text:
Terms and Conditions of Use of AmeriMark Website
Welcome to the AmeriMark website, operated by AmeriMark Direct LLC ("we," or "our") and located at www.amerimark.com (the "Site"). The Site is provided as a service to our customers. The following terms and conditions ("Terms") govern your use of this Site. By accessing, viewing, or using the content, material, or services available on or through this Site, you indicate that you have read and understand these Terms, that you agree to them and intend to be legally bound by them. If you do not agree to these Terms, or if you are under 18 years of age, you are not granted permission to use this Site and must exit immediately.
- Informational Purposes Only. The Site Contents (as defined in Section 3 below) are for informational purposes only. The Site is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical or other advice and we do not provide any such advice or assurances. Purchasing and other decisions remain with you at all times. We are not responsible for any errors or omissions in the Site or Site Contents.
- Registration. In order to access certain content, services, products, or benefits on the Site, you may be asked to register and create an account. As part of the registration process, you may be asked to click to agree to these Terms, and may then be asked to select or submit a user name and password. You are fully responsible for your account, including use of the account by any third party and maintaining the confidentiality of your password. You may also be required to provide us with certain information about yourself including some types of personally identifiable information, including your phone number, address, email address, gender, and age. Any personal information that you provide to us via the Site is subject to our Privacy Policy, which is incorporated into these Terms by reference as if set forth fully herein. Moreover, your access to and use of the Site is also subject to the Security Statement, which is also incorporated into these Terms by reference as if set forth fully herein.
- Proprietary Rights. We own or license all materials, including images, illustrations, designs, icons, photographs, video clips, and any software concepts and documentation and other material on, in or made available through the Site ("Site Contents"), as well as the selection, coordination, arrangement, and organization and enhancement of the Site Contents. All Site Contents are protected pursuant to copyright, trademark, patent and other applicable laws. You agree not to remove or alter any copyright notice or any other proprietary notice on any Site Contents. All names, trademarks, service marks, certification marks, symbols, slogans or logos appearing on the Site are proprietary to us or our affiliates, licensors, or suppliers. Use or misuse of these trademarks is expressly prohibited and may violate federal and state trademark law. Under no circumstances will you have any rights of any kind in or to the Site Contents, other than the right to use the Site Contents in accordance with these Terms.
- Use of This Site. The Site and the Site Contents are intended solely for personal, informational, and non-commercial use. YOU MAY NOT USE OUR PRODUCTS OR ANY OF THE MATERIALS MADE AVAILABLE THROUGH THE SITE TO RESELL OUR PRODUCTS TO ANY PERSON(S) THROUGH ANY OTHER WEBSITE, INCLUDING A PERSONAL WEBSITE OR AUCTION WEBSITE (E.G., THROUGH EBAY). You agree that you will not use the Site for: (a) any illegal or unauthorized purposes that violate any local, national, or international laws (including import, export, copyright, and trademark laws); (b) modifying, copying, distributing, displaying, performing, reproducing, publishing, licensing, creating derivative works from, transferring, selling any of the Site Contents, unless otherwise authorized by these Terms or in a separate written agreement with us; (c) attempting to gain unauthorized access to our computer system or engaging in any activity that interferes with the performance of, or impairs the functionality of the Site or any services provided through the Site; (d) any resale or commercial use of the Site; (e) any downloading or copying of the Site Contents for any reason, or any use of data mining, robots or similar data gathering and extraction tools; (f) using the Site to access or collect any personally identifiable information, including any names, email addresses or other such information for any purpose, including commercial purposes; or (g) removing, circumventing, disabling, damaging or otherwise interfering in any way with any security-related features of the Site aimed at preventing or restricting the unauthorized use of the Site or any of the Site Contents. You may use the Site and the Site Contents only as consistent with these Terms. Any other use of the Site or Site Contents, including any of the aforementioned unauthorized uses, without our prior written permission is strictly prohibited. You acknowledge and agree that the unauthorized use of the Site or the Site Contents could irreparably harm us and the Site and that, in the event of such unauthorized use, we shall be entitled to an injunction in addition to any other remedies available at law or in equity.
- Payment. Some products or services made available through the Site may be available for purchase. You may be able to purchase some products on a payment plan (i.e., with deferred payments or in installments), in which case you will be subject to any additional terms and conditions presented to you at the time of purchase. We use a third party payment processor to process credit card transaction made through the Site. If you purchase products from us or make any payments via the Site with your credit card, the credit card information that you submit to us will be protected by encryption, such as with the Secure Socket Layer (SSL) protocol. Encryption decreases the likelihood that your credit card information will be stolen or intercepted during transmission to us. You are responsible for all charges incurred under your account, whether made by you or another person using your account. If for any reason we do not receive payment for a purchase, we may exercise our rights in law and equity, including: (a) immediately suspending or terminating your account; (b) seeking collection of the outstanding amount owed; and (c) seeking legal action against you for the breach of these Terms. You are also responsible for paying any governmental taxes imposed in connection with use of the Site or the purchase or any products or services made available through the Site, including sales, use, and excise taxes (excluding only taxes on our net income).
- Prices and Orders. All prices displayed on the Site are quoted in U.S. dollars. We may restrict delivery to addresses within the United States and Canada. We will add shipping and handling fees and applicable sales/use tax in accordance with our then-current policies. We reserve the right to discontinue or change specifications and prices on products and services offered through the Site, without prior notice and without incurring any obligation to you. Products displayed on this Site are available only while supplies last. Descriptions of, or references to, products or services on this Site do not imply endorsement of that product or service, or constitute a warranty, by us. The receipt by you of an order confirmation does not constitute our acceptance of an order. Prior to our acceptance of an order, verification of information may be required. We reserve the right at any time after receipt of your order to accept or decline your order, or any portion thereof, even after your receipt of an order confirmation from us. We reserve the right to limit the order quantity on any item and to refuse service to any customer without prior notification. In the event that a product or service is listed at an incorrect price due to supplier pricing information or typographical error, we shall have the right to refuse or cancel orders placed for the product listed at the incorrect price, regardless of whether the order has been confirmed and your account charged. If your account has already been charged for the purchase and your order is canceled, we will promptly issue a credit to your account in the amount of the incorrect price, or provide you with a refund at your election. The risk of loss and title for all products purchased by you and shipped by us pass to you upon our delivery to the carrier for shipment. The risk of loss and title for all products purchased by you and shipped directly by one of our vendors pass from such vendor to you upon such vendor's delivery to the carrier for shipment.
- Colors. We have made every effort to display the colors of our products that appear on this Site as accurately as possible. However, since the actual colors you see depend upon your computer and monitor, we cannot guarantee that the colors displayed to you will be completely accurate.
- User Comments, Feedback, and Other Submissions. Certain features of the Site may allow you to contribute other materials and information for access, use, viewing and commentary by other users to the Site (collectively, "Comments"). By posting Comments, you represent that you have the full legal right to provide those Comments and that use of the Comments by us and all other persons and entities will not: (a) infringe any intellectual property rights of any person or entity or any rights of publicity, personality, or privacy of any person or entity, including as a result of your failure to obtain consent to post personally identifying or otherwise private information about a person; (b) violate any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or agreement; or (c) constitute disclosure of any confidential information owned by any third party. Upon your submission of Comments or other material or information to us, you grant us a worldwide, perpetual, irrevocable, transferable, license to access, use, distribute, reproduce, display, modify, create derivative works based upon, and sublicense, the Comments, all without any compensation to you whatsoever. For the avoidance of doubt, we shall be under no obligation to: (1) maintain any Comments in confidence; (2) pay any compensation for any Comments; or (3) respond to any Comments. If you believe that any content or postings on the Site violate your intellectual property or other rights, please follow our Complaint Procedures in Section 9 of these Terms.
- Complaint Procedures. f you believe that any content or postings on this Site violates your intellectual property or other rights, please notify us through the Contact Customer Service form with a comprehensive detailed message setting forth the following information: (a) your name and the name of your company, if any; (b) your contact information, including your email address; (c) the nature and substance of your complaint, the specific rights at issue, and your basis for making the complaint, including the content or posting that is objectionable; and (d) the following statement: "The statements, representations, and assertions made in this message are true, complete, and accurate and I have the full legal authority to make each and every such statement, representation, and assertion and to make and be granted any demand made in this message."
- Third Party Websites and Features. The Site may contain links to other websites for the convenience of users in locating information, products, or services that may be of interest. Links to other websites, including those of our suppliers or vendors, do not constitute sponsorship, endorsement, or approval from us of the content, policies, or practices of such linked sites. The Site may also incorporate features and services provided by third parties, such as payment processing. Linked sites and incorporated features and services are not operated, controlled, or maintained by us and we are not responsible for the availability, content, security, policies, or practices of linked sites, including privacy policies and practices. Links to other sites are provided for your convenience only and you access them at your own risk.
- Changes in Terms and Termination. We have the right at any time and without prior notice, at our sole discretion, to revise these Terms or to impose new terms and conditions governing your access to or use of this Site. These revisions and additions shall be effective immediately upon notice thereof, which may be given by any means, including posting the revised or additional terms and conditions on this Site. You are responsible for reviewing this Site periodically for any modification to these Terms that may affect your rights or obligations hereunder. You agree that you shall be deemed to be apprised of and bound by any modification by us to these Terms. ANY ACCESS OR USE OF THIS SITE BY YOU AFTER NOTICE OF REVISIONS OR ADDITIONS TO THESE TERMS SHALL CONSTITUTE AND BE DEEMED TO BE YOUR AGREEMENT TO SUCH REVISIONS OR ADDITIONS. No modification to these Terms by any party other than us shall be valid or enforceable against us unless expressly agreed to in writing signed by a duly authorized officer of our company. We may suspend or terminate your account and your ability to use the Site, or any services on the Site, for failure to comply with these Terms, for providing us with untrue or inaccurate information about yourself, for infringement upon our proprietary rights, or for any reason whatsoever or for no reason.
- Disclaimers We, our subsidiaries, and affiliates, are not responsible for and do not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of any Site Contents, Comments, data, links, advertisements or other items contained within the Site. We reserve the right to immediately remove any Site Contents or Comments for any reason, or for no reason. We cannot and do not review all communications, products, or services made available on or through the Site, but, although not obligated to, we may review, verify, make changes to or remove any Comments, Site Contents, or the Site, including information submitted in connection with the Site Contents or other features at any time, with or without notice in our sole discretion. You agree that you must evaluate and bear all risks associated with the use of Site Contents or Comments and that you may not rely on the Site Contents or Comments. THE SITE, THE SITE CONTENTS, COMMENTS, INFORMATION, AND OTHER MATERIALS MADE AVAILABLE THROUGH THE SITE ARE MADE AVAILABLE "AS IS" AND "WITH ALL FAULTS." USE OF THE SITE IS ENTIRELY AT YOUR OWN RISK. WE MAKE NO REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES, AND DISCLAIM ALL REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES, WITH RESPECT TO THE SITE, THE COMMENTS, THE SITE CONTENTS, DATA AND OTHER MATERIALS MADE AVAILABLE THROUGH THE SITE, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, WRITTEN OR ORAL, ARISING FROM COURSE OF DEALING, COURSE OF PERFORMANCE, USAGE OF TRADE, OR OTHERWISE, INCLUDING THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, ACCURACY, SYSTEMS INTEGRATION, NON-INTERFERENCE, QUALITY, TITLE, AND NON-INFRINGEMENT. THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO SATISFACTORY QUALITY, PERFORMANCE, ACCURACY, COMPLETENESS AND EFFORT WITH REGARD TO ANY AND ALL COMMENTS, THE SITE, THE SITE CONTENTS, SERVICES, PRODUCTS, DATA AND OTHER MATERIALS ON, IN AND MADE AVAILABLE THROUGH THE SITE, IS WITH YOU.
- Product and Service Warranties. We want you to be completed satisfied with your purchase. If for any reason you are not entirely pleased with a product you purchased on the Site, simply return the item in accordance with our 100% guarantee and easy returns policies. Many products are packaged with the manufacturer's warranty and service information detailing specific terms and conditions. Manufacturers' warranties may vary from product to product. PRODUCTS AND SERVICES SOLD BY US ARE SUBJECT TO ANY APPLICABLE WARRANTIES AND REPRESENTATIONS OF THEIR RESPECTIVE MANUFACTURERS. WE MAKE NO ADDITIONAL (AND HEREBY DISCLAIM ALL) REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES WITH RESPECT TO ANY PRODUCT OR SERVICE SOLD TO YOU THROUGH THE SITE.
- Limitations of Liability. WE SHALL NOT BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, EXEMPLARY, EXTRA-CONTRACTUAL, OR PUNITIVE DAMAGES OF ANY KIND WHATSOEVER, INCLUDING LOST REVENUES OR LOST PROFITS, WHICH MAY OR DOES RESULT FROM THE USE OF, ACCESS TO, OR INABILITY TO USE THE SITE, THE COMMENTS, THE SITE CONTENTS, DATA, AND OTHER MATERIALS MADE AVAILABLE THROUGH THE SITE, REGARDLESS OF LEGAL THEORY, WHETHER OR NOT EITHER OF US HAD BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OR PROBABILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES, AND EVEN IF THE REMEDIES OTHERWISE AVAILABLE FAIL OF THEIR ESSENTIAL PURPOSE. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES WILL OUR TOTAL LIABILITY TO YOU OR ANY OTHER PERSON OR ENTITY IN CONNECTION WITH, BASED UPON, OR ARISING FROM THE SITE, COMMENTS, THE SITE CONTENTS MADE AVAILABLE THROUGH THE SITE, OR THE SERVICES, PRODUCTS, DATA OR OTHER MATERIALS OFFERED IN CONNECTION THEREWITH EXCEED THE PRICE PAID BY YOU TO US DURING THE YEAR PRECEDING THE EVENTS GIVING RISE TO THE CLAIM.
- Exceptions to Limitations and Exclusions of Liability. Please note that some jurisdictions, including New Jersey, do not permit some of the limitations or exclusions of liability set forth in Sections 12, 13, and 14 above - including, in New Jersey, limitations of warranties for consumer products and services. Accordingly, some of the foregoing exclusions may not apply to you. We encourage you to consult a local attorney for legal counsel on these issues. If any of the limitations or exclusions of liability set forth in these Terms is deemed invalid or unenforceable for any reason, then the limitation or exclusion shall apply to the greatest extent permitted by applicable law. If you are dissatisfied with the Site or any of these Terms, your sole and exclusive remedy is to discontinue using the Site.
- Indemnification. You agree to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless us, our vendors, owners, affiliates, related entities, and each of their respective directors, officers, employees, and agents from and against all claims, losses, damages, liabilities, and costs (including reasonable attorneys' fees and expert fees), arising out of or relating to your use of the Site, the Site Contents, or any services, products, or data obtained through the Site, as well as your fraud, violation of law, negligence, willful misconduct, and any breach by you of these Terms (each, a "Claim"). You may not settle any Claim without our prior written consent. We (or our licensors) may assume the defense of any Claim, at your sole cost and expense, and you shall cooperate in all reasonable respects in such defense. You shall have the right to employ separate counsel and to participate in the defense of any Claim. If we (or our licensors) do not notify you that we (or they) elect to undertake the defense of a Claim, you shall have the right to defend the Claim with counsel reasonably acceptable to us (or them).
- Internet Security. We use reasonable efforts to ensure that the Site is generally available. However, there may be occasions when access to the Site is interrupted or unavailable. We will use reasonable efforts to minimize such disruption where it is within our reasonable control. You agree that we shall not be liable to you for any modification, suspension, or discontinuance of the Site. You understand that the technical processing and transmission of materials to, from, or through the Site may be transferred unencrypted and involve: (a) transmissions over various networks; and (b) changes to conform and adapt to technical requirements of connecting networks or devices. Please be advised that we do not guarantee that any information sent from to, from, or through our Site will be secure during transmission, nor can we guarantee the confidentiality of any communication or material transmitted to, from, or through the Site or the Internet, including, for example, personal information such as your name and address.
- Applicable Law. These Terms will be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Ohio, without reference to its conflict of law rules. By accessing, viewing, or using the services, works, content, or materials on the Site, you consent and agree to (a) the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal and state courts located in Cleveland, Ohio; (b) accept service of process by personal delivery or mail; and (c) irrevocably waive the right to trial by jury and any jurisdictional and venue defenses otherwise available. If any provision of these Terms shall be deemed unlawful, invalid or unenforceable for any reason, then that provision shall be deemed severable from the Terms, and shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining provisions.
- Entire Agreement. These Terms constitute the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and supersede all previous written or oral agreements between the parties with respect to such subject matter. No waiver by us of any breach or default hereunder shall be deemed to be a waiver of any preceding or subsequent breach or default. The headings and captions in these Terms are intended for convenience only and shall in no way affect the interpretation of the Terms. Notwithstanding the foregoing, these Terms and the information provided in this Site in no way override the terms and conditions of your purchase of any product or service, except as specifically provided herein. To the extent any area within this Site contains SPECIFIC TERMS AND CONDITIONS concerning use of that particular area of the Site ("Specific Terms"), those Specific Terms are in addition to these Terms. To the extent there is a direct conflict between these Terms and the Specific Terms, the Specific Terms shall prevail.
- Acts Beyond Control. We shall not be liable for any nonperformance or delay in performance caused by any act beyond our reasonable control, including acts or omissions of third parties, unavailability of supplies, equipment failure, war, strikes, lock-outs, fire, flood, or any other Act of God, any law, regulation, ordinance, or other act or order of any court, government, or governmental agency, or delays, unavailability, errors, or other failures of the Internet or other data networks.
- Miscellaneous. The Site is controlled and operated from within the United States. Without limiting anything else in these Terms or otherwise, we make no representation that the Site, Site Contents, Comments, services, products, information or other materials available on, in, or through the Site is appropriate or available for use in other locations, and access to them from territories where they are illegal is prohibited. Those who choose to access the Site from other locations do so on their own volition and are responsible for compliance with applicable laws. The waiver or failure of us to exercise in any respect any right provided hereunder shall not be deemed a waiver of such right in the future or a waiver of any of other rights established under these Terms. Headings used in these Terms are for reference only and shall not affect the interpretation of these Terms. No person or entity not party to this agreement will be deemed to be a third party beneficiary of these Terms or any provision hereof. When used herein, the words "includes" and "including" and their syntactical variations shall be deemed followed by the words "without limitation."
Revised July 26, 2016


text:
Located in Ventura Harbor, Coastal Marine Biolabs is a private, 501(c)(3), research-based science education organization that provides innovative field and laboratory-based learning experiences for high school students. Under the mentorship of CMB scientists, students use many of the key technological cornerstones of modern scientific discovery to explore contemporary questions that lie at the frontiers of scientific knowledge.
session dates
apply here

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Joao Barbosa finished ninth overall at the Rolex 24 over the weekend, piloting the third fastest Corvette prototype. Judging by the screams, tears and flailing arms of his wife, he's definitely fast enough.
If I got strapped into a Daytona Prototype for the first time and hurled around the high-speed banking like that, I'd probably be emptying my breakfast into the footwell. With that in mind, Mrs. Barbosa did pretty well.
(Hat tip to: Robb!)


text:
Servicios Personalizados
Links relacionados
- Citado por Google
- Similares en Google
versión On-line ISSN 2304-8557
versión impresa ISSN 0023-270X
Koers (Online) vol.80 no.2 Pretoria 2015
Lydia Jaeger and Herman Dooyeweerd: Dialogues on the foundations of Christian scholarship
Renato Coletto
School of Philosophy, North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus
This article introduces and discusses Lydia Jaeger's dialogue with and critical evaluation of a few aspects of Dooyeweerd's philosophy. From her critical realist position, Jaeger evaluates Dooyeweerd's rejection of the 'Logos-speculation' and his definitions of truth. As he deviates from the Christian epistemological tradition referring to the 'correspondence between thought and reality', Jaeger argues that he fails to connect subject and object sufficiently. I argue that in Dooyeweerd's ontology subject and object are thoroughly interwoven by the law-order. I also question Jaeger's critique that, in his epistemology, Dooyeweerd doesn't make sufficient use of biblical resources and is too inclined towards idealism. I suggest that Jaeger's contentions could be re-considered and that a more positive approach to reformational philosophy may open new avenues for her own research.
Key words: Christian philosophy and scholarship, Lydia Jaeger, Herman Dooyeweerd, Critical realism, Logos doctrine/speculation, Correspondence theory of truth, Reformational and Scholastic attitudes in philosophy
Hierdie artikel is 'n inleiding in, en bespreking van Lydia Jaeger se dialoog met, en kritiese evaluering van enkele aspekte van Dooyeweerd se filosofie. Jeager evalueer Dooyeweer se verwerping van die 'Logos-spekulasie' en sy definisies van waarheid vanuit haar krities-realistiese posisie. Omdat hy van die christelik epistemologiese tradisie afwyk, laasgenoemde verwysende na die 'korrespondensie tussen denke en realiteit', argumenteer Jaeger dat hy nie daarin slaag om subjek en objek genoegsaam met mekaar te verbind nie. Ek argumenteer dat Dooyeweerd se epistemologie subjek en objek deeglik met mekaar verweef deur middel van die wetsorde. Ek bespreek ook Jaeger se bewerings dat, in sy filosofie, Dooyeweerd nie genoegsaam gebruik maak van bybelse bronne nie en dat hy geneig is tot idealisme. Ek suggereer dat Jaeger se bewerings herbedink behoort te word en dat 'n meer positiewe benadering tot Reformatoriese filosofie nuwe weë ook vir haar eie navorsing kan oopmaak.
Sleutelwoorde: Christelike filosofie, Lydia Jaeger, Herman Dooyeweerd, Kritiese realisme, Logosleer/-spekulasie, Korrespondensie waarheidsteorie, Reformatoriese en Skolastiese benaderings tot die filosofie
Lydia Jaeger is an Evangelical philosopher of science, with specialisations in theology, philosophy and physics. She is a prolific author who writes in several languages and has been associated with several universities in Germany, France and England. She is at present also Dean of the Biblical Institute of Nogent-sur-Marne, near Paris. As I regard myself too as an Evangelical and I lecture in philosophy of science, I was immediately interested in her work. We are both well-acquainted with the neo-Calvinist1 tradition of Kuyper, Vollenhoven, Dooyeweerd, Van Til (in South Africa also Stoker, in France also Lecerf). While I lean more on the Dooyeweerdian side, I had the impression that she leans more on the Van Tilian side. But then she recently clarified that, as far as she is concerned, she 'takes inspiration from both' these giants of the Kuyperian tradition.2
Given this background, when I came across an essay3 of hers dedicated to Dooyeweerd's philosophy, I was somehow surprised to find that it harbours a rather radical critique of Dooyeweerd's position. In that text, in fact, she advances several objections against Dooyeweerd's epistemology and ontology. These objections are rather fundamental and seem to leave little hope for further dialogue. They seem to parallel Blocher's trenchant verdict on several aspects of Dooyeweerd's epistemology: 'I have had to conclude that he is wrong' (Blocher, 2010:227). Nevertheless, Jaeger begins her essay by saying that her critique is to be understood as a sign of interest in Dooyeweerd's philosophy and concludes by pointing out several areas of agreement between herself and Dooyeweerd (2012:309-310). I am therefore encouraged to think that my present 'ecumenical' exercise will not be perceived as irrelevant.
In this article, I will reply to Jaeger's essay by trying to argue that her contentions against the Dutch-reformed philosopher should be re-considered. On the one hand, in my opinion, Dooyeweerd's philosophy is closer than she may think to several themes, concerns and results that she pursues and develops in her own writings. On the other hand I will also deliver a few critiques of Jaeger's position, with the purpose of suggesting that a reformational alternative might fit better with a/her Christian approach. In the next section, however, the first step is to introduce her epistemological convictions and her critiques of Dooyeweerd's philosophy.
Jaeger's theses and contentions
Jaeger's epistemological position is rooted in the Christian tradition, in what she calls the 'traditional Christian theory of knowledge' (Jaeger, 2012:303). Her conception is based on the idea of creation and on the doctrine of the Logos, the second person of the Trinity. According to Jaeger, this doctrine excludes all nominalist and idealist views and invites to a (moderate) form of realism. Jaeger's epistemology, therefore, is a realist one, yet she does not opt for naive realism. Her conception, quite popular in Christian circles, can be defined as critical realism. From that point of view, the object of knowledge is not isolated from the knowing subject: the two are 'tuned' to each other.
The Logos doctrine allows overcoming a traditional problem of classical realism, the problem of connecting the subject and the object. It is not always clear, in fact, that or how the two should be related to each other, in other words why/how the object should be open to human knowledge. On this junction the doctrine of the Logos plays an essential role. The human subject, created in God's image, can recognize in the object a creature that is known by the Logos. As she writes: 'the correspondence between (...) knowing person and world to be known is granted by the double presence of the Logos' (Ibid: 303). The Logos is 'present' to both of them.
The knowing subject too has a double connection to the Logos: true knowledge is given not only by the correspondence between thought and object but also between thought and Thought (human and divine thought - Ibid: 308-309). There are no 'brute facts' in the cosmos, they are always pre-known and pre-interpreted by the Creator. Human thinking is veridical when it corresponds to divine thought. As Van Til used to say, it is a matter of 'thinking God's thoughts after Him'.
The Logos is the ordering principle of the universe, from which all things derive. The Bible, says Jaeger, affirms this truth in the Prologue of the Gospel of John. Several Greek philosophers recognised the Logos as the rational order of the cosmos. Christians should not shy away from this recognition: 'all truth is God's truth', even when it is proclaimed by pagans (Ibid: 307). Conversely, when John wrote about the Logos (in the Prologue to his Gospel), he knew that the idea was already present in the Greek world and that it had connotations that were not exactly biblical. Nevertheless, his Prologue creates a bridge between the Old Testament and Greek culture (Ibid: 305).
These are Jaeger's theses briefly summarized. Her critiques against Dooyeweerd's philosophy are the following.
Dooyeweerd rejects what he calls the 'Logos-speculation' on the basis that there are very unsatisfactory versions of the doctrine of the Logos (e.g. in Clement, Origen, Tertullian). Yet the cost of this rejection is that he cannot properly connect the subject to the object. In Dooyeweerd's philosophy the Logos is substituted by the (naive experience of the) self (Ibid: 303). The previous allegation is stated from a different angle:
Dooyeweerd's conception of the truth is not based on the classical correspondence between thought and reality, or thought and facts (adequatio rei et intellectus). As a consequence, his epistemology does not provide a sufficiently direct contact between 'the human spirit and the world' (Ibid: 308). One should also consider two other critiques.
Dooyeweerd's epistemology does not stem from and is not the result of an intense interaction with the biblical text (Ibid: 307-308).
His position results in a certain dose of idealism: he is too inclined towards Kant and Husserl (Ibid: 310).
Jaeger's reflections place her in an ideal dialogue with Dooyeweerd, a dialogue on the foundations of Christian philosophy with crucial implications for the nature of Christian scholarship. In the following section we are going to analyse the first allegation.
Dooyeweerd's rejection of the Logos-speculation
Jaeger is supported in her (moderate realist) position by several reformed giants of the past, not only Kuyper but also Bavinck and Woltjer. It might be objected, however, that Jaeger finds herself also in the company of Thomas Aquinas and other Scholastic authors. In addition, the reformed theologian Geerhardus Vos (1980:478-484) expressed clear reservations concerning critical realism and, even more interesting, Van Til himself articulated a few perplexities concerning the use of the Logos doctrine in Bavinck's epistemology (Van Til, 1974:94-95). To complicate the picture even further, one might add that both Dooyeweerd and Vollenhoven did initially accept a form of critical realism similar to Kuyper's and equally informed by 'trinitarian' themes (cf. Tol, 2011:192-199). Only at a later stage they found it un-satisfactory and decided to opt for an alternative (i.e. reformational) solution.
But apart from the supporters and detractors of critical realism and the Logos doctrine, Jaeger recognizes that Dooyeweerd's critique of the 'Logos speculation' is profound. After examining the Greek conceptions of the Logos (e.g. Philo and Plotinus -Dooyeweerd, 2012:68-74) he takes into account several Christian versions of the doctrine (Ibid: 74-80) and he shows that they all contain important flaws (Ibid: 82 ff.). Dooyeweerd's concerns are not only theological, they proceed on philosophical grounds. The major problem that he mentions is that 'the Logos-theory logicizes the creation order' (in other words absolutizes the rational modality - Ibid: 83 ff.).
Jaeger is prepared to admit (with Van Til, 1971:441) that the pre-Nicean versions of the Logos-doctrine are not satisfactory from a theological point of view. In fact, they reduce the Logos to a kind of 'inferior' deity. But she sounds slightly surprised by the fact that 'Dooyeweerd's critique is extended to Augustine as well' (Jaeger, 2012:304, 306). Interestingly, at this junction Jaeger does not respond to Dooyeweerd's criticism of Augustine's (post-Nicean) Logos-theory, she just assumes that an acceptable version of the doctrine must exist. Unfortunately, she does not clearly indicate which (whose) version of the doctrine might be acceptable, and I think this weakens her argumentation to an extent.
The only clue she provides on this issue is that, in a proper version of the Logos-doctrine, the correspondence between thought and fact should be integrated by the correspondence between thought and Thought (human and divine thought, Ibid: 308-309). But how does the latter make the "contact" between the knower and the object of knowledge more direct? After all, the thought-Thought correspondence seems to be a move away from the object. In this context Jaeger (Ibid: 309, fn. 32) quotes Auguste Lecerf, but in her own paraphrase of his position Lecerf refers to the necessity of understanding the "structure" (the law) of/for created reality, not divine thought. Lecerf seems rather to support a reformational understanding of these issues (which will be discussed below). Finally, she does not respond to the crucial issue of the logicization of the created order (I will return on this issue below).
Perhaps feeling that the best defence is attack, Jaeger proceeds to argue that, in his philosophy, Dooyeweerd consciously replaces the Logos with the naive experience of the self. She writes that 'the naive experience of the supra-temporal self plays in Dooyeweerd the role traditionally attributed to the Logos in the classical Christian theory of knowledge' (Jaeger, 2012:303). The idea was not immediately clear to me, but I think she means the following. While in critical realism the Logos connects subject and object, in Dooyeweerd's philosophy a similar connection is envisaged in his conception of naive (or pre-scientific) experience. There the subject is placed in direct contact with objects, events and processes: in this sense naive experience plays the role of the Logos in connecting object and subject. This direct contact is acceptable to Jaeger, with the only regret that the Logos is replaced by the self.
When it comes to theoretical thought, the situation is definitely worse: there Dooyeweerd introduces an antithesis, an opposition between subject and object. True, the antithesis is followed by a synthesis, but the theoretical attitude of thought is characterised by an antithesis. In addition, the self is again the 'hidden player' making possible (after a theoretical antithesis is intentionally set up) the synthesis between the logical aspect of the act of thought and the non-logical aspects of the object of scientific investigation (Dooyeweerd, 1984, 1:45). Does not Dooyeweerd then, fail to see the direct correspondence between subject (or thought) and object? Furthermore, does he not anchor his epistemology to the subject, thus creating a rather subject-ivist, or idealist type of approach, reminiscent of Kant and Husserl? This is how I understand Jaeger's arguments on this topic.
The theoretical attitude of thought
Concerning the theoretical attitude of thought (in which an 'antithesis' is established) I would say that the comparison proposed by Jaeger is completely linear. While in the Logos approach the connection to be explained is the correspondence of thought and facts, in Dooyeweerd this is not the case.
When Dooyeweerd speaks of antithesis, it is not an antithesis between subject and object but 'only regarding the logical aspect of our act of thought as opposite to the non-logical aspects of reality' (Dooyeweerd, 1948:31).4 His problem is the functioning of theoretical thought. The antithesis concerns the laborious process of theorizing, the effort which must be put in place to obtain theoretical knowledge. Subjects and objects may be thoroughly interwoven by the Logos, yet this does not mean that we have instant understanding of concrete reality and its laws. I think Dooyeweerd wanted to highlight the fatigue of scientific investigation, the sense of 'opposition' or resistance experienced in the process of analysis.
Now, Dooyeweerd's account of theoretical thought can sound more or less convincing, plausible or accurate. But it does not crucially depend on the idea of opposition. For example, Strauss has re-phrased and simplified the whole theory by focusing on the idea of abstraction. (Modal) abstraction is the 'heart' of theoretical thought and it includes both analysis and synthesis (distinction and identification) as its two 'legs'. Synthesis is then not the counterpart of opposition but of distinction (i.e. analysis -Strauss, 2009:13 ff., 361-368). In this re-construction of Dooyeweerd's theory5 the theoretical 'opposition' between aspects is no longer necessary. Could this open new avenues of dialogue between Kuyperian scholars and circles?
While keeping this hope, we need to return to my previous remark that Jaeger has not responded to a fundamental objection raised by Dooyeweerd (2012:83 ff.), that the Logos-speculation implies a logic-ization of the created order. In fact, as the demiourgos (in Plato) shapes the un-created matter he follows a rational plan and has a rational purpose. The rational (logical) modality, therefore, is both the foundation and the goal of his creative activity (Ibid: 82). In Dooyeweerd's language this means that the logical or rational aspect is absolutised, while the non-logical modalities are reduced to (sub-) modalities of the logical aspect. The implications of this idea were imported from Greek into Christian thinking. Even though in Christianity matter loses its divine attributes, creation still occurs according to God's thoughts, its order is a rational order and the correspondence between thought and fact is logical. In this construction the risk, for the object, is to become not only open to logical analysis but logically qualified (i.e. fundamentally logical). The risk is also that the logical (and mathematical?) laws may be regarded as un-created (therefore as divine).
Does this logicization affect Jaeger's discourse as well? For example, is the fact that she is prepared to regard as synonyms terms like thoughts/words, linguistic/propositional and thought/discourse a first symptom of a logicization of the created order? She writes:
How should we compare facts and their interpretation (in thoughts or in words), given the fact that they are two very different categories? How can we establish a relationship between a linguistic (or propositional) and the factual element which is supposed to correspond to it? (...) The antinomy between fact and thought (or discourse) has no ground to exist (Jaeger, 2012:309).
What is the reason why she tends to associate words and thoughts so closely? Why should words, in the following step, be included in the pole of 'thought' (the counterpart of 'facts')? Are words fundamentally thoughts? Is the Word of the Prologue of John, also to be regarded as essentially rational and as the provider of the rational order of the cosmos?
Connecting subject and object: Dooyeweerd
Whatever answer one may give to the previous questions, we have not yet clarified whether Dooyeweerd failed or not in connecting the human subject of knowledge to the objects, thus falling into idealism. In the previous section I have argued that Dooyeweerd's 'doctrine' of theoretical thought does not necessarily imply a separation between knower and knowable. But this concerns only theoretical thought, it does not exclude that, in other areas or in other ways, Dooyeweerd creates excessive distance between subject and object. It is therefore necessary to analyse other parts of his philosophy.
To do this, I suggest that his understanding of the subject-object relation is a strategic locus to begin with; more strategic, I would say, than his definitions of the term 'truth' (on which I will return below). Basically, in Dooyeweerd's ontology, what connect the subject to the object are the modal (universal) laws. Both subjects and objects are subjected to the law(s). In this sense I would say that Dooyeweerd's epistemology is clarified by his ontology.
According to Dooyeweerd all entities function in all modal aspects, either as subjects or objects (to use Clouser's language: passively or actively - Clouser, 2010:5). Cats function as subjects (i.e. actively) in the first six modalities: they have four paws (numeric aspect), when they are born they have a small size (spatial), then they learn to move around (kinematic), they get stronger (physical) and eventually they grow older (biotic) and their sight is less sharp at night (sensory). In the subsequent aspects cats function 'passively', as objects: they do not form concepts, but they can be analysed conceptually. They do not give names to their kittens but they get names. They do not sue anybody but they may belong to someone, thus functioning in the juridical modality. The modalities in which entities function as objects (passively) are always present, but they might not always be actualised. Actualisation occurs through a subject. For example, the photographs of the lunar environment provided by satellites allow our appreciation of the beauty of those landscapes. The potential for aesthetic admiration was always there, but now it is disclosed to subjects and by subjects. In other words the mentioned object-functions were latent but have been made patent (disclosed) by a subject.
At this point it is necessary to avoid the (wrong) impression that, in Dooyeweerd's philosophy, the subject-object relation presents itself only in the logical or rational modal aspect. The subject-object relation presents itself in each and every modal aspect, and therefore is not only about knowledge. For example in the sensory aspect we can perceive an object or feel an emotion. In the physical aspect a subject can hit an object (for example kick a ball). In the ethical aspect a subject can love an object, for example one's country or friends.6 This is made possible by the fact that objects and subjects function in the same modalities and are subjected to the same laws. Basically, then, we can say that objects and subjects are connected through the modalities in which they function. Troost (2012:96) observes that this is not an external or superficial type of link between entities that have little or nothing in common. On the contrary, it is an internal link, as entities are qualified by specific modalities.7 The world does not only contain subjects and objects (as philosophers of science often assume), but is an ordered cosmos, in which objects and subjects are subjected to the law-for creation, the structural modal order.
From this point of view, the very distinction between subject and object should be handled with care. Objects are never only objects: they are also subjects, at least in some dimensions (aspects) of life (cf. Hart's remarkable analysis -1984:221 ff.). Not only: in some cases subjects too can be objects. Human beings can be logically analysed, for example, individually or as groups, from a biotic, psychic, historical or social point of view. Finally, both subjects and objects are subject-ed to laws.
I find the following remark by Strauss particularly illuminating on the inclinations of reformational philosophy. He writes: 'it is an effect of the "subject-centredness" of modern philosophy (sometimes plainly designated as its subjectivism) that everything different from the human being is turned into an "object"' (Strauss, 2009:346). With the last few remarks I have moved a bit away from Dooyeweerd, to have a look at some other authors in the reformational tradition. I would like to continue this 'stroll' in the next section.
Connecting subject and object: the reformational tradition
The relevance of the law is a theme which is particularly prominent in Jaeger's writings (cf. Jaeger, 2008, 2010a, 2010b). It might be that, on closer examination, she could find in reformational philosophy a closer ally than she assumes at present.8 In this tradition, admittedly, scientific truth or objectivity is not simply the result of a correspondence between 'thought and facts'. However, Jaeger also gives alternative definitions of truth: as correspondence between a) 'thought and world' to be known (Ibid: 303) or between b) 'thought and reality' (2012:307). This raises a question: to what precisely should our theories correspond to, within the world or reality? The relativist, for example, tends to create a correspondence between theory and (the conceptions or definitions of) the human subject of knowledge. The subject too is part of 'reality' and part of 'the world'. From a reformational point of view, Stafleu suggests that scientific truth or objectivity should be re-defined as 'correspondence to the law' (Stafleu, 1987:241). In his opinion this idea of 'law-conformity' is required by the 'reformed conception of the law' (Ibid: 241). One may agree or not with this specific proposal, but it is still a 'correspondence-theory' of knowledge and it is certainly not an idealist project, creating a gulf between knower and knowable.
According to Hart (1984:82-83), who blends in his ontology the positions of Dooyeweerd's and Vollenhoven, the laws, the 'nomic conditions' are nothing else than the universals, that occupied such a central place in the discussions of Medieval philosophy. From an ontological point of view, this is equivalent to granting existence to the universals, which is quite far from any nominalist (idealist) conception. In this sense, reformational ontology could even be called 'realist'. However, in my opinion, it constitutes an original position, an alternative inspired by the biblical revelation and rooted in the recognition of the law (cf. Hart, 1984:19 ff.). This 'stroll' through the reformational tradition should leave no doubts concerning the fact that it is not an idealist tradition.
Coming back to Dooyeweerd, there is one more difference between his and Jaeger's attempts at connecting subject and object. For Jaeger the biblical worldview suggests that the two must be (are always) 'tuned' to each other. From there she might argue that this is more suitable to promote the scientific enterprise, that it is more in line with the Christian tradition and so forth. Yet she does not show philosophically that and how this tuning or correspondence occurs, or is possible.
Dooyeweerd's argumentation, by contrast, is not only a faith-position but a philosophical explanation of the connection. Jaeger's weakness on this point is the same characterizing Kuyper's position. He too wanted to avoid idealism and he too appealed to the Logos to explain the correspondence between subject and object. It was a faith-inspired choice. On this point Klapwijk recently observes that while the appeal to the Logos-doctrine can help understanding Kuyper's intentions, it does not prove the point that the Father of neo-Calvinism wanted to argue (Klapwijk, 2013:25). From my side, I have to agree: a faith-commitment is not yet a philosophical argumentation.
Dooyeweerd's definitions of 'truth'
The critiques presented up to this point constitute only one leg of Jaeger's argumentations, aiming at demonstrating the insufficient connection of subject and object in Dooyeweerd's philosophy. The other leg is constituted by her discussion of Dooyeweerd's conception of the truth. However, the previous exploration of the subject-object relation presented by Dooyeweerd is relevant in this case too, and I believe it can again shed light on the discussion.
I will omit a description of the 'perspective structure of truth', in relation to the 'horizons of human experience', as it is already well presented by Geertsema (2005:87-88, 92 ff.). I will rather focus on Jaeger's (2012:308) impression that Dooyeweerd's definitions of 'truth' are quite complex and such complexities cannot deliver the simple adequatio of thought and fact. Let us briefly examine a first definition of truth.
According to its transcendental a priori dimension truth is: the accordance between the subjective a-priori knowledge enclosed by the temporal horizon, as expressed in a-priori judgements, and the a priori structural laws of human experience within this temporal horizon. The latter is open (as to its law- and subject-sides) to the light of the transcendent Truth in Christ (Dooyeweerd, 1984, 2:573).
The above definition includes 'both the pre-theoretical and theoretical dimensions of transcendental truth' (Ibid: 573). A more specific definition of theoretical truth reads as follows.
The correspondence of the subjective a-priori meaning-synthesis as to its intentional meaning with the modal structure of the 'Gegenstand' of theoretical thought. The modal 'Gegenstand' is included in its all-sided coherence within the temporal horizon. This coherence exists both in its foundational and transcendental direction of time and is dependent on the transcendent fullness of the meaning of truth (Ibid: 572).
One may notice that in both definitions truth is regarded as a correspondence to modal dimensions (see the 'a priori structural laws' in the first quotation above and the 'the modal structure of the Gegenstand' in the second). In other words, the theme of 'correspondence to the law' emerges again and if the previous discussion is taken into account, it will become clear that no antithesis or disconnection between 'subject and object' is in view.
Dooyeweerd's epistemology is still one of correspondence. No one could insist that there are "undeniable states of affairs" as he does and fail to have a correspondence view. But he disagrees for example with Aquinas' formulation and makes it a prime example of what he rejects. Thomas holds that truth is an agreement between "thought and being" and takes belief to be "intellectual assent". Dooyeweerd (1984, 2:566) disagrees because Aquinas' solution relates knowledge and truth only to the intellect, to the logical aspect of knowing. For him knowledge and belief take place in the heart not just in the intellect. In that way they involve the whole person in all his or her aspects (Dooyeweerd, 1984, 2:571)
Jaeger (2012:307, fn. 26) does report that she noticed Van Woudenberg's (2005:116-117) observation that Dooyeweerd's epistemology is still one of 'correspondence'. Yet she did not pursue that direction to find out where it may lead. She quickly concluded that Dooyeweerd's correspondence still does not 'create a direct contact between the human spirit and the world to know' (Ibid: 308). The simple fact that Dooyeweerd does not fully conform to the 'conception traditionelle' (or even to a specific 'formula') is considered sufficient to declass his proposals. The fact that Dooyeweerd dares criticizing Bavinck's critical realism seems to be regarded as a proof that he does not create a direct contact between the knower and the world (2012:308, fn. 29). On this point, one has the impression that Jaeger is a bit too hasty in delivering her verdict.9
In the next section we need to proceed to discuss her third allegation, concerning the relationship between Dooyeweerd's philosophy and Scripture.
Philosophy and Scripture
Although recognising that Dooyeweerd wants to erect his epistemology on biblical grounds, Jaeger (2012:307, fn. 24) observes that he does not engage in a deep interaction with the biblical text. Admittedly, Dooyeweerd usually refers to broad biblical themes, rather than to specific verses. In his opinion Christian scholarship cannot be derived from a few texts and fragments, but is shaped especially by the biblical ground motif of creation, fall and redemption. 10 Ample use of biblical texts is sometimes even regarded with suspicion by Dooyeweerd. He once wrote about both Augustinian and Protestant Scholastics that 'the more alien the foundation of their philosophy were to the Christian religion, the more copious (...) became their appeals to the biblical texts' (2012:50).
Jaeger's conception is also derived from the Scriptures, both from particular texts and from general themes. As far as themes are concerned, her epistemology is based on the theme of Creation, in particular on 'the distinction between creation and Creator' 11 (Jaeger, 2012:306). And then of course she relies on the biblical texts dealing with the Logos. Now, a philosopher might not be the best candidate for exegetical discussions. Fortunately, in this case I can rely on a (Van Tilian) theologian (i.e. Oliphint, 2010:375-388) who objects to the use of the Logosdoctrine in support of realist epistemology, and does so by way of biblical exegesis.
What type of knowledge does the Logos provide, according to the Prologue of the Gospel of John? Surely, it is a type of knowledge that all men share, knowledge that 'enlightens all men' (v. 9). Surely, it is knowledge that the Logos supplies since the creation of the world. According to Oliphint, however, it is not knowledge of 'objects' or facts. It is rather the knowledge of God, knowledge of the Logos himself (Oliphint, 2010:387). This is in line with the verses in Romans 1, teaching that God is known by all human beings, although this type of knowledge is then, so to speak, repressed or removed. Obviously, these findings constitute a non-marginal blow to the use of the Logos-doctrine in support of (critical) realism.
Yet is not the Logos also the rational order of the world? This was the understanding of the Greek readers of the Gospel of John, says Jaeger (2012:305), and the apostle would not have ignored this background understanding. He knew that by using the word Logos he would have induced his readers to think of the cosmic rationality, and he did not write anything to prevent or counteract that understanding. Should we not conclude that in the doctrine of the Logos the biblical meaning and the 'natural' understanding of its Greek readers contribute to a richer picture? Oliphint is rather clear-cut on this point:
The true meaning of the term, however, is not to be gleamed from a synthesis of its historical use and its biblical use. God infallibly inspires the use and its true meaning in the writing of his own word (Oliphint, 2010:377, fn. 57).
The Logos, therefore, says Oliphint (2010:388-389) by supplying the knowledge of God, supplies what Bavinck calls the principium essendi of epistemology, the source, foundation or cause of knowledge. This principium is necessary, says Oliphint, but not sufficient to legitimize or to erect a realist epistemology. All this brings Oliphint (Ibid:390) to the conclusion, which I gladly support, that the Christian scholar should stick to the principle of Sola Scriptura. Not in the sense that the Scripture is the only reference point for epistemology, but in the sense that the Scripture should have prominence over all other reference points shedding light on the matter. From this point of view, therefore, the Christian scholar, working in epistemology, should remain faithful primarily to the Scriptures, 12 not to realism or to any other 'conception traditionelle'.
This whole discussion is of course linked to the attitudes of accommodation and reformation in philosophy. Dooyeweerd (2012:46 ff., 51 ff.) distinguishes them sharply and regards Scholastic philosophy too as the result of a synthesis between Christian and pagan elements. Yet Jaeger too, from her position, regards Dooyeweerd's philosophy as compromising with Humanist philosophy, in particular with the idealism of Kant and Husserl (Jaeger, 2012:310).
Dooyeweerd, Kant and Husserl
The fact that there are 'analogies' between the philosophies of Dooyeweerd, Kant and Husserl is not a secret. Already in a text dating back to 1962, for example, Knudsen (2009:327-329, original 1962), recognized and listed several areas of 'analogy'. Dooyeweerd himself recognises the 'thousand ties' (1984, 1:118) linking his philosophy to Kant in particular and to (contemporary) philosophy in general. And yet, right after this recognition, Dooyeweerd also claims that in its fundamental stance, reformational philosophy sets itself against Kantianism and secular philosophy in general. Knudsen too, after recognizing the analogies, proceeds to describing the substantial differences between the Dooyeweerdian and phenomenological approaches (Knudsen, 2009:329 ff.).
I should perhaps supply a brief example based on the definitions of truth that were quoted above. There we find the term 'a priori', which is typical of the philosophies of both Kant and Husserl. And yet, once one starts analysing Dooyeweerd's use of this term, one discovers that a priori refers to what is given in creation. The a priori has a subject-side and a law-side. 'The subjective insight, expressing itself in judgments' can be true or false. It is however dependent on structural laws (Dooyeweerd, 1984, 2:548). The basic difference with Kant and Husserl is that for Dooyeweerd the subject is not the a priori foundation of knowledge (Geertsema, 2005:95).
Once again, it would be helpful to place Dooyeweerd's philosophy in the broader context of reformational philosophy. It would then appear quite clearly that, since its beginnings, this movement has pointed out that the very roots of phenomenology and Kantianism are incompatible with an integral Christian approach. One might think for example of the text Creation, revelation and philosophy by Mekkes (2010, orig. 1961) or The rise and development of the phenomenological movement by Van der Hoeven (1964).13 Is it plausible to imagine that Dooyeweerd's attitude (sympathetic towards Kantianism and phenomenology - according to Jaeger) resulted in such sharp oppositions in the works of so many reformational authors? Would this not have raised at least some perplexities within this school? How come that Dooyeweerd himself (1984,2:487) defined phenomenology as "the most dangerous adversary" among the schools of humanist philosophy?
It would be equally helpful to know in which area or in which sense, according to Jaeger, Dooyeweerd's compromise with 'idealism'14 took place. Unfortunately, she does not clarify precisely how or where such a questionable synthesis occurred. In the absence of this information, perhaps my approach should be more 'presuppositional', in the sense of focusing on the assumptions of Jaeger's discourse. In other words, one should ask questions like: is it fair for Jaeger, to accuse Dooyeweerd of compromise, after effectuating her own synthesis with (one may even say her 'full immersion' in) the Scholastic tradition?
Is it fair to accuse Dooyeweerd of accommodation after showing that accommodation is legitimised by the Bible itself? Is not her understanding of the Logos the result of a synthesis between the biblical and the Greek understanding of this idea? Furthermore, she approves Blocher's thesis that the epistle to the Hebrews 'shows some affinities with the synthesis that Philo created between the Torah and Platonism' (Jaeger, 2012:305). In the same vein, she takes Paul's reference to the pagan poet Aratos (Acts 17, 28) to prove that 'the biblical authors are not afraid of corrupting the purity of their teaching by resorting to the categories utilised by Greek philosophers' (Jaeger, 2012:307).
After such declarations, what complaints could one address to Dooyeweerd, concerning syntheses or compromises?
One might consider that, probably, from Jaeger's point of view, joining an established Christian tradition is a much more legitimate choice than joining secular traditions (like those initiated by Kant and Husserl). Yet this provides an opportunity to say that the Scholastic tradition in philosophy is deeply rooted in the pagan tradition. In certain respects, Scholasticism is as pagan as Humanism! Humanism too can be regarded as a re-elaboration of Christian and biblical themes. Humanism is not simply paganism: it passed through centuries of (synthesis-) Christianity, and it could be regarded as a by-product of Christianity itself. At least, this was Klapwijk's thesis, reflecting Hegel's famous dictum, according to which Western culture has been shaped in the shadow of Christianity (Klapwijk, 1987:105 ff.).15 But this is only half of an integral (may I say: an Evangelical) point of view: it needs to be supplemented by the recognition that both Scholasticism and Humanism, although influenced by Christianity to an extent, are immensely indebted to pre-Christian thought.
Of course this doesn't mean that everything in those traditions must simply be rejected or that Christians should say the opposite of what they say. Yet my impression is that Jaeger has not paid sufficient attention to Dooyeweerd when he points out the threat that Scholastic philosophy poses to integral Christian scholarship. Admittedly, in Jaeger's essay one does find arguments showing that she recognises and is aware of these problems. Unfortunately, those arguments are accompanied by others, pointing towards a different direction.
The dialogue between Jaeger and Dooyeweerd is a precious conversation on the very foundations of Christian science and scholarship. It is also part of a long standing dialogue between the different branches of the Kuyperian tradition. In some cases the distance between these circles might remain substantial, yet the attempts at dialogue and mutual understanding are necessary, if we want to support truly Christian scholarship. This exercise requires self-examination as well.
In some reformed circles, there is an established tradition of placing Dooyeweerd's philosophy on a shelf after briefly paying lip-service to it. Usually, what is accepted from his philosophy is something that is already available from Kuyper, Van Til or some other theologian. From that shelf, reformational philosophy can be "exhibited" to interested visitors and outsiders, but for the rest it is hardly mentioned or used anymore. On the basis (or rather: with the pretext) of this or that alleged inadequacy, this philosophy stemming from the Reformation is basically ignored. Remarkably, a whole host of para-Christian, or overtly secular approaches are preferred to it (cf. Blocher, 2010:227; Frame, 1987:146, 318).
This article recommends a re-evaluation of several themes of Dooyeweerd's philosophy as a Reformed and Evangelical philosophy. It is my impression that Jaeger's evaluationof Dooyeweerd's philosophy could be more positive and several of her critiques should be re-considered. Admittedly, this exercise would imply some self-critique as well. But it would lead to a (re-)discovery of many and valuable resources, not only in Dooyeweerd's philosophy but in the reformational tradition as well.
Blocher, H., 1986, 'De l'âme et de l'ésprit', Ichthus 17(6), 3-11. [ Links ]
Blocher, H., 2010, 'Afterword: open letter to Lydia Jaeger', in L. Jaeger, Einstein, Polanyi and the laws of nature, p. 217-229, Templeton Press, West Conshohocken PA. [ Links ]
Clouser, R.A., 2010, ' Brief Sketch of the Philosophy of Herman Dooyeweerd', Axiomathes 20(1), 3-17. [ Links ]
Dooyeweerd, H., 1948, Transcendental problems of philosophical thought, Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand Rapids, Mi. [ Links ]
Dooyeweerd, H., 1959, 'Cinq conferences', La revue réformée, 10(3), 3-76. [ Links ]
Dooyeweerd, H., 1979, Roots of western culture: pagan, secular and Christian options, Wedge Publishing Foundation, Toronto. [ Links ]
Dooyeweerd, H., 1984, A new critique of theoretical thought, Paideia Press, Jordan Station. [ Links ]
Dooyeweerd, H., 2012, Reformation and scholasticism in philosophy, Volume 2: Greek and Medieval philosophy, Paideia Press, Grand Rapids, Mi. [ Links ]
Frame, J.M., 1987, The doctrine of the knowledge of God: a theology of lordship, Presbyterian and Reformed Publ. Company, Phillipsburg, N.J. [ Links ]
Geertsema, H.G., 2005, 'Dooyeweerd on knowledge and truth', in J.H. Kok (ed.), Ways of knowing in concert, p. 85-100, Dordt College Press, Sioux Centre, Ia. [ Links ]
Hart, H., 1984, Understanding our world: an integral ontology, University Press of America, Lanham, Md. [ Links ]
Jaeger, L., 2008, 'The idea of law in science and religion', Science and Christian Belief 20(2), 133-146. [ Links ]
Jaeger, L., 2010a, Einstein, Polanyi and the laws of nature, Templeton Press, West Conshohocken, PA. [ Links ]
Jaeger, L., 2010b, 'The contingency of the laws of nature in science and theology', Foundations of Physics 40(9-10), 1611-1624. DOI 10.1007/s10701-010-9470-y [ Links ]
Jaeger, L., 2012, 'Herman Dooyeweerd, la spéculation sur le Logos et la vérité', in A. Nisus (ed.), L'amour de la sagesse: hommage à Henri Blocher, p. 299-310, Edifac/ Excelsis, Vaux-sur-Seine/Charols. [ Links ]
Klapwijk, J., 1987, 'Reformational philosophy on the boundary between the past and the future', Philosophia Reformata 52(2), 101-134. [ Links ]
Klapwijk, J., 2013, 'Abraham Kuyper on science, theology and university', Philosophia Reformata 78(1), 18-46. [ Links ]
Knudsen, D.R., 2009, Roots and branches: the quest for meaning and truth in modern thought, edited by Donald Knudsen with an introduction by William Edgar, Paideia Press, Grand Rapids, Mi. [ Links ]
Mekkes, J.P.A., 2010, Creation, Revelation, and Philosophy, Translated by Chris Van Haeften, Dordt College Press, Sioux Centre, Ia. [ Links ]
Oliphint, S.K., 2010, 'Bavinck's realism, the logos principle and sola Scriptura', Westminster Theological Journal 72(2), 359-390. [ Links ]
Shin, K.W., 1994, A hermeneutic utopia: H.G. Gadamer's philosophy of culture, Toronto Tuppence Press, Toronto. [ Links ]
Son, B.H., 1972, Science and person: a study on the idea of philosophy as rigorous science in Kant and Husserl, Van Gorcum, Assen. [ Links ]
Strauss, D.F.M., 1982, 'The place and meaning of Kant's Critique of pure reason (1781) in the legacy of Western philosophy', South African Journal of Philosophy 1(2), 132-147. [ Links ]
Strauss, D.F.M., 2006, 'The best known but least understood part of Dooyeweerd's philosophy', Tydskrif vir christelike wetenskap/Journal for Christian Scholarship 42(1-2), 61-80. [ Links ]
Strauss, D.F.M., 2009, Philosophy: discipline of the disciplines, Paideia Reformational Project, Grand Rapids, Mi. [ Links ]
Stafleu, M.D., 1987, Theories at work: on the structure and functioning of theories in science, in particular during the Copernican revolution, University Press of America, Lanham, Md. [ Links ]
Tol, A., 2011, 'Reformational philosophy in the making', Philosophia Reformata 76(2), 187-215. [ Links ]
Troost, A., 2012, What is reformational philosophy? Paideia Press, Grand Rapids, Mi. [ Links ]
Van der Hoeven, J., 1964, The rise and development of the phenomenological movement, Association for Reformed Scientific Studies, Hamilton, Ontario. [ Links ]
Van Riessen, H., 1992, 'Science in the light of the relation between thinking and believing', Tydskrif vir Christelike Wetenskap 28(1), 27-95. [ Links ]
Van Til, C., 1971, 'Response by C. Van Til [to Arthur F. Holmes]', in E.R. Geehan (ed.), Jerusalem and Athens: critical discussions on the philosophy and apologetics of Cornelius Van Til, p. 438-444, Presbyterian and Reformed Publ. Company, Nutley, N.J. [ Links ]
Van Til, C., 1974, An introduction to systematic theology, Presbyterian and Reformed Publ. Company, Phillipsburg, N.J. [ Links ]
Van Woudenberg, R., 2005, 'Two very different analyses of knowledge', in J.H. Kok (ed.), Ways of knowing in concert, p. 101-122, Dordt College Press, Sioux Centre, Ia. [ Links ]
Vos, G., 1980, Redemptive history and biblical interpretation: the shorter writings of Geerhardus Vos, Presbyterian and Reformed Publ. Company, Phillipsburg, N.J. [ Links ]
Renato Coletto
Email: email@example.com
Published: 01 Des. 2015
1 In this article I will use the term 'neo-Calvinist' as including all scholars and circles in the Kuyperian tradition, and therefore as a synonym of 'Kuyperian'. I will reserve the adjective 'reformational' to refer to the specific school of Dooyeweerd and Vollenhoven.
2 Personal communication, 20 September 2013.
3 The text is in French and all translations appearing in this article are mine. In English, the title of Jaeger's (2012:299-310) essay is: 'Herman Dooyeweerd, the Logos-speculation and the truth'. The essay is part of a collection, edited by Alain Nisus, by the title The love of wisdom: [essays in] homage to Henri Blocher.
4 Dooyeweerd (1984, 1:52-55) argues that, in his transcendental critique, Kant committed precisely the fallacy of identifying the "transcendental logical cogito" (logical aspect) with the self that directs the cogito. As a result, the logical aspect of the act of thought is mistakenly assumed to be the agent performing the act of theoretical thought. Consequently, the true character of theoretical thought and its true starting point have remained hidden, and the autonomy of theoretical reason has been accepted as a truism.
5 Strauss' 'reconstruction' uses materials provided by Dooyeweerd himself, as the latter does sometimes characterize theoretical thought in terms of abstraction (cf. 1984, 2:472), though he may not necessarily abandon the idea of 'opposition'.
6 Another wrong impression could emerge in relation to the logical modality, namely that, according to Dooyeweerd, the subject-object relation is present only in naive experience. Such impression could be generated by the fact that Dooyeweerd says that we know an 'object' only in naive thought, while in theoretical thinking we know a 'Gegenstand'. It should be pointed out, however, that in theoretical thinking (i.e. when abstracting modalities) we do not lose sight of the object completely. The theoretical attitude of thought does not replace the naive attitude but, we might say, it is added to it. On this point Dooyeweerd might not have clarified his position sufficiently.
7 n his commentary on Dooyeweerd's philosophy, Troost writes: 'what we call the external world is so integrally interwoven with our human subjectivity, that the so-called subject-object split can be little more than a faulty mental construction, an erroneous fantasy (...)' (Troost, 2012:96).
8 I have in mind for example reformational scholars like Van Riessen and Stafleu. According to Stafleu the reformed (and reformational) conception of the law is the one that prevailed since the Copernican 'revolution', even though the secular versions of it do not recognise the Origin of laws (Stafleu, 1987:239-240). Van Riessen observes how the recent reluctance to recognise the law, in several academic disciplines, is often due, on the religious level, to a refusal to recognise a law-Giver (Van Riessen, 1992:55).
9 Haste betrays Jaeger also in her footnote 29 (p. 308). In fact, in the passage of the New critique that she quotes there (i.e. Dooyeweerd 1984, 1:560, fn.2) Dooyeweerd's criticism is not directed (as she claims) to Herman Bavinck (the reformed theologian) but to the German philosopher of nature Bernard Bavinck.
10 This is a somewhat 'classical' assessment of Dooyeweerd's use of Scripture. Yet, should one start counting the instances when he quotes or refers to specific biblical texts, one might be quite surprised by the abundance of scriptural references. In this regard I would mention in particular his Roots of Western culture (1979). For Dooyeweerd however biblical quotations do not have the function of constituting or proving philosophical arguments but to show an agreement between the (philosophical or scientific) 'building' and its (religious) 'foundations' (Dooyeweerd, 2012:50).
11 In this regard, I find it difficult to follow some of Jaeger's remarks concerning Dooyeweerd's understanding of this biblical theme. Firstly she (2012:307) denounces an inclination 'to conceive the distinction between Creator and creature in an antithetical mode'. Nevertheless, her further explanation of this idea in footnote 24 (Ibid: 307) speaks of Dooyeweerd's insufficient distinction between Creator and (human) creature. Dooyeweerd's distinction would be compromised by his conception of the supra-temporal heart (a divinisation of the self?). Nevertheless, in her footnote 25 (Ibid: 307) Jaeger refers to Acts 28, 17 ('for we are also His offspring') to defend 'the continuity between God and humanity'.
12 I am not always comfortable with the way Jaeger and Blocher deal with biblical verses or themes in connection with philosophical issues. A few years back Blocher (1986:6) managed to derive from the biblical distinction between God and creation, the idea that human beings reflect in their constitution a duality (body and soul) which is already present in 'the entire reality'. In the concluding paragraph of her essay, Jaeger (2012:310) quotes Acts 17, 28 ('in Him we have our life, movement and being'). If this is intended to counteract Dooyeweerd's well-known argument that we should distinguish between God as 'being' and creation as 'meaning', I think the attempt is rather biblicistic. In any case, Dooyeweerd does not say that creatures have no 'being', but that 'meaning is the creaturely mode of being' (see 1984, 1:4).
13 Further examples from subsequent decades are constituted by Bong-ho Son (1972), Strauss (1982), Kuk-won Shin (1994).
14 The only clue given by Jaeger (Ibid: 310) about Dooyeweerd's "idealism" is that according to him a 'creature is nothing in itself, if isolated from the other creatures and especially from its transcendent Origin' (Dooyeweerd, 1959:17). Now, in this famous passage Dooyeweerd is speaking of the supra-temporal self, not of all 'creatures'. Yet even admitting that rocks and plants could not exist apart from their Origin, from other creatures or from aspects other than the physical and biotic, this does not reduce them to sensations or make them mind-dependent in an idealist sense. Perhaps Jaeger thinks that the modal aspects are only in our minds. But Dooyeweerd (1984, 2:49-50) defines them as aspects 'of reality' or 'of experience' (cf. Strauss, 2006:68). Once this is understood, I think it will be easily admitted that his ontology may not be regarded as idealistic.
15 'I would even defend the thesis', writes Klapwijk, 'that practically the whole of modern humanistic philosophy derives from a transformation of the Christian inheritance' (Klapwijk, 1987:105-106).


text:
The Link Belt Sprocket Factory first opened in 1914 in southwest Atlanta, Georgia. It was closed and abandoned in the early 1980's. Thanks for access to Adam Deck of the Lifecycle Building Center.
Capital and largest city in Georgia, Atlanta is known the world over for its parks, professional sports teams, shopping, museums, and entertainment. One of the fastest growing cities in the United States, Atlanta has been commended by the Environmental Protection Agency for its determination to implement ecologically friendly policies. Unlike many other Southern cities, Atlanta broke with its historic Old South architectural characteristics and opted for a progressive modern style led by native Atlantan John Portman, who created the atrium hotel in 1967 when he designed the Hyatt Regency Atlanta.


text:
The bladder is located in the lower abdomen. It is a hollow organ with flexible muscular walls. It stores urine until a person is ready to urinate. Bladder cancer is a disease in which cancer cells grow in the bladder.
Cancer occurs when cells in the body, in this case bladder cells, divide without control or order. Sometimes, cells divide uncontrollably when new cells are not needed. A mass of tissue called a growth or tumor can form. The term cancer refers to malignant tumors. Malignant tumors can invade nearby tissue and spread to other parts of the body.
Three main types of cancer affect the bladder. They are named for the type of cell that becomes cancerous:
- Transitional cell (urothelial) carcinoma
- Squamous cell carcinoma
- Adenocarcinoma
The cause of bladder cancer is unknown. However, several risk factors have been identified.
Risk Factors
Risk Factors
This condition is more common in adults between 65 and 85 years old. It is also more common in men and people who are Caucasian. Factors that may increase your chance of developing bladder cancer include:
- Smoking
Occupation due to exposure to certain substances:
- Rubber, leather, and textile workers
- Painters
- Hairdressers
- Machinists
- Printers
- Truck drivers
- Petroleum industry workers
- Genetics
- Chronic bladder inflammation or infection such as schistosomiasis, an infection caused by a parasitic worm
- Personal or family history of bladder cancer
- Chemotherapeutic drugs: cyclophosphamide and ifosfamide
- Obesity
- The use of pioglitazone, an anti-diabetic agent
- Exposure to arsenic
- Radiation treatment of the pelvis
- Bladder birth defects
- Chemicals such as nitrosamines and benzidine
- Urinary stones for many years
- In-dwelling catheter for many years
- Bladder diverticuli: an area of weakness in the bladder wall through which some of the lining of the bladder is forced out
- Metastasis from another cancer
Symptoms include:
- Blood in the urine
- Frequent urination, or feeling the need to urinate without being able
- Painful urination
- Lower back pain
- Weight loss, bone pain, or abdominal pain in advanced cases
You will be asked about your symptoms and medical history. A physical exam will be done. Your doctor will feel the abdomen and pelvis for abnormalities. The physical exam may include a rectal or vaginal exam.
- Your urine may need to be examined. This can be done with:
- Urine cytology
- Urine culture
- Your bladder and the surrounding area may need to be viewed. This can be done with:
- Cystoscopy
- IV pyelogram (IVP)
- CT scan
- MRI scan
- Ultrasound
- Bone scan
- A sample of bladder tissue may need to be tested. This can be done with a biopsy.
Staging tests are done after bladder cancer is found. These tests find out if the cancer has spread and, if so, to what parts of the body. Treatments for bladder cancer depend on the stage of the cancer. The stages of bladder cancer are:
- Stage 0: cancer cells are found only on the surface of the inner lining of the bladder
- Stage 1: cancer cells are found deep in the inner lining of the bladder; no lymph nodes are involved
- Stage 2: cancer cells have spread to the muscle of the bladder; no lymph nodes are involved
- Stage 3: cancer cells have spread through the muscular wall of the bladder to the layer of tissue surrounding the bladder OR possibly to the reproductive organs including the prostate glands; no lymph nodes are involved
- Stage 4: cancer cells extending outside the bladder to the wall of the abdomen or to the wall of the pelvis without lymph node involvement OR have spread to one or more lymph nodes and other parts of the body
Stages of Bladder Cancer
Copyright © Nucleus Medical Media, Inc.
Treatment options depend on the stage and may include one of more of:
Surgery involves removing cancerous cells and nearby tissue. Types of surgery to treat bladder cancer include:
- Transurethral resection—This is done for early stage or superficial bladder cancer. A cystoscope is placed into the bladder through the urethra. A small wire loop at the end of the cystoscope is used to remove cancer cells. Fulguration can be done during this procedure. It uses electrical current to burn away remaining cancer cells.
- Cystectomy is the surgical removal of all or part of the bladder—This is done when bladder cancer is invasive. Segmental or partial cystectomy is the removal of part of the bladder. Radical cystectomy is the removal of the entire bladder and nearby lymph nodes. In men, the prostate is usually also removed. In women, the uterus, ovaries, part of the vagina, and the fallopian tubes might also be removed. A form of urinary diversion must be created to store the urine if the bladder is removed.
Radiation Therapy
Radiation Therapy is the use of radiation to kill cancer cells and shrink tumors. Radiation may be:
- External radiation therapy—Radiation is directed at the tumor from a source outside the body.
- Internal radiation therapy—Radioactive materials are placed near the cancer cells in the bladder through the urethra or through an incision in the abdomen.
Chemotherapy is the use of drugs to kill cancer cells. Chemotherapy may be given in many forms, including pill, injection, or via a catheter. The drugs enter the bloodstream and travel through the body killing mostly cancer cells, but also some healthy cells. For bladder cancer, chemotherapy is often given directly into the bladder. This is called intravesical chemotherapy.
Biologic Therapy (Immunotherapy)
Biologic therapy is the use of the body's immune system to fight cancer. Substances made by the body or in a laboratory are given directly into the bladder to help boost, direct, or restore the body's defenses against the cancer. This type of therapy is used only for superficial low-grade cancers that have been resected transurethrally.
The following steps can reduce your risk of getting bladder cancer:
- If you smoke or use tobacco products, talk to your doctor about ways to quit.
- Avoid or minimize occupational exposure to certain chemicals; follow good work safety practices.
- Eat a diet rich in fruits and vegetables.
- Avoid excess intake of high fat or high cholesterol foods.
National Cancer Institute http://www.cancer.gov
Canadian Cancer Society http://www.cancer.ca
Accessed June 11, 2015.
Bladder cancer. Urology Care Foundation website. Available at:
Accessed June 11, 2015.
Torpy JM. Bladder cancer. JAMA. 2005;293(7):890. Available at:
Accessed June 11, 2015.
What you need to know about bladder cancer. National Cancer Institute website. Available at
Accessed June 11, 2015.
7/21/2015 DynaMed Systematic Literature Surveillance
Sun JW, Zhao LG, et al. Obesity and risk of bladder cancer: a dose-response meta-analysis of 15 cohort studies. PLoS One. 2015 Mar 24;10(3).
Last Updated: 7/21/2015


text:
Just a dash of Latino flavor accents Fusion TV's debut
Last year, Univision and ABC set out to create the first English-language cable network custom-made for young Hispanics. Somewhere along the way, they changed their minds.
When Fusion debuts Monday evening from its new studios in Doral, the channel run by the leader in Latin media will be targeting a much broader audience: adults under 35 of all ethnic backgrounds.
"They initially started as the network for millennial Hispanics," said Yannis Pappas, the Brooklyn comedian from a Greek family who will be one of Fusion's morning show hosts. "Now it's all millennials. And we're winking at Hispanics."
Fusion's shift offers a look at the challenges in pursuing Hispanic consumers, perhaps the hottest target in marketing today. The network scrapped the initial Latin identity after focus groups showed young Hispanics were put off by the idea of a television channel centered on their ethnicity, said Isaac Lee, head of news at Univision and CEO of Fusion.
"We found out that Hispanic millennials do not want to be ghettoized. They don't want content that only speaks to them," said Lee, 42, who ran Poder magazine before joining Univision in 2010. "The only way to reach them is to provide fantastic content, and to include them."
That realization helps explain Fusion's grab-bag of programming, which will go out live at 6:57 p.m. with Univision anchor Jorge Ramos' first English-language news show.
But if Ramos represents an obvious choice for Univision's original concept, the rest of the line-up captures Fusion's unconventional approach to news and talk: an animated satire show, comedians taking on sports, a puppet talk show, and an evening program on sex and politics. Fusion hired the former head writer from The Daily Show with Jon Stewart to produce a comedy block from Fusion's Los Angeles operation.
Fusion's broader demographic makes for complicated marketing, since Lee and others say young Hispanics remain their primary target. "Imagine if you are doing archery," Lee said. "The bull's-eye, the red dot, is still an Hispanic. But the whole target is not just the red dot."
Even if the original Latin approach by Univision didn't prove viable, the broader focus offers an intriguing prospect for the Miami area. While an English-language channel for Hispanics would further the city's reputation as the center of Latin media, a network pursing millennials puts Miami on the forefront of a closely watched front in the broadcasting wars.
Pivot TV launched in August to pursue millennials, with Sen. John McCain's twenty-something daughter, Meghan, hosting a talk show, and indie favorite Joseph Gordon-Levitt contributing his interactive film project, HitRECord. Sean Combs debuted his all-music network, Revolt, earlier this month in the hope of being the new MTV for the millennial generation.
Fusion's rollout is moving relatively slowly, with executives saying it will be available in about 20 million homes Monday night.
That's about half the size of Pivot at its debut and far less than the 45 million homes available to Al Jazeera when it launched its U.S. network in August. Fusion's initial reach will be small enough that it will not receive Nielsen ratings, the network said. Cable giants Comcast (which owns Univision rival Telemundo) and Time Warner haven't signed on to carry Fusion, meaning large areas of South Florida won't be able to see the network when it launches.
Fusion expects to triple its reach within three years, and it has the promotional muscle of ABC to help.
Last week, Fusion host Alicia Menendez co-hosted ABC's The View, and on Monday both Good Morning America and Univision's Despierta America (filmed in Univision's original Doral studios) will simulcast each other's programming to promote the Fusion launch. Ramos joined George Stephanopoulos on This Week Sunday to promote Fusion's launch.
ABC is also airing promos of Fusion's mascot (a giant fuzzy F) being mock-interviewed by GMA anchors, including Robin Roberts and Josh Elliott. Jim Avila, an ABC reporter who was also named Fusion's White House correspondent, will interview President Barack Obama on Monday for a segment airing on Ramos' show, Fusion announced Sunday.
In the division of labor, ABC has responsibility for selling Fusion to cable providers and to advertisers. ABC's parent company, Disney, has a portfolio of channels that could fold in Fusion as those contracts come up for renewal.
Lee said Disney views Fusion as following the same path as ESPN in the 1980s: a new network bound to have a slow start, but one with significant profit potential once it finds an audience and a stride.
In creating its lineup, Fusion made its most high-profile hires in the comedy field, including former Daily Show chief David Javerbaum and Billy Kimball, who once wrote for The Simpsons. The Jim Henson Company is partnering with an animation shop behind Comedy Central's popular Robot Chicken shorts for a half hour of "topical satire" using stop-gap cartoons.. The Harvard Sailing Team comedy troupe will host a 30-minute program called Sports Talkers, while the show No, You Shut Up features a home host discussing the news with a panel of puppets.
Executives point to Stewart's following as proof of millennials' affinity for comedic news. And while Fusion also has a documentary team and Pappas will be joined in the morning by Brazilian journalist Pedro Andrade and Univision correspondent Mariana Atencio, Kimball said the network wants humor infused in as much of the news programming as possible.
"That's how you add value to news," said Kimball, the chief programming executive for Fusion in Doral. "You're giving people not just the information, but you're giving some perspective, too."
Still, Comedy Central devotes just one hour of original programming a night to current events. And humor can be a challenge in television news. Fox News gave up on its version of The Daily Show ( The½ Hour News Hour) after six months, and comedian D.L. Hughley lasted about that long on CNN after what one media critic called "a show featuring painfully awkward interviews."
"It will be interesting to see if ABC and Univision get it right," said Morley Winograd, co-author of the book Millennial Makeover. "That ability to use humor to break through pretense is why it might actually work for them."
The stakes are high in the Miami area, long the U.S. capital of Spanish-language media.
Univision secured about $11 million in tax credits and cash from Florida and Miami-Dade County for its Fusion headquarters, which shares space with the Spanish-language network's news division. To secure the incentives, Univision and Fusion committed to investing an additional $247 million in the venture.
Univision has not disclosed a construction expense for the "Newsport," but in a conference call with analysts Thursday, the company said the tax credits alone wiped out the cost of building it. Univision pledged to eventually create about 350 jobs with the new facility (Fusion currently employs about 200), and will receive cash subsidies once the added payroll slots are confirmed.
Soundproofed to keep out the roar of jets from the Miami International Airport flight pattern above, the complex has a two-story newsroom with open ceilings. Spanning 150,000 square feet, it may be the largest in television news, Fusion executives said. A matrix of adjustable light panels and glass-walled meeting rooms overlooks the desks below, with Univision on one side and Fusion on the other. .
On a recent afternoon, Fusion news editor Maritza Puello broke into an impromptu dance with a Univision assignment editor when J Alvarez's La Pregunta began playing loudly from her computer.
Later Puello, who came from a New York television station, explained Fusion's audience: "It's your diverse, inclusive America," she said. "It has what we'll call a little Hispanic seasoning. We'll call it the flavor."
Menéndez, a popular online host for huffingtonpost.com whom Fusion hired to anchor a lifestyle show, said she appreciated Fusion's broadening its marketing approach beyond customized content for Hispanics. She recalls her annoyance at Latin-themed women's magazines peppering English headlines with Spanish words — like "what does your abuela think about your novio?"
"That drives me crazy," she said. "They are singling me out."
With its Monday launch, Fusion will test whether it can master the balancing act of pursuing Hispanic viewers without targeting them directly. With about 20 percent of the millennial audience Hispanic, Lee said a broad young-person approach will inevitably snag the fast-growing Hispanic demographic that Univision already dominates with its Spanish-language programming.
The strategy has promise, but may be too reliant on an interest in news and lifestyle programming from a demographic more inclined to entertainment, said Scott Hess, a vice president at the Spark media firm who is finishing up a research study titled The Five Faces of Millennials on how the under-35 generation consumes media.
"I question the programming mix," Hess said, noting Ramos' starring role and the heavy presence of current-events discussion. "I think that kind of viewing is what you watch when you're 30 to 35. I'm not sure there are enough millennials there yet."
But Hess added that while he sees a risk for failure, he also predicts a huge payoff if Fusion gets it right. "They're reading the insight correctly, and they're taking a chance on it," he said. "I like that a lot."
Ramos, who at 55 will be Fusion's senior on-air personality, said he sees Fusion as Miami's latest contribution the Latin crossover movement.
"It started with music with Gloria and Emilio," he said of the Miami-based Estefans. Then politics, with Florida Sen. Marco Rubio and the Castro brothers of Texas all eyed as up-and-coming national players. "Now it's happening in the media."
After correctly introducing millennial expert Scott Hess, an earlier version of this story misspelled "Hess" in subsequent references. This version was corrected to fix the error.


text:
After looking for a used car for three weeks, i finally found one listed on cars.com and Joseph answered the phone and stayed late that day just to show us the car. He picks excellent condition vehicles and prices them very competitively. The customer service is wonderful. He kept communicating with us during the buying process. No run around, no hassle. I would buy form him again. Thank you, joseph, and Carzone Motors.
Had a very positive experience with Car Zone Motors. The staff was very professional and with high integrity, the advertisement had great deal of detail, there were no hidden surprises. I felt very comfortable, I usually do not write reviews, my experience was so positive that I had to write a review. I will be going back for another car. I found my dealer
The employees at Car Zone Motors were very nice and professional; the repairs were quality and I was always able to get in and out of happy. Being in High school, this was my first car, and the workers here made it a great first experience.
by GOOD DIVA from Houston, TX | December 10, 2011
I have purchased seven cars, since I have been driving. This was my BEST used car purchase experience! I was highly impressed with the saleman's knowledge of the Lexus RX 330 and his willingness to assist me after the purchase. This dealer provided customer service above and beyond my expectations!
December 14, 2011
They were extremely helpful throughout the whole process
Called Joseph about a 08 Honda Pilot the 1st day it was listed, the price seemed to good to be true, came by to test drive it and the vehicle was in perfect condition. While I secured financing, Joseph not only held the vehicle for me but replaced 2 tires, air filter, changed the oil, and filled up the tank. This was all unnecessary since I was already willing to buy it as is. The vehicle is working out great for my family and I'll definitely check out Car Zone Motors inventory on my next purchase.
Joseph is a great person to deal with.
Honest and upfront. Love my Lexus I bought from him and will call when I need my next car
If you are looking for a good deal, you have to come here, great people, great service, I got my car here and I'm so happy. Thanks for everything Joseph, definitely I'll be back to shop here
Dilmurod A
Dilmurod A
10 months ago
I bought BMW 550i from Joseph. Extremely Happy with his honesty and deal he gave me. Trustworthy dealer.
We bought a Mazda RX8 from Joseph, he was incredible to work with, customer oriented went out of his way to make sure we got exactly what we wanted. He is honest and such a pleasure to deal with. I would buy another car from him and highly recommend his dealership.