This paper provides a Christian philosophical and theological response to the moral imperative of human advancement through multiplanetarism as emerging from the Great Filter theory. First, it explains the Fermi paradox that underlies the Great Filter theory. Next, it explores this theory itself and its motivational power in driving advancement toward multiplanetarism. In particular, we explore two motives behind the multiplanetary efforts that are (in part) guided by the Great Filter theory, analyzing the relevant statements of SpaceX founder and chief (...) engineer Elon Musk. Finally, we assess these motivations (and the accompanying normative assumptions) behind space exploration and multiplanetarism from the perspective of Reformational philosophy, using Herman Dooyeweerd’s theory of ground motives as a lens. Thus, the paper’s leading research question is this: How can we assess the current attempts at securing a multiplanetary existence for humankind in the light of Dooyeweerd’s theory of ground motives? (shrink)

In his Understanding the Christianity-Evolution Relationship, Michael Ruse puts old wine in new skins. In an original and illuminating way, he approaches his topic from the perspective of the age-old divide between mechanistic and organicist ways of thinking. Yet, this does not bring him to new conclusions as compared to his earlier work on the topic. In response, I argue that a more rigorous conceptual and doctrinal analysis is needed to sort out whether Darwinian evolution makes God redundant or whether (...) it actually accords more with theism than with naturalism. (shrink)

In his early youth, Herman Dooyeweerd wrote a series of poems on the occasion of his love for his girlfriend and the end of his relationship with her. It is more than clear that the young Dooyeweerd gave a religious twist to his experiences. This article investigates whether the poetic expression of his experiences gives an indication that he understood the personal experience of religion in the sense of his later philosophy. If it does, then these poems illustrate what he (...) meant by religion. (shrink)

It seems remarkable that several philosophers in the Reformed tradition have recently interacted with social practice theory without interacting with each other. This gave rise to the question as to whether they interact differently or similarly with social practice theory and to what extent Reformed philosophy might benefit from such an interaction. In this article, therefore, we aim to clear the way by addressing three strands in Reformed philosophy, namely, Nicholas Wolterstorff, the normative practice approach, and James K. A. Smith. (...) We explore why they use social practice theory, what they do with it, and how they make it their own. Finally, we highlight what unites them and what divides them, and conclude with suggestions as to how they might benefit from each other’s work in social practice theory. (shrink)

This article responds to reviews of my recent books by Henk Geertsema and René van Woudenberg. First, it explains the method of critical retrieval and reviews my criticisms of Herman Dooyeweerd on the topics of religious antithesis and transcendental critique. Next, I take up questions concerning my social philosophy, epistemology, and conception of truth. Then, in an appendix, I respond to Geertsema’s allegations that I have misunderstood Dooyeweerd. Throughout, the article shows how my work aims to contribute to the inner (...) reformation of Reformational philosophy. (shrink)

Traditionally, it is believed that God is all-powerful and omnipresent. Given the notion of divine omnipresence, why does it seem like God is absent amidst suffering? This paper presents a philosophical and theological analysis of God’s omnipresence. I hope to show how we may construe a robust and viable doctrine of divine omnipresence amidst suffering. I argue that although God’s presence results in divine action, given that divine action is mostly experienced in a relational, covenantal context, his presence does not (...) always lead to the absence of suffering. Although God is ontologically and maximally omnipresent, he is specially and covenantally present only with those who are open to a relationship with him. His presence with worshippers can be both interventional and noninterventional. In the former, he might remove suffering; in the latter, only inner peace and comfort might be experienced. (shrink)

Translation of “De transcendentale critiek van het wijsgeerig denken en de grondslagen van de wijsgeerige denkgemeenschap van het avondland” by Herman Dooyeweerd (1941), Philosophia Reformata 6 (1), pp. 1–20.

In this review essay, I discuss how Lambert Zuidervaart relates to the philosophy of Herman Dooyeweerd in two of his books. He himself calls his work in this regard a critical retrieval. To answer the question as to how far this characterization is justified, we will look at Zuidervaart’s discussion of the religious antithesis and the transcendental critique, his idea of macrostructures and societal evil, and his view of truth and knowledge.

In mainstream analytic epistemology, Reformed theology has made its presence prominently felt in Reformed epistemology, the view of religious belief according to which religious beliefs can be properly basic and warranted when formed by the proper functioning of the sensus divinitatis, an inborn capacity or faculty for belief in God that can be prompted to generate certain religious beliefs when presented with things (e.g., certain majestic aspects of creation). A major competitor to Reformed epistemology is Wittgensteinian quasi-fideism, a position drawn (...) from the epistemology of Wittgenstein’s On Certainty, according to which some foundational religious commitments are not properly basic beliefs but some kind of apodictic, unshakeable certainties that form part of the structure of one’s rationality and worldview. I argue that the Reformed tradition has contained elements of quasi-fideism at least as far back as Calvin’s account of faith from the Institutes of the Christian Religion, book 3, chapter 2. (shrink)

Introduction to the translation of “De transcendentale critiek van het wijsgeerig denken en de grondslagen van de wijsgeerige denkgemeenschap van het avondland” by Herman Dooyeweerd (1941), Philosophia Reformata 6 (1), pp. 1–20.

The aim of this paper is to analyze the theoretical commitments and the legal-political problems of Hans Kelsen’s thought from the perspective of Herman Dooyeweerd’s philosophy. It seeks to answer the following question: Why was the relationship between state and law in Kelsen’s thought unable to protect civil society and individuals from the power of the state? The argument, based on Herman Dooyeweerd’s philosophy, is that Kelsen was trapped in an insurmountable theoretical dialectic or tension between nature and freedom. In (...) pursuit of methodological purity, Kelsen reduced the state and law to the logical aspect and morality to the historical aspect. Analyzing Kelsen’s thought from the point of view of Dooyeweerd’s transcendental critique, this paper demonstrates that Kelsen’s commitments with respect to reality led him to a reductionist theory that rendered society defenseless against the power of the state. (shrink)