dynamic

Linked Glossary of Terms
(references to De Wijsbegeerte der Wetsidee, unless indicated. See concordance for correlation with pages in the New Critique. The concordance is in pdf format.)

dynamic NC I, 32 (the central sphere of human existence is dynamic)

“Van Peursen’s Critische Vragen bij “A New Critique of Theoretical Thought,” Philosophia Reformata 25 (1960, 97-150, at 137 (‘supratemporal’ is not intended to refer to a static situation).Pages 106-107: Even temporal states of affairs are dynamic.

(fliessenden)

The opposite of static.

Even states of affairs have a dynamic meaning character: they refer outside and above themselves to the universal meaning ocherence in time, the creaaturely root-unity, and the supra-creaturely unity and Origin of all meaning. And this referring expressees itself in the inner structure of these very states of affairs:

Ook in de tijdelijke orde gegeven “standen van zaken” zijn dus van dynamisch zinkaraker, d.w.z. zijj wijzen buiten en boven zich zelve uit naar de universele zin-samenhang in de tijd, de creatuurlijke wortel-eenheid, en de boven-creatuurlijke Oorspongseenheid van alle zin, een heenwijzing die zich in hun innerlijke structuur zelve uitdruikt. Maar deze zin-dynamiek beweegt zich binnen het onoverschrijdbare kader van een door God gestelde orde. Zij heft niet de relatieve bepaaldheid van de in deze orde gegronde standen van zaken op, maar legt slechts de betrekkelijkheid van deze bepaaldheid bloot, zodat iedere verzelfstandiging van een gegeven stand van zeken, onherroepelijk tot een fundamentele misvatting daarvan voert.

Thus, the “states of affairs” given in the temporal order also have a dynamic meaning character. That is to say, they refer outside and above themselves to the universal temporal coherence of meaning, to the creaturely [supratemporal] root-unity, and to the supra-creaturely [etenral] unity of the Origin of all meaning–a referring which expresses itself in their own inner structure. But this meaning-dynamic moves within the fraemwork of God’s set order, an order that cannot be trasngressed. It does not remove the limited nature of the states of affairs that are grounded in this order, but only lays bare the relativity of this limitation, so that every attempt to absolutize a given state of affairs leads irrevocably to a fundamental misunderstanding of them.(“Van Peursen’s Critische Vragen bij “A New Critique of Theoretical Thought,” Philosophia Reformata 25 (1960, 97-150, at 106-107)

The static is rigid, the dynamic is flowing.

Baader wrote about the difference between static and dynamic in “Über Starres und Fliessendes.” Philosophische Schriften, 113. The rigid shows continuity but no penetrating [eindringende] power. The flowing shows a penetrating power,but no continuity.

We can compare this to Dooyeweerd’s view of enstasis as an experience of the continuity of cosmic time. Theory, which breaks this continuity apart by dis-stasis, has a penetrating power.

Baader says that the static view of eternity is a mistake caused by our abstraction, which views rest (Ruhe) as static and lifeless (Elementarbegriffe 535). Rather, eternity should be seen as always resting in its movement and always moving in its Rest, as always new and always the same. He cites St. Martin

In der göttlichen Region ist die Hervorbringung immer gewesen, die Erhaltung ist immer, und die Widereinung (Reintegration) wird immer sein.

[In the divine region, the generation has always been, the preservation is always, and the reunification (reintegration) will always be].

This dynamic view of eternity is also found in maximus the Confessor, who speaks of “ever-moving rest and steadfast movement at the same time” Quaestiones ad Thalassium 65; Mystagogia 5, 19 (cited in Hans Urs von Balthasar: Cosmic Liturgy: The Universe According to Maximus the Confessor (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2003).

Revised Jan 29/08; Dec 24/16