This article contains a critical survey of the attempts that have been made to writea comprehensive history of philosophy in the Netherlands. Three historiographical typescan be distinguished. In the early nineteenth century, after the founding of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, Dutch philosophers became increasingly aware of the peculiaritiesof their national tradition in philosophy — as distinct from the traditions of France, Germany or Britain. The result was what might be called a 'patriotic historiography', which tended to glorify the Dutch (...) intellectual past. In the second half of the century, however, a 'critical historiography' emerged, which tended to stress what was taken to be the lack of originality and relative unimportance of the Dutch contribution to philosophy. This negative selfimage of Dutch philosophy remained dominant until the advent of the influential historian of philosophy Ferdinand Sassen. Sassen, in 1959, managed topresent a more balanced account, based on careful and detailed research, of the historyof philosophical thought in the Netherlands. Nevertheless, his 'synthetic historiography' leaves a number of important questions unanswered. In recent years, research has tended to concentrate on bringing out the unique intermediary position of the Netherlands,which on many occasions has enabled it to play an influential role in various philosophical developments throughout Europe. Looked at from this angle, the study of Dutch Platonism, humanism, Cartesianism, Spinozism, Leibnizianism, Newtonianism, Kantianism, Hegelianism, positivism etc., can provide essential contributions to the understanding of the general development of European philosophy. It is also to be hoped that knowledge oftheir national past will help contemporary Dutch philosophers to define more adequatelytheir present and future role in philosophy, within a European community which is becoming increasingly integrated. (shrink)

Johann Friedrich Ludwig Schröder (1774-1845 ) was born in Germany but moved to Holland at the age of 13. After studying at Halle he joined the Kantian movement in Amsterdam as an active member, cooperating with Paulus van Hemert and contributing articles to his Kantian magazine. During his professional career as a marine instructor (1803-11 ), however, he became increasingly critical of Kantianism. As professor of mathematics, physics and philosophy at the University of Utrecht (1816-44) he traded in his former (...) Kantianism for a variant of the common sense philosophy then in favour in the Netherlands. He now regarded Kantianism as a form of scepticism. Accordingly, in his major work, the Contnbution to a Critique of the Truth of Human Knowledge, he propounds an anti-sceptical doctrine of such ‘basic truths’ as are founded on the immediate relevation of our consciousness. Schröder also attempts to reduce the Kantian doctrine of the noumenon to an inconsistent set of propositions, by showing them to be antinomies in the Kantian sense of the term, even using Kant's own dialectical method in proving their contradictoriness ; these contradictory propositions he calls the 'antinomies of the Kantian philosophy'. In a minor work, The Sign Relation as the Basis of Human Knowledge (translated freely), we find reminiscences of Thomas Reid's Inquiry into the Human Mind: of the doctrine of sensations suggesting our conceptions of things, of causes being the signs of their effects, of 'the natural language of mankind'. Schröder, in developing these ideas in his own way, presents the sign relation as being fundamental to the construction of our knowledge of both nature and the human soul. Only by taking one thing as the ‘sign’ (signal, symbol, symptom, index, expression, picture, representation etc.) of another can we attain a conception of the world as a coherent whole. Our perception of this relation is partly a matter of innate capacities, partly the result of acquired skill. (shrink)

Zwischen 1738 und 1745 erschien in Amsterdam eine von Johann Christoph von Sprögel und Adolph Friedrich Marci übersetzte achtzehnbändige Ausgabe der Lehrbücher der Mathematik und Philosophic von Christian Wolff. 1764 gab Johannes Petsch, einer der bedeutendsten Leibniz-Wolffianer in den Niederlanden, eine holländische Übersetzung der Essais de Théodicée von Leibniz heraus. Wie groß jedoch der Einfluß der beiden deutschen Denker auf die niederländische Philosophie gewesen ist, war bislang unklar. Der Aufsatz versucht zu zeigen, daß der Leibniz-Wolffianismus neben dem Neukantianismus eine wichtige (...) Rolle im philosophischen Denken der Niederländer in der Zeit der Aufklärung spielte. (shrink)

Two separate Dutch translations, with introduction and notes, of the Monadology were published in 1991: Monadologie of de beginselen van de wijsbegeerte, translated by Dr. F.P.M. Jespers of the Universiteit voor Theologie en Pastoraat in Heerlen and De Monadologie. Over samenhang in het universum, translated by H. Boering and H.C. Meinsma. These are the first Dutch translations of the Monadology.

In _Susceptible to the Sacred_, Bani Shorter, a well-known Jungian analyst, examines the psychological experience of ritual in contemporary life and how this promotes awareness of the individual's natural potential. Basing her book on live material, she investigates, with great sensitivity, how people perceive the sacred and use ritual in their search for purpose, motivation and transformation.

_The Hearing Impaired Child_ introduces the background issues of hearing impairment then discusses specific aspects. These include causes of hearing loss, speech and language, personality and emotional development, and careers. Appendices provide checklists for language acquisition and reading and writing skills, lists of useful addresses, a helpful glossary and references for further reading.

(1877). I. A Trans-African Telegraph. Transactions of the South African Philosophical Society: Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 1-11.

This article suggests that the popular western image of the Buddha of the Pali suttas has been influenced by the opening pages of Walpola Rahula’s book What the Buddha Taught. It examines two closely linked qualities postulated by Rahula as attributes of the Buddha: that he is respectful of other religions and that he encourages freedom of thought in his followers. It finds Rahula’s evidence faulty at every turn and goes on to give examples of the Buddha’s and suttas’ disrespectful (...) attitude to other faiths, suggesting that in respect of its ‘exclusivism’, the Buddhism of the Pali suttas is no different from other religions. (shrink)