Amazon.com Widgets

Jules van Schaijik

Joined: Aug. 5, 2011

Bio:

Happily married to Katie for over 22 years; father of 5 wonderful children; and father in law to one more. (And much more handsome than the picture makes it seem.) I was born and raised in the Netherlands. Went to college in Steubenville, OH, and have been moving between Europe and America ever since. For studies, work, etc. Right now, we are happily ensconced in West Chester, PA, where the town is lively, the surroundings beautiful, the friends friendly, and the cycling club very active. I’m looking forward to many fun and fruitful conversations about things that matter.


Most recent posts by Jules van Schaijik:     (See all of them)


The unity of objectivity and subjectivity in emotion

Sep. 20 at 5:50am | Comments: 13 | Most recent comment: Sep. 22 at 8:45pm

Central to Dietrich von Hildebrand's philosophy of the heart is the idea of "intentionality" or object-directedness. Emotions, he holds, are not just subjective psychological experiences, but meaningful responses—to persons, events or situations. That is why they can be appropriate or inappropriate, reasonable or unreasonable. Like thoughts, emotions have an objective measure, a standard to which they can and should conform. Introduced to this idea of “intentionality” by von Hildebrand more than 25 years ago, I've always associated...

Austen on the need to investigate our feelings

Jul. 31 at 12:45pm | Comments: 3 | Most recent comment: Aug. 1 at 8:38am

I finished Deresiewicz’ delightful book A Jane Austen Education, which I first mentioned a few days ago. Before putting it back on the shelf, I want to mention another of its insights—one that tracks closely with what I have learned from von Hildebrand about the heart as "the real self" (see his The Heart, chapter 8). It has to do with the need to investigate our feelings. For Jane Austen the most obvious responsibility we have...

The moral seriousness of Miss Bates

Jul. 25 at 1:37pm | Comments: 2 | Most recent comment: Jul. 25 at 9:56pm

I picked up A Jane Austen Education by William Deresiewicz yesterday, and already learned something new. It has to do with the extremely talkative Miss Bates, from Emma. Miss Bates has always struck me as pitiable and ridiculous, a character thrown into the novel largely for comic effect. But Deresiewicz has a different angle. He argues that Miss Bates lives "the novel's highest lesson of all": that it is the little things of everyday—the sorts of things talked...

Kierkegaard turns 200

May. 8 at 8:52pm | Comments: 0

I was just reminded by an advertisement (a bookseller), that Søren Kierkegaard turned 200 last Sunday. That is something I don't want to let pass unnoticed. But I have only a few minutes at my disposal. So I will just leave you with soem passages from one of Kierkegaard's early journals. In these he expresses his longing, indeed, his need, "to find a truth which is truth for me, to find the idea for which I am willing...

On the Pseudo-Obvious

Mar. 11 at 5:21pm | Comments: 2 | Most recent comment: Mar. 12 at 11:15am

Today Alice von Hildebrand, widow of Dietrich von Hildebrand and philosopher in her own right, turns 90 years old.  In honor of the occasion, we asked her permission to republish an article of hers that we first came across about 25 years ago.  It's influenced our thinking ever since.   ON THE PSEUDO-OBVIOUS — by Alice von Hildebrand Introducing pseudo-obviousness It is no rare occurrence in the history of philosophy that a thesis which is neither proven nor evident has...


Latest comments by Jules van Schaijik:     (See all of them)


Re: The unity of objectivity and subjectivity in emotion

Sep. 20 at 4:20pm | see this comment in context

Thanks Carole. I agree with you about John Paul II. He is very aware, it seems to me, of a specifically modern type of resistance to the very idea of God, which argues that a flourishing personal existence is impossible under the constant presence of an all-seeing and all-caring Being. God, in this frame of mind, is experienced as the biggest and most insufferable "Big Brother" imaginable.

It is important to show that this image of God, and of our relationship with him, is not true. God is all-powerful and all-seeing. But he does not have a "heavy hand".

Re: The unity of objectivity and subjectivity in emotion

Sep. 20 at 4:03pm | see this comment in context

Thanks Katie. What you say makes me want to add that while, as I say in my post, von Hildebrand does not develop the personal persective side of the emotions very much, he does have a lot to say about the heart being in some sense the real self of the person. He corroborates philosophically what Alice Miller claims: that to suppress or stifle the emotions, is to do real damage to a person.

--

Kate Whittaker Cousino, Sep. 20 at 10:04am

…our emotions should actually be increasingly trustworthy guides as we come into right relationship with truth and with others. 

Exactly so, Kate. Emotions, if rightly developed, are often quicker and more sensitive than reason. The emotion of sexual shame is a good example. Wojtyla, as I'm sure you know, thinks "there is a need to to develop sexual shame by education." "In shame," he writes, "resides the genuine moral strength of the person" and "only a true and genuine shame insists upon a true and fully valid love."

Re: The Trouble with Hagiography

Sep. 20 at 1:57pm | see this comment in context

Amen!  And well said.  I couldn't agree more Devra.

Re: "Boxing" Others

Feb. 28 at 1:28am | see this comment in context

The distinction between "reading" and "boxing" also sheds light on the discussion between you and Katie about the legitimacy of confiding in others.  Part of the reason for confiding is to test and adjust one's own read of persons and situations.  But this confiding turns into mere gossip or venting as soon as it becomes a mere matter of spreading my negative read to others and infecting the larger community with it.

Re: "Boxing" Others

Feb. 28 at 1:25am | see this comment in context

Thanks for this insightful post, Marie.  Katie has been telling me to read it ever since it went up, but, knowing it required my full attention, I didn't get to it until yesterday.  Very challenging stuff indeed!  More a matter for self-examination than for further discussion.  (Like some of Kierkegaard's writings.)  I especially appreciate the way you bring out the motives of pain-avoidance and control, and also your explanation of how boxing others impinges on their inner freedom.  I have never heard that point mentioned in connection with this issue.

I also think the word "boxing" well chosen.  It is much more descriptive and less ambiguous than "judging".  Perhaps it would also help to distinguish more clearly between "having a read" and "boxing".  The former is both natural and helpful.  It is only when a "read" turns into a "box" that it becomes a problem.  That's when it becomes incorrigible, i.e. stops being responsive to the ever-unfolding truth and reality of the other.  That's also when it freezes the other in time and goes against hope and charity.

Stay informed

Latest comments

  • Re: The unity of objectivity and subjectivity in emotion
  • By: Peter Alexander
  • Re: The unity of objectivity and subjectivity in emotion
  • By: Peter Alexander
  • Re: The unity of objectivity and subjectivity in emotion
  • By: Peter Alexander
  • Re: The unity of objectivity and subjectivity in emotion
  • By: Peter Alexander
  • Re: The unity of objectivity and subjectivity in emotion
  • By: Peter Alexander
  • Re: The unity of objectivity and subjectivity in emotion
  • By: Peter Alexander
  • Re: The unity of objectivity and subjectivity in emotion
  • By: Peter Alexander
  • Re: The unity of objectivity and subjectivity in emotion
  • By: Katie van Schaijik
  • Re: The unity of objectivity and subjectivity in emotion
  • By: Jules van Schaijik
  • Re: The unity of objectivity and subjectivity in emotion
  • By: Jules van Schaijik

Latest active posts

Reading circles

Lectures