activity within it. It critically discusses three common presumptions (the detached observer, the neutrality and autonomy of theoretical thinking, and the authority and value of theoretical knowledge that results from research) and shows how Dooyeweerd addresses each, not by accepting or rejecting them, but by placing them in a wider context of pre-theoretical thought.
|§2-1. SOME PRELIMINARIES
|§2-1.1 Differences Between Research and Everyday Experience
|Everyday experience is much richer than what we consider in our theories and classifications to be important.
|§2-1.2 Relationships Between Research and Everyday Experience
|Theoretical thought and research occurs within, and referring to, everyday experience.
|§2-2. THE RESEARCHER-WORLD RELATIONSHIPS
|DETACHED OR PARTICIPANT OBSERVER? Both.
|§2-2.1 Is Detached Observer Possible?
|The picture is more complex than many believe.
|§2-2.2 Is Detached Observer Desirable?
|Detachedness and engagement both have their own advantages.
|§2-2.3 Dooyeweerd's View of the Researcher-World Relationship
|Detachedness is not really possible, but a certain kind of detachment does occur, in which the researcher stands over against their material.
|§2-3. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THEORETICAL AND PRE-THEORETICAL THINKING
|Theoretical thinking cannot be divorced from pre-theoretical.
|§2-3.1 Is Neutral Theoretical Thinking Desirable?
|Supposed neutrality of theoretical thinking is not always desirable.
|§2-3.2 Is Neutral Theoretical Thinking Possible?
|Theoretical thinking can never be totally neutral, but it can exhibit a useful generality.
|§2-3.3 Dooyeweerd's View of Theoretical and Pre-theoretical Thinking
|Dooyeweerd holds theoretical thinking to be always within, and referring to, pre-theoretical.
|§2-4. THE VALUE OF THEORETICAL AND PRE-THEORETICAL KNOWLEDGE
|Both theoretical and pre-theoretical knowledge (intuition) have their value.
|§2-5. UNDERSTANDING EVERYDAY, PRE-THEORETICAL EXPERIENCE
|Everyday experience is characterized by embeddedness and diversity. Philosophy had long ignored or disdained everyday, pre-theoretical experience and has only recently taken an interest in it. There are three ways of treating everyday experience with respect.
|§2-5.1 Interest in Everyday Experience
|For 200 years, philosophers have treated everyday experience as a topic to study. Dooyeweerd is among them.
|§2-5.2 Appealing to Everyday Experience
|Everyday experience has long provided material by which philosophers have drawn attention to the need for fresh ideas. Dooyeweerd is among them.
|§2-5.3 Starting with Everyday Experience
|Even those who study everyday experience start with theoretical thought to make that study. Dooyeweerd is different; he begins with pre-theoretical thought and everyday experience, in order to understand theoretical thought properly.
|§2-6. EVERYDAY EXPERIENCE AND RESEARCH
|Everyday experience is important in research application, activity and even content; this summarises how Dooyeweerd's view is useful in research.
|§2-6.1 The Everyday Experience of Applying Research
|Applying the results of research is, or becomes, an everyday experience: the applier is embedded in the diverse world.
|§2-6.2 Research Activity as Everyday Experience
|The real-life of research has an everyday character: embedded and diverse.
|§2-6.3 Everyday Experience in Research Content
|What we study is the 'everyday' reality of the world, though selected aspects thereof.
|Never forget everyday experience and pre-theoretical thought.
|Chapter 3. Diversity and Coherence
|Chapter 3 discusses the diversity and coherence inherent in reality, including the reality of research activity, application and content. Dooyeweerd's understanding of diversity is as aspects (spheres of meaningfulness), which are mutually irreducible but also interwoven and inter-dependent. It shows how Dooyeweerd's suite of fifteen aspects can help us understand and manage various complexities in research, including failure, unexpected repercussions of research application, harmonisation with bodies of knowledge, the plethora of fields and concepts, and the harmony of theoretical models.
|§3-1. A PHILOSOPHICAL LOOK AT DIVERSITY AND COHERENCE
|Reality is diverse and yet coherent - i.e. complex. Some philosophies have tried to reduce diversity, or deny coherence. Others have taken them seriously.
|§3-2. DOOYEWEERD'S ASPECTS
|The best-known part of Dooyeweerd's philosophy.
|§3-2.1 An Initial Look At Diversity
|Introduces Dooyeweerd's suite of aspects, with examples.
|§3-2.2 Aspects as Modes
|Aspects are ways of seeing reality, but also modes of being, functioning, rationality, possibility, good and knowing; we will see how they pervade everything.
|§3-2.3 Irreducibility of Aspects
|Each aspect is irreducibly distinct from all others, precluding reductionism.
|§3-2.4 Inter-aspect Coherence
|Yet each aspect coheres with the others in various ways.
|§3-2.4.1 Aspectual simultaneity
|Things exhibit all aspects simultaneously.
|§3-2.4.2 No conflict among aspects
|No aspect undermines any of the others; any seeming conflict reveals we have misunderstood some aspects.
|§3-2.4.3 Inter-aspect analogy
|Each aspect contains echoes of the others; e.g. causality.
|§3-2.4.4 Inter-aspect dependency
|Each aspect depends on earlier aspects to enable its functioning, and on later aspects to fill out its full meaning.
|§3-2.4.5 The Order of Aspects
|The aspects are in a sequence defined by this dependency.
|§3-3. DIVERSITY AND COHERENCE OF RESEARCH ACTIVITY
|The immense complexity of research activity may be understood and managed by reference to Dooyeweerd's aspects.
|§3-4. DIVERSITY AND COHERENCE OF RESEARCH APPLICATION
|So may application of research findings.
|§3-5. DIVERSITY AND COHERENCE IN RESEARCH CONTENT (THEORIES)
|Even in supposedly simple sciences theories and findings exhibit multiple aspects, many of which are overlooked.
|§3-5.1 Diversity and Coherence of Research Fields
|Though fields revolve around core aspect, they involve all aspects.
|§3-5.2 Diversity and Coherence of Data Collected in Research
|Expect data collected in research to exhibit multiple aspects, which cohere around the focal aspect of the research.
|§3-5.3 Diversity and Coherence Within Concepts
|Complex concepts like trust exhibit most aspects and even simple concepts exhibit several.
|§3-5.4 Diversity and Coherence in Research Findings / Theories
|so our findings and theories should be open to all aspects in principle, though focusing on one.
|Be open to diversity and yet look for coherence; use Dooyeweerd's aspects to help you.
|Chapter 4. Meaning in Research and Reality, and an Overview of Dooyeweerd's Understanding of Reality
|Chapter 4 strengthens the notion of aspects introduced in Chapter 3, as modalities or spheres of meaningfulness and corresponding law. As such, aspects are the possible modes of being, rationality, good/evil, functioning, repercussions, properties, relationships, subjects and objects, and knowing, whether tacit or explicit. It presents most of Dooyeweerd's positive philosophical understanding of the world, as a reference-point for reading the other chapters, and briefly discusses how this provides insights about research application, activity and content.
|§4-1. TYPES OF MEANING
|Five types of meaning: signification-meanings, interpretation-meanings, attribution-meanings, life-meanings, and meaningfulness. Meaningfulness transcends human beings.
|§4-2. TREATMENT OF MEANING IN PHILOSOPHY
|Meaning has often been taken for granted in philosophy. When philosophy has tackled meaning, under various guises, it has usually focused on one of the first four types of meaning. Very little philosophy has taken meaningfulness seriously, except for Dooyeweerd, whose whole New Critique takes meaningfulness as a starting-point.
|§4-3. MEANINGFULNESS AS THE FOUNDATION FOR ONTOLOGY, EPISTEMOLOGY AND AXIOLOGY
|To Dooyeweerd, meaningfulness is the ground of all; this section explains most of Dooyeweerd's views of reality.
|§4-3.1 Diversity and Coherence of Meaning
|The diversity and coherence of everyday experience (including research) is a diversity and coherence of meaningfulness.
|§4-3.2 Aspects: Spheres of Meaningfulness
|Aspects are ways of being meaningful: spheres of meaningfulness. Each has a distinct kernel meaningfulness, and a constellation of meaningfulness around it.
|§4-3.3 Meaningfulness as the Modes of Being
|All being is meaningfulness; and Dooyeweerd's aspects are modes of being (ways in which things can be), which may also be called "aspectual beings". Most things are simultaneously multiple aspectual beings, e.g. poem as aesthetic and lingual.
|§4-3.4 Types and Identity
|Types and identity may be understood via aspects, rather than by substance or essence.
|§4-3.5 Structural Relationships
|Part-whole and enkaptic relationships can be undestood clearly by reference to aspects.
|§4-3.6 Meaning and Rationality
|Each aspect offers a distinct rationality (way of making sense or nonsense).
|§4-3.7 Meaning, Value and Good
|Meaningfulness implies Good or Value; each aspect offers a different Good (and corresponding Evil).
|§4-3.8 Law, Functioning and Repercussion
|The dynamic of meaningfulness.
|§4-3.8.1 Law: the possibility of functioning and repercussion
|Each sphere of meaningfulness (aspect) is also a distinct law-sphere, and the aspects together constitute a law-side that governs all reality and enables it to function dynamically, with repercussions that are meaningful in each aspect. Each aspect offers reality a different kind of possibiity.
|§4-3.8.2 Multi-aspectual functioning
|Things function in all aspects simultaneously. All activity is multi-aspectual functioning.
|§4-3.8.3 Society, progress and meaningfulness
|Progress is the opening up of the potential of aspects.
|§4-3.8.4 Meaningful properties and functional relationships
|Properties and relationships are constituted in things functioning in the various aspects, and are different in each aspect.
|§4-3.9 Subject and Object in Terms of Meaningfulness and Law
|Dooyeweerd's subject-object relationship is intimate engagement (unlike Descartes'); Dooyeweerd allows subject-subject relationships too. The object is meaningful in a target aspect.
|§4-3.10 Prior Meaningfulness and the Metaphor of Ocean
|Meaningfulness is like an ocean in which we and all reality 'swims' or 'dwells' together, a common ocean of meaningfulness for all reality, and especially for researcher and researched.
|§4-3.11 Towards a Model of Meaning
|With this we might begin to understand what meaning is, in all its forms.
|§4-3.11.1 The proposed model
|The first four types of meanings may be seen as grounded in, and presupposing, meaningfulness; each results from functioning in various aspects, targeting others.
|§4-3.11.2 Application to philosophy
|The various understandings of meaning in philosophy may be accounted for with this model.
|§4-3.12 Meaningfulness and Knowing the World
|Knowing is multi-aspectual, tacit in most aspects, explicit in the analytic and lingual aspects.
|§4-3.13 Knowing Meaningfulness Itself: Delineating the Aspects
|How can fish understand the ocean? How may we understand what aspects there are? Dooyeweerd has devised principles whereby we can obtain an understanding of which aspects there are, but they can never be absolute.
|§4-3.14 Meaning, Time and Self
|Self and time cannot be understood philosophically, but they are grounded in meaningfulness. Time as actuality.
|§4-4. POTENTIAL RELEVANCE FOR RESEARCH
|This meaningfulness-oriented philosophy can bear rich fruit in research.
|§4-4.1 Meaningfulness and Research Application
|Research is meaningful in context of wider world, bringing repercussions, which could contribute to, or jeopardise, shalom of the world.
|§4-4.2 Meaningfulness and Research Activity
|Meaningfulness of research activity is its mandate to generate research content that anticipates its application. Meaningfulness within research activity is its multi-aspectual functioning.
|§4-4.3 Meaning and Research Content
|Most things that are grounded in meaningfulness are important to research content, including rationality and normativity.
|Take meaningfulness seriously in understanding and doing research.
|Chapter 5. Research and Philosophy
|Chapter 5 discusses how philosophy is important in research -- as approach, foundation and source of tools. It summarises Dooyeweerd's reasons why philosophy needs to be questioned rather than accepted as given, because of three kinds of presupposition: worldviews, ground-motives and standpoints. Most philosophy holds presuppositions that undermine theoretical thought (especially the immanence-standpoint and dialectical ground-motives), so Dooyeweerd explores an alternative, which he dubbed a "Christian" philosophy - but it is one which does not try to impose doctrines onto the content of research theories. This chapter also shows where readers may obtain resources for understanding Dooyeweerd.
|§5-1. ROLES OF PHILOSOPHY IN RESEARCH
|§5-1.1 Ontology, Epistemology and Axiology
|Usually separated, we treat these together.
|§5-1.2 Philosophy as Approach
|Our philosophical view of how our research relates to the world.
|§5-1.3 Philosophy as Foundation
|Our philosophical understanding of the nature of the world influences the conceptual frameworks we use to guide our research.
|§5-1.4 Philosophy as Source of Conceptual Tools and Methods
|Our philosophical understanding of the world influences which conceptual tools (e,g, classifications, models) we allow ourselves to employ or produce.
|§5-2. PRESUPPOSITIONS: WORLDVIEWS AND GROUND-MOTIVES
|Presuppositions about what is meaningful usually have a hidden influence on our research; there are three levels.
|Similar to paradigms, worldviews are often centred on an aspect we take to be of special importance.
|When we find a paradigm or worldview insufficient, our ground-motive informs us what the problem is and where a solution might lie. Ground-motives are "spiritual mainspring" of society. Three dialectical ones have dominated Western thinking, along with one pluralistic one. Four have dominated Korean thought.
|§5-2.3 Ground-motives as Presuppositions not Truths
|Deeper than worldviews, ground-motives seem to be taken as obvious truths but in fact are reliviously-adhered-to presuppositions. As such, thinkers should always declare the ones in which they work.
|§5-2.4 Differences Between Dialectical and Pluralist Ground-motives
|Dialectical ground-motives have always caused deep problems in philosophy: irresolvable, fruitless conflicts, and blinding us to half of reality.
|§5-3. PRESUPPOSITIONS: STANDPOINTS
|The deepest kind of presupposition, about the general nature of reality itself, about the Divine and how Creation relates thereto. Most philosophy has adopted an immanence standpoint.
|§5-3.1 Problems Resulting from the Immanence Standpoint
|The immanence standpoint makes it difficult to understand everyday experience, diversity, meaningfulness, things, concepts, and tends to reductionistic isms and dialectical swings.
|§5-3.2 Alternative Standpoints
|Eastern and Biblical offer alternatives to the immanence standpoint.
|§5-3.3 Towards a Different Standpoint
|Dooyeweerd adopted the Biblical standpoint, and found it could overcome the problems resulting from the immanence standpoint.
|§5-4. THE DEVELOPMENT OF DOOYEWEERD'S PHILOSOPHY
|Dooyeweerd developed a kind of philosophy that is commensurate with Christian beliefs but is true philosophy and not theology nor doctrines in disguise.
|§5-4.1 Struggles with the Immanence Standpoint
|Dooyeweerd experienced the problems with the immanence standpoint at first hand in his field of juridprudence, which led him to seek a resolution.
|§5-4.2 Seeking a "Christian" Philosophy
|The historical roots of Dooyeweerd's "Christian" philosophy and how it differs from Scholastic ("Christian") philosophy.
|§5-4.3 Fresh Insights for Research
|Like Faraday, it was Dooyeweerd's Biblical beliefs that freed him to see things in new ways that can bring fresh insights.
|§5-5. CROSSING RESEARCH PHILOSOPHY BOUNDARIES
|How do thinkers with one standpoint dialogue with those of another: how might Dooyeweerd's ideas genuinely engage with mainstream thinking?
|§5-6. CONCLUSION 133
|Chapter 6. On Theoretical Knowledge and Research
|Chapter 6 paves the way to a clearer understanding of research, by exploring the roots of theoretical thought at the core of research. It examines Dooyeweerd's immanent and transcendental critiques of theoretical thought, to unveil three fundamental components necessarily found in all good research: abstraction of aspects of the world, harmonization of multiple rationalities to yield findings, and then critique by reference to wider meaningfulness and what society presupposes its origin to be.
|§6-1. THE CHALLENGE OF TRUTH
|Truth is not straightforward, and Dooyeweerd helps us understand why.
|§6-1.1 Realism and Anti-Realism: Is There Generic Truth?
|Traditional thought splits into two camps, Realist ('objective' truth which we can hope to know) and Anti-Realist ('subjective' views).
|§6-1.2 About Truth
|§6-1.3 Dooyeweerd's Critique of Truth
|"There is no truth in itself"; there is truth, but it is not self-dependent, but depends on meaningfulness (the perspective we take).
|§6-2. ON THE NON-NEUTRALITY OF THEORETICAL THOUGHT
|Dooyeweerd argued in several ways that theoretical thought is, and can never be, autonomous or neutral.
|§6-2.1 Dooyeweerd's Immanent Critique of Theoretical Thought
|Theoretical thought never has been neutral nor autonomous of religious presuppositions.
|§6-2.2 Dooyeweerd's Transcendental Critiques of Theoretical Thought
|Theoretical thought never can be neutral nor autonomous. Dooyeweerd made two transcendental critiques to determine the universal and necessary conditions for theoretical thought, of which his second is the more useful to us.
|§6-3. DOOYEWEERD'S SECOND TRANSCENDENTAL CRITIQUE OF THEORETICAL THOUGHT
|Dooyeweerd's 2nd transcendental critique opens up the fundamental issues in theoretical thought, with which we can understand research.
|§6-3.1 Preparing to Understand the Transcendental Problems
|Research (theoretical thought) is in a context and is more than just the activity of the individual researcher.
|§6-3.2 The Starting Question
|What is the difference between pre-theoretical and theoretical attitudes of thought? Answer: abstraction from the world.
|§6-3.3 First Transcendental Problem (TP1), Abstraction: Thinker and Diversity of World
|What do we abstract? Aspects (ways of being meaningful); this gives us data. But this fractures the coherence of meaningfulness that is reality, so we get a narrowed view.
|§6-3.4 Second Transcendental Problem (TP2), Reuniting That Which Was Set Asunder: Rationalities and Responsibility
|How do we regain the coherence? By harmonising the multiple rationalities by which we derive findings from data. But there is no one overriding rationality, so human responsibility is key.
|§6-3.5 Third Transcendental Problem (TP3), Grounds of Critical Self-Reflection: Origin of Meaning
|On what grounds may the researcher and the community judge findings? By reference to the wider (totality of) meaningfulness, which ultimately takes us to an origin of meaning.
|§6-3.6 Ground-motives as Origins of Meaning
|The origin of meaningfulness to which critique ultimately refers is usually the prevailing ground-motive.
|§6-4. DOOYEWEERD'S PERSPECTIVE ON TRUTH
|Dooyeweerd's detailed definition of truth (a) in everyday life, (b) in theoretical thought.
|We have three ways in which meaningfulness is important in theoretical thought, to do with diversity, reuniting, and totality. Next chapters make this practical in research.
|Chapter 7. Ground-Ideas: How Philosophies Work
|Chapter 7 introduces Dooyeweerd's notion of three-part Ground-Idea, which emerges from Chapter 6, to offer a systematic approach by which researchers can discuss how philosophy underpins their research. It can help researchers identify an appropriate research philosophy, facilitate dialogue between schools, understand advance in knowledge and bias in research.
|§7-1. DOOYEWEERD'S NOTION OF THREE-PART GROUND-IDEA
|The three transcendental problems of Chapter 6 refer to three major issues in research: world, rationalities and wider meaningfulness.
|§7-1.1 Ground-Ideas of Philosophy
|These three elements constitute what Dooyeweerd called the Ground-Idea; and may be used to differentiate and relate philosophies.
|§7-1.2 Diversity of World
|Employ aspects to understand the collecting of research data.
|§7-1.2.1 Data from the world
|Actual research targets a focal aspect of the world. Examples given.
|§7-1.2.2 On sources of data
|Whereas many philosophers presume that all data comes via the senses (and then used in deduction), Dooyeweerd argues that it comes directly from intuition in each aspect; e.g. economic data is intuited directly from what we read or see etc.
|§7-1.2.3 Secondary data and use of instruments
|Secondary data comes because all input material bears multi-aspectual meaningfulness, and hence can be used by many. Instruments, which embody the results of earlier research, become part of the everyday activity of data collection.
|§7-1.3 Coherence of Rationalities
|In even the simplest research multiple rationalities are active (each meaningful in a different aspect); example where 9 rationalities are involved.
|§7-1.4 Wider Meaningfulness and Origin of Meaning
|Critique of findings is not just of which data and rationalities were employed, but also goes deeper into, for instance, the academic motivations. This takes account of wider meaningfulness presupposed by the research community. This helps us understand reproducibility.
|§7-1.5 Ground-Idea Analysis: Example from Sociolinguistics
|Lamb's critique of the use of the notion of antilanguage is analysed by reference to each of the three elements: world, rationalities, wider meaningfulness, including ground-motive.
|Four triples compared.
|§7-2. ON PROGRESS AND ADVANCE IN KNOWLEDGE
|What is originality and advance or progress in knowledge?
|§7-2.1 Clarification Offered by the Notion of Ground-Idea
|Each element of Ground-Idea contributes to advance in different ways. Example from field of information systems research.
|§7-2.2 Accounts of Dialectic
|Dialectical advance is best understood as the community shifting attention from one aspect to others.
|§7-3. GROUND-IDEAS AS A BASIS FOR DIALOGUE
|Using Ground-Idea elements with aspects helps us build bridges between apparently incommensurable research approaches.
|§7-3.1 An Example: Positivist, Interpretivist and Socio-critical Approaches
|Seemingly incommensurable (according to the Nature-freedom ground-motive) these three approaches may instead be seen as meaningful in different aspects of world, rationalities and wider meaningfulness.
|§7-4. APPLICATIONS OF GROUND-IDEAS IN RESEARCH PROJECTS
|The notion of Ground-Idea can help researchers to select their research philosophy and to understand bias.
|§7-4.1 Ground-Ideas as Research Philosophy
|That all good philosophy takes a position on what is meaningful about the world, the rationalities employed and the wider meaningfulness, offers a way of (a) critically examining extant research philosophies, (b) constructing one's own tailor-made research philosophy.
|§7-4.2 On Bias in Research
|Bias in research may arise from (a) narrow selection of aspects of the world, (b) inappropriate rationalities employed, (c) distortion by the community's presupposition of wider meaningfulness.
|This chapter has explored the notion of three-element Ground-Idea and how it can help researchers clarify and guide their research. The discussion continues into Chapter 8.
|Chapter 8. Fields of Research
|Chapter 8 shows how Dooyeweerd can enlighten us about fields and their cores and boundaries, their dignity and responsibility, about the nature of paradigms, and about how to clarify concepts and ideas.
|§8-1. UNDERSTANDING RESEARCH FIELDS AND DISCIPLINES
|Each field or discipline tends to revolve around a core aspect, by which reality (the world) is meaningful to it, maybe with secondary aspects.
|§8-1.1 Some Approaches
|How may we delineate fields; what gives a field its identity? Several approaches to answering that are briefly reviewed, opening the way to answers based on aspects.
|§8-1.2 Fields as Centred on Aspects
|Most fields find one aspect of primary importance (which dictate what their research abstracts from situations), occasionally a couple of aspects. The core aspect (sphere of meaningfulness) gives the field its dignity and responsibility and indicates its destiny as it progresses.
|§8-1.3 Secondary Aspects
|In addition to the core aspect, research often takes account of issues meaningful to immediate neighbour aspects.
|§8-1.4 Wider Meaningfulness: Applications and Interdisciplinary Research
|Application and fully interdisciplinary research must take the wider meaningfulness (all aspects) into account.
|§8-1.5 Conclusions About Fields
|§8-2. ON PARADIGMS
|Paradigms may be defined by what is meaningful to them, in terms of aspects.
|§8-2.1 The Idea of Paradigm
|Kuhn's notion of paradigm (shift) is briefly reviewed, indicating its ambiguity, especially when we try to understand paradigms in terms of processes or people.
|§8-2.2 A Dooyeweerdian View: Paradigms as Meaningfulness
|Much of the ambiguity may be resolved if we understand paradigms as expressions of what is meaningful to a research community, which may be analysed in terms of aspects.
|§8-2.3 An Example: Linguistics and Sociolinguistics
|The paradigm shifts in the field of linguistics may be understood by reference to new aspects being taken seriously.
|§8-3. CONCEPTS AND IDEAS IN A FIELD
|The three elements of Ground-Ideas can help researcher clarify concepts and ideas.
|Chapter 8 concludes our discussion of the utility to researchers of Dooyeweerd's notion of three-element Ground-Idea.
|Chapter 9. Dooyeweerd's Suite of Aspects
|Chapter 9 presents an understanding of what is meaningful and good in each of Dooyeweerd's aspects, to help the reader both gain an intuitive immanent understanding of each, and also employ aspects explicitly in their research for evaluation or stimulation. By comparing Dooyeweerd's suite with others, it outlines reasons why Dooyeweerd's aspects may be relied upon.
|§9-1. DESCRIPTION OF EACH ASPECT
| This section, drawn from The Dooyeweerd Pages, provides detailed discussion of each of Dooyeweerd's fifteen aspects. It should be perused and pondered rather than read. It should also be referred to
|§9-1.1 The Quantitative Aspect
|§9-1.2 The Spatial Aspect
|§9-1.3 The Kinematic Aspect
|§9-1.4 The Physical Aspect
|energy, forces, causality
|§9-1.5 The Organic / Biotic Aspect
|life and self-maintenance
|§9-1.6 The Psychic / Sensitive Aspect
|sensorimotor interaction and basic emotion
|§9-1.7 The Analytical Aspect
|distinction and clarity
|§9-1.8 The Formative Aspect
|deliberate shaping, achieving, innovation
|§9-1.9 The Lingual Aspect
|§9-1.10 The Social Aspect
|"we" rather than individuals
|§9-1.11 The Economic Aspect
|frugal management of resources
|§9-1.12 The Aesthetic Aspect
|harmony and delight
|§9-1.13 The Juridical Aspect
|due, appropriateness, justice
|§9-1.14 The Ethical Aspect
|self-giving love beyond due
|§9-1.15 The Pistic / Faith Aspect
|commitment, courage, belief
|§9-2. GROUPING THE ASPECTS?
|There are no 'super-aspects' under which those may be grouped.
|§9-3. COMPARISON WITH OTHER SUITES
|Comparison of Dooyeweerd's suite with over a dozen others, including Maslow's Hierarchy.
|§9-4. ON TRUSTING DOOYEWEERD'S SUITE
|Reasons why it is reasonable to trust (and therefore use) Dooyeweerd's suite.
|Dooyeweerd's suite is worthy of being used in research.
|Chapter 10. The Complex Activity of Research
|Chapter 10 discusses the activity that is research in some detail, by reference to aspects. Especially the 'hidden' aspects of research are brought to light. First comes a practical approach for how researchers using Dooyeweerd may engage with other thought.
|§10-1. OVERALL APPROACH: "LACE"
|Dooyeweerd can Listen, Affirm, Critique, Enrich other thought.
|§10-1.1 The Elements of LACE
|Explanation of each of L,A,C,E.
|§10-1.2 Example of LACE with Information Systems Approaches
|How the integration of Positivist, Interpretivist, Socio-critical approaches (§7-3.1) is an example of LACE.
|§10-1.3 Examples of LACE with Foundations of Information Systems
|How the LACE attitude led to formulation of new paradigmatic frameworks for the information systems field.
|§10-2. RESEARCH AS MULTI-ASPECTUAL FUNCTIONING
|Research, as any human activity, may usefully be seen as multi-aspectual functioning, so separating out the aspects can help critique and guide it and prevent hidden aspects being overlooked.
|§10-3. THE MORE VISIBLE ASPECTS OF RESEARCH ACTIVITY
|Brief look at well-known activity in terms of aspects.
|§10-4. SOME LESS-OBVIOUS ASPECTS OF RESEARCH ACTIVITY
|Awareness of each aspect can help bring hidden issues to the surface, which often jeopardise the success or fruitfulness of research.
|§10-4.1 Less-obvious Pistic Functioning in Research
|e.g. hidden agendas, ideological commitments, loyalty, idolatry.
|§10-4.2 Less-obvious Ethical Aspects in the Activity of Research
|e.g. Generosity v. competitiveness; modesty
|§10-4.3 Less-obvious Juridical Functioning in Research
|Various responsibilities - not only to field, colleagues, etc. but also to families! Call for family-friendly PhDs.
|§10-4.4 Less-obvious Aesthetic Functioning in the Activity of Research
|Harmony of the field; excitement; elitism, etc.
|§10-4.5 Less-obvious Economic Functioning in Research
|Patience; worth; the benefits of frugality.
|§10-4.6 Less-obvious Social Functioning in Research
|Where power relations are and are not appropriate. Relationship and families.
|§10-4.7 Less-obvious Lingual, Formative and Analytic Functioning in Research
|Dyslexia and Asperger. Deceit. Research outwith project. Creative response.
|§10-4.8 The Early Aspectual Functioning in Research
|Health, electric power, movement, etc.
|§10-5. A CASE STUDY: ACTIVITIES IN A KNOWLEDGE PROJECT
|Gareth Jone's development of sustainability knowledge based systems gives many insights into research activity.
|Research is usefully seen as multi-aspectual functioning.
|Chapter 11. Experience of Research Using Dooyeweerd
|Chapter 11 is lengthy, a compendium of examples where researchers have actually used Dooyeweerd's ideas in various stages of a research project.
|§11-1. STAGES OF RESEARCH USING DOOYEWEERD
|Overview of which portions of Dooyeweerd's thought might be most useful at each stage of a research project.
|§11-2. UNDERSTANDING THE DISCOURSES AND LITERATURE OF A FIELD WITH DOOYEWEERD
|Dooyeweerd can help researchers understand the literature of a field, and the discourses that are going on.
|§11-2.1 Methods Involving Ground-motives
|Eriksson used ground-motives to understand the systems thinking field.
|§11-2.2 Joneidy's Analysis of Seminal Papers
|Joneidy used aspects to pinpoint what motivates seminal authors.
|§11-2.3 Understanding Collections of Papers
|Basden employed Dooyeweerd's aspects to provide an integrative overview of two disparate collections of papers.
|§11-2.4 More Complex Inter-Discourse Analysis
|More systematic analysis of the literature of a field.
|§11-2.4.1 Breems' study
|Study of six fields of research, which explains why the issue of computer procrastination has not been adequately discussed in any of them. Introduces the visual device of the aspectual heatmap diagram.
|§11-2.4.2 Basden's study
|Using Breems' and Joneidy's methods and heatmap diagrams to gain an overview of the entire field of information technology use.
|§11-2.4.3 Reflection on heatmaps
|Some of the benefits and challenges of using aspectual heatmap diagrams.
|§11-3. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS: DOOYEWEERDIAN ADVENTURES AMONG PARADIGMS
|Several researchers have critiqued paradigms of a field or even generated new paradigms.
|§11-3.1 Critique of Paradigms in Statistics
|Hartley's discussion of paradigms in statistics by reference to ground-motives.
|§11-3.2 Paradigms and Frameworks in Systems Thinking
|Several authors using Dooyeweerd's ideas (ground-motives, aspects) to enrich the field of systems thinking (Eriksson, de Raadt, Strijbos, Mirijamdotter, Bergvall-Kċeborn, Goede, Basden and Wood-Harper)
|§11-3.3 A Multi-aspectual Paradigm in Sustainability
|Seeing sustainability as multi-aspectual shalom offers a new paradigm, explored by Brandon, Lombardi, de Raadt, Gunton et al., Jones). This work is bearing fruit in the professional field.
|§11-3.4 A New Paradigm of the State and Civil Society
|Chaplin applies Dooyeweerd's discussion of the state to the situation today, to propose a new paradigm.
|§11-3.5 New Paradigm in Knowledge Management and Tacit Knowledge
|Kimani's new paradigm to understand the complexity of tacit knowledge in small businesses.
|§11-3.6 New Paradigms and Frameworks in the Information Systems Field
|Basden's in-depth attempt to forge five new paradigms for different areas of the information systems field.
|§11-3.6.1 ISD: Information systems development, including programming
|seen as multi-aspectual responsibilities intertwined
|§11-3.6.2 IT features
|seen as multi-aspectual subject-object relationship, including the normativity of each aspect to account for appropriateness
|§11-3.6.3 IT/IS use
|Three multi-aspectual human engagements, enkaptically intertwined
|§11-3.6.4 IT and society
|The multiplicatton of multi-aspectual repercussions, and the utility of Dooyeweerd's notion of correlative enkapsis to understand structure and agency and how various 'systems' interact with each other
|§11-3.6.5 Nature of information and computers
|information and computers as multi-aspectual beings; a possibly fruitful approach to artificial intelligence debates
|§11-3.7 Broadening Paradigms in Engineering
|Ribiero's recommendation of a multi-aspectual approach in electrical engineering
|Aspects are useful to separate out tangled issues. Ground-motives are useful to understand intellectual battles.
|§11-4. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS: CLARIFYING CONCEPTS AND IDEAS
|That Dooyeweerd sees being and functioning as multi-aspectual and grounded in meaningfulness offers a new way to clarify concepts and ideas that crop up in research.
|§11-4.1 Understanding a 'Simple' Concept: Diagrams
|Diagrams understood as lingual and spatial (Fathulla)
|§11-4.2 Exploring a More Complex Concept: Idolatry
|E-government failure understood from the pistic aspect, with an in-depth discussion of idolatry (Krishnan-Harihara)
|§11-4.3 Multi-aspectual Concepts: Information, Documents
|Information and documents understood as multi-aspectual beings, but also in their multi-aspectual usage context including such issues as role of author and reader, and the nature of literary works (Burke and Basden)
|§11-4.4 Complex Notions Incorporating Antecipations and Retrocipations
|McGibbon's survey of the notion of trust involving complex relationships among aspects
|§11-4.5 Contributing Ideas to Philosophy
|Some of these researches could make contributions to Dooyeweerd's philosophy; so could all research in principle.
|§11-5. USING DOOYEWEERD TO DISCUSS RESEARCH METHODS
|How may we study the nature of trust when the activity of research itself involves trust? The usual research methods on offer are not suitable. So McGibbon employed Dooyeweerd's ideas to craft and justify his own research method. Also Basden discusses how apparently incommensurable research approaches may be integrated.
|§11-6. DATA COLLECTION WITH DOOYEWEERD
|Dooyeweerd's aspects can guide and stimulate collection of research data during interviews.
|§11-6.1 Using Aspects to Design Questionnaires
|Abuelma'atti's use of Dooyeweerd's aspects to form questions for questionnaire
|§11-6.2 MAKE: Multi-aspectual Knowledge Elicitation
|Winfield's use of Dooyeweerd's aspects to elicit expertise, including tacit knowledge
|§11-6.3 MAIT: Multi-aspectual Interview Technique
|Kane's use of Dooyeweerd's aspects to 'give voice to' interviewees, helping them express what they might deem trivial or embarassing
|§11-6.4 Practical Reflections on MAKE and MAIT
|The interviewees themselves used Dooyeweerd's aspects and found them intuitive - and usually found almost all aspects relevant.
|§11-6.5 Philosophical Reflections on MAKE and MAIT
|Using Dooyeweerd's aspects encourages co-construction of the data, dissolves power relationships and authority structures, transcends cultural differences, and (surprisingly?) liberates rather than constrains.
|§11-6.6 Eliciting Detailed Expertise
|Jones' elicitation of detailed complex knowledge by aspect
|§11-7. USING DOOYEWEERD IN DATA ANALYSIS
|Where data is gathered without the help of aspects (e.g. via open interviews) Dooyeweerd's aspects proved very useful for analysing it and drawing out hidden issues.
|§11-7.1 Simple Aspectual Analysis
|Showing the basic idea of aspectual analysis of texts (excerpts from Kane's interviews)
|§11-7.2 Finding Hidden Meanings: What Motivated Seminal Papers
|Example of drawing out hidden meanings from excerpts (from Joneidy's study)
|§11-7.2.1 The method
|Joneidy's approach to finding non-obvious motivations
|Make use of the mutual irreducibility of aspects and inter-aspect dependency
|Joneidy's discussion of the challenges of using aspects
|§11-7.3 Researching Everyday Down-to-earth Issues
|Most academic literature focuses on 'high level' issues of interest to management, academics etc. rather than on the 'down-to-earth' issues that are meaningful to those 'on the ground' - i.e. their 'real life' or 'everyday experience'. Dooyeweerd's aspects have been used very fruitfully to study down-to-earth issues.
|§11-7.3.1 The first study
|Ahmad coined the term 'down-to-earth issues' and offers a way to tease out down-to-earth issues of information technology use.
|§11-7.3.2 The second and third studies
|Khojah and Aiyenitaju employed and extended Ahmad's approach to study the use of healthcare records and IT in primary schools.
|§11-7.3.3 Quantitative and qualitative analyses
|Both undertook qualitative and quantitative analyses using aspects.
|§11-7.3.4 Comparative analyses
|Both used quantitative aspectual profiles and qualitative lists to compare cohorts.
|§11-7.3.5 The value of extra, volunteered information
|Both separated out the extra, volunteered information from interviewees' direct answers to interviewer questions, to reduce researcher bias
|§11-7.3.6 The literature versus everyday experience
|All three found that the aspectual profile of the literature differs from that which is meaningful to those studied - giving a handle on academic bias
|§11-7.3.7 Reflection on aspectual analysis of down-to-earth issues
|Dooyeweerd's aspects are easy and intuitive to use, help to reveal down-to-earth issues, uncover hidden issues, classify the plethora of issues and cope with values. They make it easy to reduce, or at least discuss, researcher bias, so that researcher experience can be a boon rather than a problem.
|§11-7.4 Complex Quantitative Comparisons
|While Ahmad, Khojah and Aiyenitaju offer relatively straightforward quantitative profiles and qualitative analyses, Breems' heatmap diagrams offer a more complex quantitative analysis.
|§11-7.5 Complex Qualitative Comparisons
|McGibbon used aspects for very complex qualitative analysis.
|The above researches show a wide range of styles and kinds of analysis, but there are still some gaps.
|§11-8. EXTENDING THESE IDEAS: NEW ADVENTURES AWAITED
|Where Dooyeweerd has not much been used in research includes the initial and final stages of research, in observation methods, and in the natural and mathematical sciences. This section discusses potential in these areas.
|§11-8.1 Using Dooyeweerd at Beginning and End of Research
|To gain an introductory overview of a field, and discuss, as conclusion, the contributions and limitations of research, might be facilitated by Dooyeweerd's notion of Ground-Idea and totality of meaningfulness, along with aspects.
|§11-8.2 Using Dooyeweerd in Observation
|If observation is of what is relevant to the main research question, then Dooyeweerd's aspects can help guide what to observe. That researcher and researched both 'swim' in the same 'ocean of meaningfulness' (according to Dooyeweerd) can bring detached and participant observation together.
|§11-8.3 Using Dooyeweerd in Natural and Mathematical Sciences
|In the sciences of the early aspects, the later aspects are usually only indirectly relevant via retrocipation. Satherley used Dooyeweerd's ideas in chemistry research, and Hartley in statistics, but it remains to be seen how Dooyeweerd's ideas can be employed more intensively.
|Research in a wide range of fields using Dooyeweerd has shown considerable potential. There are many more opportunities yet to be explored.
|Chapter 12. Criticisms of Dooyeweerd
|Chapter 12 collects together criticisms of Dooyeweerd, so that researchers can use Dooyeweerd with eyes open.
|§12-1. CRITICISMS OF DOOYEWEERD'S IDEAS
|This contains criticisms I have been able to find. There might be others I have yet to discover. I ignore criticisms which boil down to "I don't agree" or "I don't like Dooyeweerd."
|§12-1.1 Critiques of Dooyeweerd's Approach to Everyday Experience
|Hart criticises Dooyeweerd's ambiguity.
|§12-1.2 Critiques of Dooyeweerd's View of Non-Neutrality or Non-Autonomy of Theoretical Thought
|Geertsema criticises Dooyeweerd's emphasis on the human heart and suggests it is unnecessary - so I have de-emphhasised it in this book.
|§12-1.3 Critiques of Dooyeweerd's Approach to Diversity and Coherence
|§12-1.4 Critiques of Dooyeweerd's Idea of Meaning(fulness)
|The Humanist thinker van Loon agrees with Dooyeweerd's idea. The Christian philosopher Plantinga offers many criticisms, most of which are based on his own dogma, but one of which is useful. Strauss believes Dooyeweerd was too influenced by the Linguistic Turn in philosophy, whole Zuidervaart believes he took too little account of it.
|§12-1.5 Critiques of Dooyeweerd's Notion of Being, including the State
|There are a few dogmatic criticism, which I ignore. Chaplin critiques Dooyeweerd's understanding of the state.
|§12-1.6 Critiques of Dooyeweerd's idea of Good and Evil
|§12-1.7 Critiques of Dooyeweerd's idea of Aspectual Functioning
|None known, except that I have introduced the idea of aspectual targets (§4-3.9).
|§12-1.8 Critiques of Dooyeweerd's View of History and Progress
|Klapwijk suggests that Dooyeweerd's view of progress is too close to accepting differentiated Western culture as the norm. For that reason I have downplayed the notion of societal differentiation in §4-3.8.3.
|§12-1.9 Critiques of Dooyeweerd's View of Ground-motives
|Most critiques find Dooyeweerd's notion useful. Based on his analysis of Korean ground-motives, Choi criticises Dooyeweerd's emphasis on dialectical ground-motives.
|§12-1.10 Critiques of Dooyeweerd's Idea of the Immanence Standpoint
|Van Loon suggests that Dooyeweerd's idea is too antithetical, but Choi believes van Loon misunderstood Dooyeweerd. Clouser usefully adds a third standpoint.
|§12-1.11 Critiques of Dooyeweerd's Transcendental Critiques of Theoretical Thought
|This has attracted considerable criticism, some about each transcendental problem. Hart questions whether Dooyeweerd's transcendental critique really does point to a religious root, but finds Dooyeweerd's general idea useful. I wonder whether Hart misreads Dooyeweerd, and Clouser clearly shows a religious root. Strauss offers eight detailed criticisms, but most feel like nit-picking, because some arise from ambiguity in Dooyeweerd's rendering. Geertsema builds on Strauss to offer a more substantive critique.
|§12-1.12 Critiques of Dooyeweerd's idea of Antithesis between Christian and Non-Christian Thought
|I find some problems when the antithesis between Christian and non-Christian thought is emphasised, which is partly what motivated me to devise LACE (§10.1).
|§12-1.13 Critiques of Dooyeweerd's Aspects
|Various thinkers have suggested different aspects - as indeed Dooyeweerd asked us to do.
|There is need for more critique of Dooyeweerd, especially arising out of experience of using his ideas. A challenge to researchers is to use Dooyeweerd's ideas and contribute to this critique.
|Chapter 13. Summary and Conclusions
|Chapter 13 concludes the discussion of foundations and practice of research understood via the lens of Dooyeweerd's philosophy and challenges researchers to join the adventure of exploring his ideas.
|§13-1. SUMMARY OF CONTRIBUTIONS TO RESEARCH
|This section summarises the kinds of contributions Dooyeweerd can make to research.
|§13-1.1 Overall Benefits
|Dooyeweerd offers clearer views, new perspectives and encouragement to keep the broader context in mind - in almost every stage of research.
|§13-1.2 Contributions to Research Content
|Each chapter contains a different contribution to research content that results in findings on which it is reasonable to rely as a contribution to humanity's bodies of knowledge. Examples: avoiding reductionism, cross-cultural understanding, better understanding of paradigms.
|§13-1.3 Contributions to Research Activity
|Most chapters contain contributions to better research activity., including such things as respect, responsibility and efficiency.
|§13-1.4 Contributions to Research Application
|Most chapters offer contributions to more responsible, beneficial application of research findings.
|§13-2. THE CHANGING WORLD OF RESEARCH
|Dooyeweerd wrote in the mid-twentieth century, but the world has changed since then. Most of his ideas, however, are still very relevant. Indeed, Dooyeweerd is particularly suited to the more globalised world because of his emphasis on everyday experience, diversity, coherence and meaningfulness. His ideas can provide a good philosophical foundation for environmental responsibility and action.
|§13-3. COVERAGE OF DOOYEWEERD'S PHILOSOPHY
|Unlike some philosophies, Dooyeweerd's ideas are relevant across a very wide range of fields.
|§13-4. THE ADVENTURE IS JUST BEGINNING
|Dooyeweerd's ideas have proven very fruitful in research in many ways. Yet use of them research has only just begun. Come, join the adventure!