Kierkegaard in 90 Minutes (Philosophers in 90 Minutes)

Table ofCantents

CNLY/N

.suB Jtcrtvrr?/.t ALL DECIS IV6Nf SS IIVHERES IN S U Bf , E C T I V] T ?

THERE DEcISION, To SeeK

oEJEcnvry/s To Br ttv 6RRa,t

KIERKEGAARD (1813-1O55) livedonlyfofty-two yearz,Yefin hie ehoft life,he wrohemorethan lw entry-five booke, AfLer his dealh,hieworke olippedinNoobecuriiy.

'u#rrf:

h a I l(-/

ry izedEuro?ean Nhinkinqand frhe LhaT,

w2?

,,,8U7T}IEYTAR,N OUTTO8E AEOUT YOUANDME TOO,

t--

--.l

Y

sla(V our eNorybYralking J/eI'e J a6our,goren'efahher,Michael, TEDEK9EN MICHAEL (1756-1838)had KlEKKEGAARD in eVenIhieyoutrhin dire povefi,Y windsweploanddune Denmark's counf,ryof NorfhernJutrland,where in his childieh aNonemomenV deoVairwhiletendinq eheepouf, on bhe barcen healhlandhe had raieed hie lifi,lefiel lo heaven and had cureedGod, a major ein in NheLufheran Tief,iemin which he had beenraised.

As a younqman he had and comelo Copenhaqen Varlayeda emalloavinq inlo a sizeablewealf,'h, ot eepinghimeelfin booke and makinqerna(Vsocial connecf,iong.

I

t

d

@

CUDJ

HNMEL

---=>

( s

SOIVIEftMES 8EAT WOUID WHEN SqREN THETABTE EOY, WAS A SIITATI

lf aren Kierkeqaardwao born in C o p e n h a g eonn M a y O , 1 B 1 Zf,, h e lasL of eevenchildren.Hie mother, Anne Lund Kierke4aard, was his old fathels aecondwife and had beenT,hemaid of T,hefiraL Mre, Kierkegaardduringthe periodof h e rf i n a l i l l n e s E ,

rLl a ,"ItlIfE

- j a -

- ttv(, ;-

tf(

t

\ Frz.^?tc, \

\-.

- L t

t

J/n

a cerlain senee,younq goren wae eacrificedon

or he almoqLwa6, lhe alf,arof hiafaNher'sreliqioeiNy, luoL a6 youngloaacof the Diblicaletory waealmoeL sacrificedon hiofahher'laYar, qaardwaefaecithat Kierke lL ie no merecoincidence nafued by the olory of Abrahamand lsaacall hia life. ThieeNory,taken as a melaphor,illuminaNes muchof Kierkeqaard'eadulr'behavior'

IIE EELIEVEO FOR,EXAMPLE, IIAD TIIAT}IIS "NOR,MALITY" ONA RELISEENSACRIFICED

llls sPEclFlcMlsGl0us ALTAR. A RELIOI OUS SI ON_a,ASI CALLY }IIM FNOM ONE_PS,EVENTED IT PEOPLE. SEINGLIREOTIIER MARRIAGE,PAR,ENTPR,ECLUDED FAMILYLIFE,ANOA IIOOO, CAR,EER,,

.--{

J

tt)

his morbidobseosion,MichaelrecoTnizedhis <eovihe oon'oqeniuoand Lriedto nurlureit, Even thoughMichaelwas self-educa1ed, he ... ANDTH€NTH€ wae veryknowledgeable, and he took sA1D... ErsHoP . muchof younqgoren'e inetrucilion inlo his ownhande. He wouldhaveIhe boyeaveedropon his dinnerpalbiee wilh Lheelite of Copenhaqen, and afterward he wouldmakeesren siL in the emptychairof eachqueotand set forXh Ihe ar7umenf,whichlha| dur?eroonhad eo?oueed ingLhedinner.

%

nNDarnnrbfanr? gHH, THEEtrret rcwfti tnP_osstgLe. tr nlsry,T

fr.t

ButLritr. ,,

He wouldteach gorenqeoqraphyW t akinghiehandand otrollinqthrouqhIhe liviny roomwith himVretendinq iL waea foreiqncounhryand makinghimnamefamoue eighNo NhaN Lheywould"oee,,in thal country,gsrenwaoeent, to LatinSchoolwilh inslrucLionefrom hiefather to brinq homethe third best grade.

LtfrLEs,?Ell's "TRAllllllolll fiHE NAMEOF CIIS,ISil1,AIIITI'

800R$WN 0il8 0Flils LATET flAnsflAilow0a0 nilsE TflE 0F CllllD?slcil0uEVESROWS

%r^r,herwoutd ehowthe litLleboycolfrom a oredilluetraf,ione ehackof cardedepiclridinqon ingf amouopeopleand evento, euchae Napoleon shoolin7an aVVlefrom his son's hie eteed,or WitliamTell Whoie lhal? WhaNdid he head,Sorenwouldaek queef,ione: do?Thenfrom lhe middleof Lhe Vile)oren'efather ?roduceea pictureof Jesuson the cro56,Theboyaeks,"Who it? WhaNdid he do?Tellme,. ,. Whywerepeopleso badNo him?"Thefalher telle hie oon, "Thisis the gaviourol the world, He wae killedby thoee whomhe wouldsave."Yearelaf,er wrof'e,"Ao a childI Kierkeqaard waost ernlyand oeriouoly up in ChrieNianity. brouqht, il waea epeakinq, Humanly crazyupbrinqingi'

ASA Ctllto LlAo AnEADv ATIOIOMAN, 8EE'YMAOEIITTO

^/-.4 lftf

a

lrom his mor' liberaued -Z*ialty bid VaeL,oneof the fireNlhingo did waefall in loveand Kierkeqaard VoeN7eoplewho becomeenqaged. readabouf'his romancewilh hie fiancbe,ReqinaOlsen,do noNlikelhe way he comVorled himeelfwilh her.He meNher when he wao NwentYone and she wae fou(Deen,lhaf,

is Eo oay,threeyearebetorehe could7roVerly court,her.He oVenlI'hoeeNhreeyeare well,inqralialinghimeelfwif'hherf amity, aboul her he findingouI everyft'hing f,o could,placinghimselfin a Vooit'ion influenceher aeslhebicf,asf'e,and Frit'z her boyfriend, evenbefriendinq of confiuoinghio poeitrion Schlegel, denceto undermine ?oorFriLz,

6tpr

c)

,/'t

./t

t

Wn

elory, ficNional ln hie peeudonymouo "Diaryof a geducerl'Kierkeqaard t'ells of the eeductionof a younqwomanby a manwhostudieshereveryqeolure. Thereaderol f,heef,oryrealizesNhaI of the f,hewomanie doomedbecauee totalibyof the eeducer'e Vlan.Similarly, of Ihoee whoknowNheNhorouqhneee NowinKeqina Kierkegaard's VloT,linq feelf,haLshe,Loo,was enaredbefore she hada chancelo react.)ure whenKeqinalurned sevenleen, enouqh, gsrenwooedherand wonher.The {) enqaqemenL parLylook Vlace,andlhe wae published. announcemenf,

ryil,ffi, r')

ber of the bourgeoieeetabliehment, whensuddenlyfor no reaeonhe shared

with anyoneelee,he brokethe enqaqement,ln hiediaryhewrotethat he had doneeo becauee"God had veloedT,he marriage!'Keginawaoheai1broken and beqqedhimIo retrurnto her,Herfather humiliatedhimselfpleadinqKeqina,6caoe. Kierkeqaardwae inLractableand cold. He

allowedhimeelfro be eeenfrolickinqin queetionableneighborhoode of CoVenhaqen. ThenhedieaVVeared from Denmark and eneakedoff to Derlin, whereheenrolledat Ihe Univereily in a coureeon Hegelian VhiloeoVhy underthe prominen| Trofeesorg chellinq,and wherehieclaeematreo included noneother than Friedrich Enqelo, LudwiqFeuerbach and MichaelDukunin-eachof whomwould larerexerr,a Vowertul influence on European Ehouqht,

rw-ro

Afuertrheterminationof lhe academicquaraexhe reNurned T,o copenhaqen,bur whenhef,hought, he eaw Keginanodal himin church,hefledt'o Derlinaqain.Whilein Derlinqhieeecondtime he wroteoneof hiegreateetrbooke,Fearand rremblinq.hiebook abouVAbrahamand leaac,and iL contrained a eecreLmeesaqe for Keqina.

Kierkeqaard wrole in hiediarythaL by Moreover, for Nhebreak,hewould aesuminqreo?onoibility wnenhe returned freeReginaLo loveagain.Yet, from frerlinand diecovered hhat shewa6 enqaryed Kierkegaard was T"oFriEzSchleqel, beeidehimselfwithjealoueyand a senseof loee.Somelime laf,erhe wrote in his journal, (Regino morried

''IF I HAD FAITH,I WOULD HAVER,EMAINED WITH

who wos Schlegel, modegouernorof the DonishVirgin l s l o n d sH. e o n d Reginohod o good life there.Butofter Schlegel's deqth, Reginomodeit cleorthqtshestill lovedihe now longdeod Kierkegoord.)

He went to hie grave still love-sick.

tl

It, seems that,Kierkegaardhad only three oignificant human relationohipothat had a major inrpaat on his life: one wif,hhie faf,her,

onewith KeqinaOleen,

journalthat Vurpoftedf,o Thiewaoa vulqareaLirical eerveliberalpoliLical the hauLe-bourcaueeeby mocking qeoioieof CoVenhaqen, ln facf,,iNwaeaNleaet,ae much for Ihe qooeiV-monqering of a lilllalinq Veep-ohow voyeureand would-be imit at ors of trheu??er-middle claseIhaf,lhe newo?a?er ?arodied,

z

sw

barbs. exceol eoren Kierkeqaard,whom he greally admired. Igl 6a,

"l14rn

oneof Kierkeaaard'e bookewae

reviewed favorablyin TheCorsair. Kierkeqaardwrole a earcaelic leLLerto tn6NT A Cotn?Lt Lhe ediLor,sayinglhal beinq FRoin VOU,MY D6AR t TheCoreair wa6 a SlR, rS AN 11115uLT o r i n e u l La, n d t h a t wouldmuchmore ofer Lo havehie tk aLLacked, which wouldbe LanLamountLo a c o m p l i m e nT Lh , eh u m i l i a L e d O o l d e c h m i d Lb e q a na dailyaLlack on ?oor Kierke4aard, whichwae relentleeeand devaef,aLina.

fry t"hen . Kierke4aard's weak epinehadgivenhim aLooVedVoat,ure and hieekinnyle6e with auffEthat were too hiqhto be etylieh madehiman eaEyt ar6et for f,he caricaturistr's ?en.

He becamea lauqhinq elock throuqhoul Denmarkand wae eneeredaf, by LheqenLeel folk and ineulledby etreel urchineand loute wherever he wenL, GoldechmidL becameaehamedof himeelf,but the mockeryhe beqan laeted longafler TheCoreair folded, Kierkegaardtried Lo ?uLa braveface on it, but the "Coreair affair" wae eurely lhe oecond-moeL ?ainfulevenLin hie life. 14

A_-,n hie laeNyeare,Kierkegaard abandonedh i e "indirecLcommunication" and athackedthe official DanishLutheran Churchin a moel direc| manner,furIh er alienat,inqwhaar, fewtriendeand eu?Vorberehe had,

Accordinqto Kierkeqaard, Vrimitive ChrieLianity had beena eViritualrevoluf,ion Lhat had challenqed the etatue quoand had thereforebeenan offenee lo all complacency. buI Lhe contem?orary Churchwas hhe veryeymbolof eelf-eaf,iefied bourgeois smu7neee, so he criticizedit relenhleeely aN everyoccasion, He calledwhat the Churchwas preachinq "lemonade twaddle."He eventuallyVr:intrd and Vaoeed ?amphleteat, hie ownex?enee NhemouNLheway reliqioue zealoLeoften r/V do in the eLreeLsof our ownciiliee, (The?amphletre, however, were much morearbiculate Ihan trhoseof t oday,e typicalreligioue ?amphleteer,and all the wordewere epelledcorcectly!)

*vN

'o _i;;

Hereare oomeshorl exam?les: WORID AI,II,EN, AIIyIEN, AEMCADAERA! END, ATT HONOR TO WITHOW AII4IEN! OF THEPRIESTS!..., THISIS THESECRET

IIW OFFOFNOTHNE. ONE CANNOT ESPECIATTY SOOFTEN, THISONEHEARS THE ANDPRECISEIY FROM PRIESTS..., PERFORI,I THISTRICK CHRISPRIESTS DOES NOTEXIST_YET TIANITY ACTUATTY THEY TIWOFFOFIT

THISHAST0BESAID;S0BElT NOWSAID. IN OTHER ART, WHATEWR WHOEWR,THOU 8YCEAS. FRIEND, 8EI,/IY THYIIFEI,/IAY RESPECTS OF WORSHIP IN THEPWTIC PART INOTOTAKE IT IS EOD, ASITNOWISWITHTHECUIMTHAT THOU OFTHENEWTESTAIITEM), THECHHfiNANffY AI,TD THAT ONEEUU THEIESS, HAST CONSTANTTY PART lN D0fr N0TTAKE A flREAT hNE:TH0U ASA FOOL, COD TREAflNE

Erkeqaard was paseionaT,ely involvedin thie polemicwhen,on )cT,ober 2, 1b55, he fell to Lhe sLreeN?aratyzed.A manth and a hall laLerhe wae dead.Therewao a n e a r r i o t ,a t , h i s f u n e r a l ,a e a n u m b e ro f an7ry thealoqy effudenf,saL Lhe univeraiLy wereoubraqedaf, Lhe way Lhe ChurchLried lo t ake over in deaLhthe man who had oppooed il so bifferly with hie IasL breath,

I Z*t-4

. -=---

--*-+7

Ae had wanf,edlo havewriLLenon hie tomb-

sLone ui*?tYiwbt If nbibtbus[,,, b u t i n e L e a dh i Eo t r o n er e a d a ,

" $frrpn Adhye Tkterhpqs$rb Tf.ntutbe ltb of ffilay, tgt3

@rebttsetttll 0f ^#obember 19b5." At leaet the laet na(neie aVVroVriate. ln DaniehiL meano"qraveyard." 17

6v t.|^^t.^^lard'efinal

lLt

tf,,4ar KaEa

i l l n e e oc o i n c i d e d wilh L h e m o m e n Lt h a L h e Lhe had exhaueT,ed l a e l o f h i ed e a d father'e money, K i e r k e q a a rn de v e r r e a l l yh e l dd o w na l o b i n h i e l i f e ,b u L p e r h a ? ow e c a n c a l l h i ma p r o f e e o i o n a l wrif,er,le geemgLo h a v eo g e n LL h e q r e a L e E l p a r Lo f h i e w a k i n ql i f ea L h i e wrif,inq d e e k ,a n d h e c e r t a i n ' ly Vroduced a l a r q en u m b e r o f b o o k ei n L h e f e wy e a r e lhaL helived. (lowever,iL'O l u c k yh i ef a L h e r l e f Lh i m a l a r q e eum Lo liveoff of, b e c a u e eh i e b c o k e werenol exaclly beeL eel\ero.)

20

ullAut

AidKierkeqaard wrire abour?

About a cerLainkind of TRUTHLhal he c a l l e d" e u b l e c l i v eL r u l h " o r " e x i o L e n l i a l LruLh,T " h i eL r u L hi E ,a c c o r d i n gL o o h i m , l h e m o e l i m ? o r f a n t k i n do f l r u f h , b u t u n f o r L u naLelyit cannol be comrnunicateddireclly. l l i e c o m p o e e do f d e e pi n e i q h L eo r r e v e l a L i o n oo r c h o i c e ea b o u La n i n d i v i d u a l 'lei f e , and lhey are different in Nhecaee of each i n d i v i d u aK l , i e r k e q a a rfdi n d e h i m e e l if n t h e paradoxicalpoeitionof wantinglo write bookeabouLtheee t ruLho-LhaL ie, of w a n t i n ql o c o m m u n i c a l eL h a Nw h i c hc a n noL be cornrnunicaled,Therefore,he develo ? e a n d e m p l o y ea l h e o r y o f i n d i r e c Lc o m municaLion.

\' THAT €VENYTHING

----7

L-

.-==-_^_< =_=T=
a1

%*eqaard

derives

muchof hie ineViration for lhis Iheoryfrom hiefavorite philooopher, old Socralesof

Arhene@69-3993,C) tn hie diecueeions, oelensiblyrecordedby hie dieciVle?laho,eocraNee' form of comje seento be oneof lRONy. munication

},E NAREIISAISEXACTLV W}IAT}IE MEANS, He overslates, understafes, missNaNeo, and mytholoqizee.The claesical Voebicizee, _ !,--,'t-..'t examvleof SocraLee' irony wag his asserrion ''\ of hie own i4norance.

WheninformedthaL the oracle al Delphi(epokeeVereon for

T KuoN NorHtNG'r

lhe gode) had calledSocrates the wjeeel man in Athene,Socralee claimedto be slunned. Howcould he be the wieesNman in Athens if

he knewnothinq?However, u?onconeiderafion, 5 ocraT,ee concludedNhaf,he wae indeedwieer l h a n o l h e r V e o V l eb e c a u o et,h o u q h h e knewnoNhinq, he knewthat he k n e wn o t h i n g ,

AHICHIS A HEITAVA

LoT thoeE THAN Yau K Now

-75l

tL,/aher peoplealeo knewnoNhinq, buNthought they knew somethinq,)ocraf,es'ironicclaimof ignorance wao used,of couroe,to undermine the arcoqantVrehenee lo knowledqe by hio oVVonenNs. Weknowhowdevaetabinqhie ironycouldbe,Dy trhemiddleof oneof Ihe TlaLonic dialoguee, Alcibiadee. Socrateehas reducedoneof hie adversariesT,oT,ears,Alcibiadee aeks, "SOCRATES, WIAT IIAVEVoU

ooltEf0 ME?I ItOuilen, Kn0w w10 I AM.u

Accordinqt o Kierkegaard, 9ocrahe6"approached eachman individually, deprivedhimof everyt h i n g ,a n d s e n l h i m

,_-.eE

awayemVtyhanded,"Whal Socratee gocrateebecamethe trauqhlhad no objectiveconlent,,raNher, neqativeconditionwherebylearnerelearnedsome,r,hinq about lhemselvee. Kierkeqaard wrof,ehie Maefer'otrheeie(really equivalenl Lo our Doctoral dieoer1aNion) on eocraf,eo, and he calledit TheConcept, of lronv. )nce he had received the Master'edegree,he liked

"the M

-froJty."

29

--::7-/D Ltt_-Z

at l,lerkeqaard and Socrateewerenot Lhe o n l yo n e ew h oh a d" maeLeredirony,"3o had lhe Jeoueof r,he SynogLic Goepele yHArS HEAVEN (MatLhew, \r1ark LtkE? and Luke),It, ie nol,eworthyLhaL in the firet three Goepele J e e J e r a r e l ye v e r " L e l l ei L l i k ei l i e , " r a L h e rh e g r e a c h e o u e i n ga n i n d i r e c t form of communica* L i o nt h a t Kierkeqaard LakeeLo be e e e e n L i aaln d notluet incid e n L aL l o hiE L e a c h i n qF, o r exarn?le, wnenever

CRops. NO

RFAl.t?.

B RFAD.

No,,qsA LLy

rRF;mF t_rDDF^/

J e e u e i e-- 7 aeked a b o u LL h e k i n q d o mo f God,he o ? e a k ei n

1]o, REALLY.

F/sff.

FaREET lT.t

?arablee, I n Ma L L h e w 1 3 a l o n e L, h e r ea r e e i x e u c h p a r a b l e e ,

(leaven ie likea farmer VlanLinq cro?e,it ie likeyeaeL in bread,il ie likea Lreaeurehiddenin a field,it ie like a buyerof ?earle,it ie likea fieherman'e net.) 24

in a Jeeueuoeeindirec|communication marvelouo varietyof waye.Not onlydo we eeeiNin the parables

"gftp Ansdana ofheaoen, h, /r%,eq, mffstardY"nd.o buNin Nheharsh oayinqo

1frfr thp deail {r{rtg, tian- deafr', Lhe sarcaem

"fr,ioa*@qrnich e

a a trt(rtl

to entet

ptu-

Sopp arhbea*,rtb)6".ct catne/ to hercs

t/n-Wh tfo, Ue gfu npzdU', in Nhebizarceaclions

thc, ilqfu

f tt ee..':fr,bnu>

[email protected]] and in the poetry

oghp AfuAdol?t, f,q"d

b, to*htngrori'.

KierkegaardimiLateethe methods

of )ocratreeand Jeeuein chooeinq lo communicaf,e indirecllyand ironically,

He doeeeo by wrilinq allof his philoeoVhical works oecref,ly, Vubliehing - , them underVoeudonyfre' and lhen disclaimingall reepoy ' oibilityfor lheir conlenl. n Kierkeq aard emVloy o f ourt,een

I ' / v 1C o N F U S E D . .

----=::_ J

differenl Voeudonymo in hie work,includinq

name6like"VictrorEremita" (VicLorNhe

HermiN),"Johanneode eilenlio"(John Nhe )il ent), " Co nsl a nf,inCo nsf,antritts"

trheConotanl), "Johanneo i, (Conetrantin C l i m a c u o( "J o h nC l i m a xo r J o h nf , h e Ladder), " Anf.i-Climac us" (AnT,iclim ax), "Nicolaue Notabene"(Nicola ue Nofle-well), ' and "HilariusOookbinder," Eachof lhese auf,horshas hie own ?eroonali$y, oIyle, and ouLlookon life.WhenKierkeqaardfinallyadmilLed (what everyoneknewby Nhen)that he was the aulhor of the peeudonymouo works,he claimed:

IN THEPSEUDONYNTOUS WORKS THERE ISI,IOT A flNCE WORD WHICH ISMINE.I HAVE NO OPINION ABOUT THESE WORKS EXCE?T ASA THIRD PERSON, NOKNOWIEDCE OFTHEIR MEANINC EXCEPT ASA READER, NOTTHE PRIVATE REIvIOTESI TOTHEIvI. REUTION

i.,*

1.\'uT[

rr I drcnl ajF.o-ENdfl -rlrott I a\.l(otcr' 1 (cn y'ts[Lrt \rr

,".ri*r*.nR.. l'4 or\qt 5rro

lcryrlu.

"{

lA'\

kilha

da.hv;s {ctte \rtl< 5fu1fr sfrUrch.nnrt la l.6v iru \atcl* sr1 ti\ srn ilratl'd hrd E{at'

el].t Ulli

\

ot I-,fer mooL ecnolarl U,qnore xterKeqaara e d i e c l a i m efro r a l l p r a c t i c a l ?ur?oaee,That,is becauee

hieeliqhrlytwietedehadowfalleacrooeevery?aqeof Lhe

worko,and becauaethey are all parl of hie ?oeudonymouo qrandioseVlanf,o deceivehie readereinto lhe trur,h,LhaNis Lo eay Lo communicaLe a e ubjechive Lr ubh indi recT,ly, ln f acl, Kierkeqaard'e ?eeudonymougworkedon'|,communicate any objecLive Lruthe al all, no| evenany conce\a KaLherlhan beinqknowledqe, Lheyare a n L i - k n o w l e d qTeh, i ei s becauoeknowledge, ae KierkegaardconeLrueeil, ie alwayeabeLracl, and exioNence is alwave concrele,

KIERKECAARD STEALS UNCUA6E FROM KNOWIEDCE TOUSEIT AGAINST KNOWIEDCE,

As Kierkeq aard'o wayward diecipleJean-?aulgarlre oay6,

Kierkeqaard'sworke are form6 o f n o n - k n o w l e d qt hea l m a c queradeae knowledqe at Lhe o a m et i m e t h a t t h e y i n d i c l knowled qe, Kierkeqa a rd'e worde self-desNrucf,beforeour eyeo,

27

Theyhavean Eecherlike qualily, They lead ue nowherebut,back in|,oour own selvee,Sartre oayo LhaT,Kierkegaardueee objecT,ive conceVlo" reqreoeively,eo thal the eelfdeelruclion of fhe lanq u a q en e c e o o a r i l u yn m a e k s the one who uoeo i1,,"For example,the very Nibleof Kierkegaard's bookThe read is a paradox,for accordinglo him,"dread" (or "anxief,y," a o a n o N h etrr a n s l a t i o n h a e lE) ie nof,a concepL,rather it is "lhe non-conceolual foundationof all concepT,e," (lf rhe liret dread,Adam'e dread,and the fireI, ein, \ Adam'ooin,are idenfical,,. as Kierkegaardholds,and if Adam'o ein is Lhat,of disobedienLlyeaLinqthe fru.it,"

o*Y aq"'.'{ ?{,,!y *therlF,a "!:,I' dqe lconceVY aIl knoi,vle trual houghtJie qrounded in dread.)Kierkegaard'e force uo Veeudo-conce?Le away from our own con' cepbe- back inboour own freedom,and inNoour own eubjeclivelruthe,

As 1arDreoayo,"KeadinqKierkeqaard, I climbbackao far ao myoelf.I want, lo catch holdof him,and it is myeelfI calch, This non-conce\ualworkie an invitratrion f,o underetrand myoelfae Lheaourceof all conceVtoi' 29

SCRIP TUR€ . KIERKE-

GnhRDsAYEtuLl . ,.

7k 4

/'-D

a\I

]-

eJ he bookin whichKiarkeqaarddeveloVomosl lruNh" ie Concludinq clearlyNheidea of "eubjecNive ToetecriWLo Lhe Thiloso?hicat UnecienLific Fraqmenle (1846), which hae becomea EorEof ln hhis work,wrilT,enunder Sibleof exiahenf..ialiem. lhe peeudonymof "JohanneoClimacuel'r,,hedieand ?Ub' linction ie drawn betweenOOJECTIVE J E C T I V EL h i n k i n g , 92

{|

)t -/-

o Lhink oblecLivelY ia lo V Lhinkrhe univerEal.OblecNive N h o u q h tc a n o n l Yq r a e pL h a N A whichcan be univeraalized, sentence like,"Thio book ie qreenl'is No be analYzedEo:We ?oinl af' an oblect and caleqorize it, in f'erme of univergalcon' "1ook,"and "Greennee7." ceVtro,

to As in TlaLo'e?hiloeoVhY,

world of parihink the bookie to elevateil from Eheuninlelliqible world of qeneralconcepte.The book'e ticulars to the intelliqible Lhinkinqie alwayo cannoLbe LhouqhL,because Vafr,iculariLy abstracLingLhe generalfrom the Var\icular,Kierkeqaardradicar can be izee YlaLo,lf onlylhaL whichcan be conce?t'ualized Cannol be Nhouqht,becaueeiL ie alwaye lhouqht,Ihen "exieLence" concreNeand neverabeLract', E x i g h e n c ieg a " ; u r d " w h i c h is left' overwhenall analYe i e i E c o r n p l e L el t.r i e f h e u na na l y z a bel r e s i d u ew h i c h is si^?ly "there,"ll ia, eaYO Kierkegaard,likeNhefrog you diecoveraf' the boL' lom of your beer muq afLer you havefiniehedyour beer. The "concapf"'of exiElenco ie a Varadox,whichwe e n c a u n f , eer e Ve c i a l l Yd r a maLicallywhen we f'urn f'o our own exiELence,

55

fll,

EN6INEER, J.M A NUCLEAR

sunnAcun .VVhen I am I GRADUryTED TO SKI, READ IIIG I LAUDE, doneeaying ROSERTBROWNIN;,AND EIRDeveryAhinq that 't
My exielencemuet be lived. It, muet,be exieted.Dut lhinkinqand exiebinq are not,Eheeame (evenif Descartee did eay,"l lhink, lhereforeI am"),ExieIinqie a form of DOING,nol a form of rhinkinq.YeN it is a form of doinq whichmuet be related Lo thoughL. (Unthinkin7 acLionie noV Kierkegaard'o eoluf,ion) The queelionio,whaLis hhe natrureof lhis paradoxical thinkingand-doing which Kierkeqaard advocahes ae his solulionto the Vroblem of exietence?Thekindof

trhouqhlthar ie eseenlially relatedto doinqie what Kierke7a ard calle*gUgJECTIVETH)UGHT,'and Lhie idealeadeLo hie notorious claim:

7R UTH

,s

suEtrECTNtry LeT,'g

examine rla

Tnt6,

Nruf,he.Theee The opVosiNeof eubjecliveNruths are oblecNive are lhe NruNheIhaN can be abetrracted from realiNy,conce?' tualized,and tesled-for examVle,f,helrulhs of science, maNhemaNice, and hiolory. ln each of these caeee lhere are exlernal crileria to whichwe a??ealwhenwe opeoobjechive, tion lhe lrulh of a claim,We can eay lhal individualpeople are in lhe truth if whal they asee(Yie Nrue,Here,Kierkeqaard oaye, the accent, is on fue)lltJALnfr on Yhe HOW. These indifferenL,[hat ie to eay, EruNhs,however, ar7 exieLenLially _--:_:.-=-you diecovered nothingin your life woul,diedl lhaL, one of lhege "lrulhe" wao falge.

(lf newreeearcheelablished LhaLCaeeardid noLcroee lhe Kubiconin 49 D.C,, or thaN "force" doeg no| equal"maoe limes acceleralionl'or even

,rftssl sst??| RI V E R

LhaL Lhere ie eomeLhing $d

fiehy abou| lhe foundaf,ionsof mat hematice, you would noNbehave much differenfly,and you

cerLainlywouldn'L becomea difterenrpereon,)dcfu ull .1

Y'^

!I WHAT

I I

"Subjective NruNhg," on f,heoLherhand,are,,NrL)Lhe,' for which r'hereare no objectivecrireriaro whichonecan a??eal,andyer, for Kierkegaard, rhey arerhe moer,imporLantkind'of truthe,ln Lheircaee,the emvhaeie ie on rhe How ratherrhan on the WHAT.Theeeare exisLential jn T,hatrheyare eeoentially Lruf,he, relatedLo one'eexisLence, LhaLelusive"curd"ir-,irr,ie alwaye there.Theeetruf,hsare noLabouLobjective facle, bur aboul val uee,and abou| Lhegroundinqor foundarionof valuee,

Kierkegaard holdsthe okeprical view (whichi he probably got from readingthe eighteenthcenturyScof,tiohphiloeopher DAVID HUME(1711-1776) Lhat no moralclaimcan everp_qqrounda_d fact. (youcan il_g\bli,cf,ive thal t orLurinq babiee cauoeethem ?rove

"f S" tnpLlES r.,to AN'OU6H1"

ilB -'

Vain,but you can'|,?rovelhaL il ie morally wronqLo Lorlure babiee,)

uH€RE %NCNY tS TH€ nnR,AL

a\r

t:/

// //

\-

-,/

YeL KierkegaardrecoqnizedLhat values,moral, reliqiovte, and aeehheNic, wereeeeentiallyrelated to our idea of selfhood.

ONLYIN

'ArL

suBJEcTtv rrY /s DEc,s IvENEss

,N HEREs IN SUB f,E CTIVITY

THERE DEctSloll, To SEEK OEJECTIVITY /S TO tsE IN

^Z a.7f you truly believe(ae o??oeedto merelysayinq, thar, God ie that, you believe) love,or lhat caueinqunneces-

ffi

or earymieeryie wron1, musNprevail, beauNy NhaN Nhenf,heeebeliefewillbe ex?ressedin your aclione. (Thioie what'Kierkeqaard meanLwhenhe eaidNhaNhere the accenf,is on Nhe@.) And, if You accordinqNoKierkeqaard, chanqeyour beliefsconcerning issueelikeIheee,noNonlYwill chanqe,but Youwill your behavior person,ln a becomea differenN senee,YouMow eiqnificanf' valuessinceyour eelfhoodie Nhe w@nq of your acNions, pon an re morv, f acls.lNo ed bv value

*lact

by iloelf can molivaf,ean

acfion,A facl can be Nheprebexl for an action onlyin Nhecont,ext of valueo.

As Kierkeqaard 6ay6:

Yel, in some reepecLo,even

of our worldeand haveus facts are deT,ermined by valuee, a o e u m er e e ? o n s i b t i t yf o r l h a t The factreLhaL revealLhemauthorehiV,recoqnizinq f,haLiL eelvesLo f,he ?ereonmoT,ivat ed deriveefrom valuesthat, we by ChrieLianvalueeare difrerhavechoeen.Taradoxically, enl from thoee lhat reveal Kierkegaardrefueeslo aeoume Lhemeelvee Lo Lhe ?ercon moLi- r e o ? o n o i b i l i tfyo r h i e a u h h o r o h i p vated by Lhe valueof of the idea that we pleaeure,and Lhoee " , ' , m u g l e a c ha e o u m e LhaL reveal ,., ree?onoibilily for Lhemeelvee Lo o u ra u t h o r LheVolilical

ohip.Thar is

revoluLion-

,^

ary are dif-

Lhe idea

ferenL

itEelf is a

from

eubjecLive

Lhoee

' lrulh LhaL

revealedlo f,hecongervative,(Think of the famoue

becauoe

'

cannoLbe communi,

caLed direcL-

,'ii,

fiqure now known ae "VlitLqeneLein'e

rirrrr Iy. When

The0uckHabbit

Kierkeqaard liberaLeethe idea

duck/rabbit."My atLitude f r o m h i e o w na u L h o r e h i V Lowardthe fiqure ie whaLcauo_ and Vlacesil in a circleof indiee it f,o revealiteelf ao a duck rectrcommunicationil becomee raLherLhan ao a rabbiL.) a VooeibilitythaL each of ue Kierkegaard wouldhaveuo rec- can realizeand apVropriaLe for oqnizeLhaLwe are the authore ourselvee,

30

tr

,,?

followsfrom all t7t of bhis Nhat,we can neverjuof,,ifYlhe most' baeiceNral,aof values ISNOSUCH THERE ASEXETENCE Ihat, makeu? our lives, THINC WITHOW R,ISK. hencewe can never A^r-, ni\=a be cefraintrhaN 6.4i ' y ' " fr:( ^ C' l we havechoeen "the riqht valuesl' Thismeang,amonq oNherlhinge,Nhaf'

%z

l h e r e i s n o s u c hl h i n q ae exief,encewilhout'

af' riek,and NhaNexief,ence itroverycore muel be exVeriencedae anquiehor dreadby everysensifivesoul.

pooibive, of somebhinq oayoNhatrsubKierkeqaard IS OPENis neTaT'ive EXPERIENCE jecf,iveNhouqhL AIO UNFIN$HN. ENDED Lhouqhr.Thieie because qhf ?one Nhou eubjectiv derslhe "nolhingneee beinq." lhat, Vervadeo

---

of

{t he Vhraee"noLhinqne6o Vervadeebeinq"calls aLtenT,ion lo Lhe Lenuouen e s s a n d e l u e i v e n e sosf , exiELenc e. ThiE ten uo uo neee ie expreeeedin Lhe lhortqhL of "T,heposeibilityof deaLh aL any momenL." Kierkeqaard'e obEeeWHAT DIDYOU EXPECT FPOIVI A eion with deaLh IIANWHOSE TAST NAIVIE IVIEANS e e e m em o r b i dL o

eomeVeople, 7uL Lhereie Eomephiloeo?hyhere and not,juet peychoVathology. ThaL philoaophymay be eeenin a eLory LhaL Kierkegaardrelatee in t,he ToELecri?L_: Lwo men meeLon Lhe ef,reetEof Copenha7en and one inviLesthe oLherLo dinner.The proo?ecNive gueel accepte the invif,alion,oaying,"Youcan counLon me quite definiLely." Ae he walkE away,a tile blowafrom lhe roof and sLrikesthe man dead,Kierkegaard eeemoto find thiE eLoryLo be hilarious.)ne couldlaughoneselfto deaLhover it. but afEermockinq LhiEman wha makeean abeoluLe commilmentin LhefuLureand who was enuffedfrom exislenceby euch an inei4nificanL Lhinqae a quet of wind,Kierke4aard concludesthaL he hae beenloo harehon the chap. 42

I

a-, urely he couldnof,haveexpectedr,har,T,hefellowreeVondNoLhe invif,alioneayinq:"You can counLon rne,I ehall cerf,ainlycome; but, I muENmake an exc&ptionfor lhe conEin6enGy thaf,,a tile hapgeneto blowdawn from a roof and kills me; for in that caee I cannov com&." 7ut in factr, LhaNis exachlywhaL KierkeqaardexVecLs,|f one qrae?e deegly("wifh tnwardnese," ae Kierkeqaardcallo it) LhaNone can alwayo correcLlyadd f,o every senl,enceane utNers or Ihinks lhe rider,

"However, I may be dead in the next rnoment,in whichcaee I cannot aLtendl'Lhonone has discoveredona'sdeath afi a subiectivei;rul'lh, a*d ane is in a VooibionNoordar onetsVriorilies accordingly,

?erhapoit will no longer 6eem eo impor\ant IhaL one'esocke be wiXhoulholes,or lhal one'fi shirf, maLcheeone'6 jackeL,This individualwittbe able f,a make decioionsLhaT,are Lhe rebulLof c oncenT,r af,inq atbent ion on human exislenceac il ie lived, neilher in f,he paet,nor in lhe dieNanVfuLure, buT,in the naw, frierkeqaard'sqoal ia not to

caueeua lo shiverin lercor af,T,hediecovery of the lenuoueneasof exiaLence, raf'herha hopeslhat by facilitaling i,ftediscoveryof our daahhae eubjecLive Lrurh,he can hetVue Lo diecoverour lives.

45

TOHAW WHAT A SHAME IIVEO, DIN EEFORE ONE

ll is acluallypoooible to liveone'swholelifeout' sideoneself,it io pooer bleto liveVurelyin Lermsof ritualizedfor' maf,eand socialroles, and nevercomein cont,act, wiilhlhe trulh of ivity. one'eown oubjec,t Dut,Kierkeryaard does to everyfrhinq ?ooeible Lragedy, VrevenLtrhat of Nhetragedy t'he man "whowokeup oneday hewas and discovered deadl'

lileralure influenced Muchof the existnntialisN W Kierkeqaard's Vhiloo' ae a oubiect'ive on T,hediecoveryof existrence o?hyaleoconcenfrat,es the protaqonisVof Albert Camus's(1913-1960) Merseaultr, Nrutrh. ?lranqer.haeneverLrulylived novel,The a day of hie life,yet,he finallydiocoverehis lifein the shadowof Theniqhtbefore Nhequillotrine. hieexecutionfor a murder he cannof,recallcommif'' Ning, Merseault violent'ly Nhrowea prieoNout of his Vriooncell.Thieis the firsNhumanacf' he hae HeqoeoNo everVeriormed, the barredwindowand emellero6eein lhe air, He hae neveremelledrooeo before,He eeeolhe moon over f'he frame of lhe guillohine,and he sNares aN it'. He had

neverlookedat, the ynoonbsfore.guddenly,and for lhe first' I'ime,he livee,Thefac, lhaN ha willdie tomorcowdoesnof'matt'er.He hae lived. can oayao much, Not everyone

ln anotherocenein trhe who oamefilmIhe kniqhN, io Vlayinqcheoowith a church Dealh,qoeoinf,,o and revealst o Nheconfessor his olrat eqyf or ary. defealinqhie advero TherobedconfeooorVullo backhis hood,revealing himselfae Death,and he trhankstrheetunnedkniqh| for lhe revelaNion. Antoniusbloch,whonow knowsfor cert,ainhe will die,qrabethe bareof Nhe cell.He ef,aresin VrieoN'o horroraNhis ownclenched fist,,trhenelowlybeqineto notrice the veinsand (nu6cleein hislaul wriel,and oayeour loudlo himeelf, "Thisio my hand,I can moveiT,,feel lhe blood Ihrouqhif,,Thesun Vuloinq ie still hiqhin lhe oky,and l, AnNonius Bloch,am ?lay' ing cheoewith Death," A q a i n , I h i ei s t r h e gaardian meeeaqe, Kierke The Voeilive-exi etrencecan onlybe undereloodby an acule awareneeo of trhe " negative- lh e nothinqneeowhichVervades exislence."

45

,J:

accordinq Lo Kierkegaard, theeekindeof

exieLentialinEiqhT,e, alon6with moral and religiouevaluee,are "ErJblective f,ruLho"in Lhat there are no objechive criteria to esNablioh their validiLy, and, No be made valid,flheymusL be apVropriated by Lhe individual,inLernalized, and reflec1ed gubjecf,ive in one'odecieioneand acNionE. LruLhs are not' pieceoof knowledqe,rather they are v\/ay6 of arranginqknowledqe and acLivaNinq iL.Theoe "f,ruLhe"are qroundedno| in eomefactg abotfi the exlernalworld,buL in lhe discoveryof the evasiveneoo, lhe f,enuouaneos, and the uncerLainty of life,lhat ie lo eay, in Lhe nothinqneoe of exielence.Thie diecoverymueL be made by e a c h i n d i v i d u af ol r h e r e e l o f r h i m e e l af l o n e . Kierkeqaard'e geeudonymous authorehiV,with iEe " i n d i r e c Lc o m m u n i c a L i o ni ,6" r n e a n Lt o f a c i l i f , a y e t h i e d i e c o v e r yK. i er k e q a a r dc a l l e i L " d e c e i v i n lqi e reader inLothe LruLh."

A t o n e p o i n Li n h i e b o o k EiLherI Or, Kierkeaa ard'o -=-,'=4'

,

hie reader,if you reachLhe poinl L h a L i e L h e Y n o r n e noLf d e c i e i o n .

/ THROW THIS BOOK DOWN! 46)

ONSCIOUSN NTHA

PnoBmnt

-r-, ./-

I

l -

\J'

and U he diecueeionof sublecLive LruLhemay havelefl' rhe oblecLive impreoeion thaL onlyeubjective problem' LruLhsare VhiloooVhically whileoblecaLicalfor Kierkeqaard, live LruthE are elraighLforward.7ul we oeethal evenso-calledobiective LruLhoare frauqhr with probleme Lreal' whenwet'urn Lo Kierkeaaard'e menLof the f amouequeeLfor cerLainLy

(159bDeocarLee of RENE'DE5CARTE9. found 165C),Lhefather of modern7hiloeoVhy, woAdwaniunreliable aboutlheefr,ernal LhaLclaimeof knowleAAe soYne unleeet'heycauldbe qroundedu?oY1 cerlalnfoundation,Ueinqa melhod abEolutely in Lhe moLlo,"de of doubl surnrnarized i'zLo omnibuedubit'andumeoL"("ev'zryEhinq concludedlhaL OescarLeo be dauW,ed"), eveffihinycouldbe doubted exceol coneciouaneos, ) ei c L u r , P e r h a P leh e lie f aYnoLd mosLf amouEin \l"teElern ?'hllos" l { F T E K E F O KIE T l l { N K , o?hy, aNionctfthe AM," ie t'he Vroclem abeolulecerlaintY diecoveredin o n e ' co w n c o n E c i o u e n e o e .

E v e r y t h i n ge l s e ie euepic:ioue

4&

Youcan'l LrueLbhe

THAT HOWDOWEKNOW brouqhlin ONINHERE... informaLion GOING WTIAT'S

lhrouqhNhesenseo, "Yhegengeo becauae are knowndeceiver6,"

tn UDE AWAKE

(1? t

GOINSONOUTHERE? LIKEWHAT'S ISANYTHING ?,/ \t

You can'NT,rugf'common eenoe-our ordinaryway of t h i n k i n qa b o u LL h e w o r l d b e c a u e ei L i e i m p o s e i b l teo ?rovefor cerLainaL any ?arl i c u l a r m o m e n Nt h a L y o u a r e v, nof,dreamin4inef,eadof beinq 'tr'h in a wakinqat aLe, fi-\

Lr'"

D , v ) D E T )B ? TONN

7 9] i - E T

7r,,o,1't

rrf,

I

,I

, . l : , - 1 1

1-

6, on

\

tT\E1-F Attl' lLL':HFDI T HE

ffi

DREAMS CARTESIAN

.\

-l );Y x"J' * i-rn 'rl-l;;7-:'l /\I-- = f /(,' t Y .)-

z

You can'|,f,,rugNmaLh, becaueeyou can'L VroveLhaL realiLyae you conceiveif, hae by an noL beenconeLrucf,ed a l l - p o w e r f u" le v i lq e n i e "a e a eyoLemof undeLectable malhemalical errore.

THEEVIL GENIE INVENTS MATH 49

rNr,(Ec7

plrofons

I

1ut the onelhinq you can lrueN, accordinqLo DeecarLee, ie Nhecerlainly of your own becaueeevery congcioueneoe, Limeyou eay lo youreelf,"l

THINK'(or"l

"doubLinq"io a form of "thinkinqi'WhaLmakeeconecioueneeecerLainfor DeecarLeeie lt preeenLiteelf iLe immediacy. DIKECTXro Lhet'hinkinqsub' jecL, lL doee

am lhinkEVENIF I AN inq"),you gy YourN DEcEw1D are EVERY ol',6R uJAf,IF I THrHK"fAn: rilENL An evenif lhe eeneeoaeceve, evenif you are in a dream eLale, evenif you are in a world crealed by a malevolenl demon,Thevery efforL t'o doubL f,heVroVoeition ends up Vroving il. becauee

_w-

not,Vaoe any Lhrouqh r mediumlhal miaht,conlaminate or fal'

it. NoNeven oifis'r a n e v t lq e n t u e couldgeL bebween the eubjecLand her 9o conecioueneee, Lhal any aenNence doeenolhingbul exlreeoconscioug' neoeae it io exVeriencedie necesearilY Nrue,

Such a sentenceie,

I AM.'' "I THINK, THEREFORE

-d"*;z =*v

and eelfhood(whichare of conscioueneee Uponf,hecefi,ainNy he ie abletrobuilda complicahed identicalfor Deecafi,ee), deductiveeyotemIhat allowehimIo concludefinallyNhaNobjecNivef,rufheaboul Ihe externalworldcan befound in f'he ecience and in of malhemalicalVhyeice(of LheNyVetrhaI he,Oalileo, NhenexNqenerationlsaac NawDon Vracticed,) DuI Deecarl'eewouldbe quickto admit that ecient'ificknowledqe of Ihe world ie onlyae good ao the foundationon whichiL reel'a, namely,Nhece(bainly of conguNaN leae| lhis sciousneee. f oundalionwas unaoeailable, ae did moeN Deecarteebelieved, for Nhenex| 2OO VhiloeoVhere yeare, NeverLheles s, Kie rkeqaa rd aeeailsiN,in a bookironically Litled,De OmnibueDubitrandum Eet, (1b42-43) wrir,renpeeudo' onceagain underLhe nymouoly, nameof JohanneoClimacue,

0ll

ASITS ISO]ILYASGOOD A STRUGTUBE FOUNDATION.

Wehaveeeenthal Deecart,es believed himselfT.,o haveovercome doubt by diolhe immediacy and ce(Dainlyof coverinq acus" consciouoneeo,"J ohannee Clim arquedthaNf,hereis neitherimmediacy'ntnrb ooo. nor ce(Vaintyin coneciousneeo, 17 LoaKs LtKf Johanneooayoi

S4RENKtERkE51125 ulTH A FAKEN6E AND iloysTAcNE

Cqnbt consciotlsncssffon remain ln

WhaIdoesthis complicatmean?lT, ed aeee(Cion meansf,haf Nherecould and cerbe immediacy tainty in sensation.butr y ale cet'baint lhis immedi ao eoon woulddieaV?ear ie ae lhe exVerience s lOusNEs coN8C in thouqht'or ex?reeeed Forthoughtand F- lanquaqe, are not'the eameao lanquaqe Theyare o??osedto realiNy. Theyare realitY'o"of'herl' realiNy. H0IDS coNclousilEsS To Nhinkof somet'hinqor lo name OF SETS TOGETHER CONTRADICTIOl{S ""' ii is NoopVoseit wirh otherneee,ln whichie (actualr Nhaf., consciouonelo, , To rhink, ry) ie confronledby Nhatrwhichis no! (voooibiliNy) t'hat,could "thiu is a doorl' is t o be consciousof it ao eomet'hinq ^'' lt' ie somebe open,or thaf' couldbe locked,or could im.Vrieol, LhinqthaL waeo?en,ie noL nowo?en,buNNhatrull be openlat'er' a2

berweenacrualiNyand voeeiis the collieion lJ o coneciousnee' is Nhena what,ie and what,ie not,,conecioueness blily, beNween Kierkeqaard voinf'eoul NhaN of "doubreneee." forit' of opposif,ion, relaledto doubleness' is aleoetymoloqically the word"'dot)b1," f'hal conHe concludes (Thieie Nruein boNhDaniehand Enqlleh,) ie a form of uncerfar from beinqa form ol ce(Dainf'y, ecioueneoe, conbelieved, doubl,ae Deeca(Dee rain1y,Far fromovercominq NhaN sciousneelis a formof doubf,,becausein conociouenees, - de omnibuedubit'andum eeN' whichis ie in queoNion

of inq hereie the uncerLainbY all thouqht-uncerNain becauoeunefable.WhaEthe HERAold GreekVhiloooVher CLITUe(c, 47O b.C.)believed Nobe f,rueof t'he world-thal shaheof iNwae in a consNanN "you can'l et'eVin flux,thaV Ihe game riveT 111,1i56',_

lo be believee Kierkeqaard Nrueof conecioueness,

We can fail T,oknowNhieonly by chooeinqnol f'o know it, bY beingin a sLaf'eof what,Jean?aul eafi,re calls "bad failh." The reasonfor chooeinqnoNtro knowit is clear enouqh.ll i6 becaueethere is a kind of lerror in coneciousnegs,)a(l're has beenmoet' impreeeedwilh Ihis aoVec| of Kierkeqaard'o Lheoryof conscioueness, 55

monshroue is "an imVersonal, earLreoayslhaL coneciousnees is a verbiqo of Voeeibiliby|' and headds,"conaciousnees oVontaneity., Hegoeoon lo oaythat for T,heperlerrilied by ite ownoponLaneityi' himeelfor herselfin thie reepecl,alllhe son whodoesnoLdeceive and Kierkegaard guardraile ol eocialcerLaintyand etablibycollaVee, inhabitranL of bourqeoie eelf-eatiefied SarLreseelhe complacenf, life. ae livinga kindof inaulhenNic and ?arie,reepeclively, Copenhaqen Kierkeq aard'e analyeie ultimahelyleadshimto juelifya T,houqhI, cerLainkindof religioue an oVtionlhaL Saf\re t'hinkeie no-^n longero?enNo us. Kierkeqaard'e ,^l ar1urnenlruns eomelhinglike dr ie Vreoent'+ T,hie:The neqaT'ive Doubf, in all coneciouoneoe, accenlualee lhe negaliv e, beliel chooseeLo cancel the negative.EverymenLal act ie com?ooedof doubt' and beliet,buNit, is beliet Lhat ie Lhe Voeitive,il ie beliefNhaNsusNainothouqht and holdsthe worldtoqether.

ae nol juolified iNeelfao uncerLain, beliefunderehande Nevefthelees, bAany obleclivefact,, 54

tf rHeRf'S th lJfr SURE

nr',iireArvnr

Yo1:D' - rF I'n - -r-,i"'clru'rTELL c rHERe's r're. nAVB

A VerooneueNainehhe relabiononili,l eh'iVbef'weenconsciouoneaoand AN E V IL f,he world Nhrouqhan acN of belief, \ G E N I E ,

A comVlelefailureof belief,f'hatrie, of doubt',wouldleadvo Ihe mAximizinq lhe kindof madneoot'ha| is Ihe conee' quenceof Descar\e;'radicaldoubt (W. . .) takenlo it'e omnibusdubit'andum. loqicalexlreme,

9o, for Kierkegaard, S? SAruTRCLAU "objecf,ive Fnsrg'PguuuY? T OO f H - F R I R Y7

Lruf,hs"abouNIhe

worldare qroundedin belief,not in Thar beliefcan be a naive, ce(DainNy. ' unqueet io ninq, childlike ?re- VhiloeoVhical 6eemo belief,buI at, oomepoinl Kierkeqaard hie or her comeslo ou6?ecT' Nofeel,everyone

EXTFRA/AL woRLD?

naiveh6-lhaf, is lo oay,begineNo philooophize.Thenf'hereare only lwo Voeoibilibiee, Eilher one flees inlo bad failh fthat ie. oreNendenol Io ouoPecN)or one comeeEo lhe realizalionlhaN normal

are morelikereliof conecioueneee sNaf,ee than we had of conecioueneee qioueeNaNee realized, in Nhaf, raf,herLhan I BEUAft IN THE THE FATHEP, beingeLaNeeof cersON,AND 7.H€Nainty,both are liorY 6HasT com?o6edof a re of elranqe mixNu doubr,and belief,

I BEI'EVEIN TH6 TABL6,fiE CHA'& AND TIIE COFFEE

T h e r e l i q i o u o? a r a d o x o, f t h e

q u a r d r a i l e ,a"e 7 a r N r ec a l l e i L ,

would-be d i e c i p l ew h o e a i dL o

or of what Freudcalle "lhe pey'

. lp J e g u 6 ," M a o L e r I, b e l i e v el e

choVathologyof everydaylife,"

L h o um e i n m i n eu n b e l i e fn, "o w

l l i e p e r h a g eb e s t e x ? r e o e e di n

becomeea ?aradoxof everyday lhe ficlion of Franz Kafka, ear' c o n s c i o u s n e g ol t. i s l h e

t i c u l a r l yi n h i e e L o r yo f " K . , "l h e m a n w h o

of r,hie reco7niT,ion

c o u l d b e c o r n ea

paradoxin Nhe '

Kierkeqaardian a c c o u n to f

Y€ €oPS.l1 cauLD wrv ttfTo A HU4ANBEIN6!

conscious-

c o c k r o a c ha, n d w h od i d .T h e r ei e a maaneeeaT'

neeeLhat

Lhe heart of

eubverLs

normalily.

the emooNh,

O n l yb e l i e cf a n

c o m fo r l a b l e

overcomelhe

emuqneoe

m a d n e e oa n d

of everyday

the doubL,Ye|

life,revealing

evenbelief,

a h i d d e nk i n d

LakenNo iNe

of f,error,noL

exLremeform-

l u e t i n L h ew o r l d , but in coneciouene6o iteelf. lt qivee

r e l i g i o u eb e l i e f - i e ileelf a form of mad' n e e ea n d d o u b l , b u l o n e

of cenLralityLo Lhe experience

w h i c hl i N e r a l lhy a e ,f o r

"l,hecollapoinqof r,'he

a savinqqrace, Kierkeqaard,

56

lT's RleHt gER6,

f

\-.t

vtT

at l,{erkeqaard'stheory c>fconecictuE_ neee leade direcLlylo hie l,heoryof dread,or "anquieh,"a6 T,henewerLrangIation has ii,..(/era, we'lluee Lhetold l r a n e la t l o n . E ve n t h o uq h "a n q u i e h , ' is eLymoloqically closerto the Daniah" Anqeel,"the phenamenon LhaL Kierkeyaarddescribesseeme beLLerdeei4naLedby Lhe T,erm,"dread.-This is beceuse whateverelse AnqeELie, iL ie a form of fear LhaL one o
56

DO NOTEAT THE

FRuroFro15

WhenOod ?rothe Vrohibinounces tion aqainsteaf,inq f,hefruil of NheNree f,hie of knowledqe, inducesa Vrohibibion ehaheof dread in Nhe Adam"because awakene Vrohibihion in hirnt,heVoeoibiliNy of freedoml' defines Kierkegaard dreadae freedom's a??earancebetore it eelf ae " pooeibilif,y," 6uf,freedom,accord' is ingf,o Kierkeqaard, neveronlypoeeible. As eoonao iI ie eus' if, is aclua| pecNed, Dread,Nhen,is lhe fear of freedom.1ayo "However Viqiliue, deeVf,heindividual has ounk,he may and einkeltll deeVer, Nhiemayie the object,of dreadl'

,tr\\\-

tu

'ililt [,

-q

ownfreedom.

V , , lm e u e La d d l o a l l t h i e K i e r k e q a a r d 'm e o r el e c h n i c a ld e f i n i ' lion of dread:

DREADI 5 A SVINPATHETIC ANTIPffTHY AND AN ANTIPATH6TIC

sY/NPATHV

That io,dread ie Lhedeoirefor whaLonefeare and the fear of what onedeeiree,OnceAdam knowehe can dioobryGod, he deoireslo do eo,and he dreadehie owndeeire,becauoehe knowethat ae a free beingLhereie nothingbuLhimeelfLo eLoghim from sinninq.

61

Kierkeqaardtrelleue Lhar conecioueneee of the fut'ureex?reeee;iteelf ae dread. Thisreveals another oenoein whichthe object of dread ie nothin6,Thefuf,uredoee

noLexisLlt is noLhing. And yetr,unlikehheVaet,which ie eolidandunchanqeable,

the fuhure, rnyfutu re, mueVetill be created,by me,in my freedom.I create my future lhrough my every choiceand decieion. I muet evencreate myeelf in the future. Ae 1aftre 6ayo,"l await myeelfin the fulure. Anquiohie the fear of not findinqmyoelfthere." Dreadie the fear of Lheaweoome reo?oneibrlity of selt-creation.lt is a fear of freedom.ThealNernative of dread ie notrinno-

cence,for there wao dread evenin innocence.Thealtrernailive

I coNDEll/VYov To €TERNAL FRFsDom

62

ig inauthenlicif,y, Iartre's "badfaifhi a flight from freedom,a choooinqnot t o be free.BuNof couree,thie ie lhe onechoicewecannot make,Ae Kierkegaard eaye, Not to chooseis aleoto chooee;and ag )arlre eayg,"We are condemned r,o be free."

a t - - t - - / - t

/I/e've

lalked aboul dreadand an6uieh.Nowwe Ynuotlookaf,

another bleakt opic-DE?YAlR. J ueNas Kierkegaard'sobseesion wiNhdeaLh eoem,emorbidlo many of hie reader6,oo do Nhevery tiqlee of oome of his bookeeeernloadedwith neqaNivity-booke wiih nayneelikeFear and Tremblinq,The Conce?tof Qread,and M gicknpqBunLoDeaNh,lt ie quiLedefinilelythe case thaL KierkegaardconcenlraLedon lhe dark side of human experianGe, buL he had hio reasons,oeme of which ffiay havelo do wilh ?er1onbuVEomeof whichwere deeVlyphilooophical. al pahholo1y,

6+

Kierkeaaard's obeeesionwith I rursI abnormaleLaLes

AB5{l(}

of consciouenese 1:t. derivefrom his view ".il. "nor- it',-r. that, eo-called malily" diequiEeethe .r=.. t*Y, lrue eiqnificanceof what,if, meanef,o bE. \ and f,haLwhenone haE beenVuehedto the very ed4eof exieLence, one hae a ?ere?ecLive providinqa deeperinoiqhLinto human rea[ity,With lhis notion in mind, we lurn nowLo eomeof Kierkeqaard'e ideaein hiE MAN15SPIRIT.BUTWHAT ISSPIRIT?SPIRIT IS THE ha Sickneesunf,oDeaf,h SEIF.BUTWHAT IS THESETF? THESELF ISA REU(1849). He beginef,he book TIONWHICH ITSETF TOITSOWNSETF,... REUTES AlIAN with a tremendouely OFTHEINFINITE ANDTHEFINITE, compli- ISA SYNTHESIS OF THE TEMPORAT ANDTHEETERNAI, OFPOSSIBITIW caLedpara4raVh: ANDNECESStry lN SH1RItT tSA SYI|THES|S. A SYNTHESIS ISA REUTIO\I BETWEEN MO FACTOP,S, SOREr,ARDED, I/IAN15NOTl/ET A SETF,

jokinq here,ae WaEKierke7aard Wooay AlleneeernEt o euqqeeL h i e c o m m e n Lo n L h i e p a e e a 4 e ? THECONCEPT BRAUGHTTEARS TOMYEYES. MY (I'IVIA WORD, I THOUGHT, TOBETHAT CLEVER! lWAN WHO HASTROUBIE WRITINO TWO IvIEAI{INGFUI SENTENCES ON'MYDAY ATTHE ZOO,") TRUE, THEPASSAGE WASTOTATIY INCOMPREHENSIBIETOME,BUTWHAT OFITASION6AS KIERREfiAARD WAS HAVINq FUNT

Terhape. b uL Kierkeqaard'e j o k e oa r e V h i l o e o V h i cl a o lk e e meanLt"o be Lakeneerloualy. L e t u e p l u n g ei n L oL h i ej o k e ' e rnurky deVths. 69

Wefind Ihat lhe eelf(or "epiril") ie the act of relatinqtwo which oVVoeing Volee, be can overeimply called"body" and "ool)1," Thieacl is noNone lhaf, Nakee Vlace auNomaf,r callyonce and for all,

BODY

SELF=SP

rather if' musf' beconsLanbly if selfhood pertormed The ie Nobe mainlained. af,NemVllo eef'abliehLhe oYnf,heeieis likeArietotle's to achieve"Lhe golden af,NemVt' rnean"in moralacNion.)necan err by beingNoomuch af'NracNed NoNheidea of bodY-as-self,

z

definifionof the nowadde Nohis alreadycomplicahed Kierkeqaard self:

iTSetp To ana tnzr .

9o we seef,haf,there are t'wo relalionshiVeto be sustained:one betweenbodyand eoul,and one belweentrheeelf and "anotherl' ie clearlybaeinqhie Kierkegaard thoughbeon the famoueanalyeieof

HEGEL(1760-1&31), a ?hiloooVher trheselfputfofth byO,W,F. him. Kierkeqaard anddeeplyoffended whobothdeeplyinfluenced (ln facl Nhe"joke" in Kierkeqaard'sdefinibionof Nheself that we lookedat is a jokeon Heqel,for Kierkegaardio parodyinqHeqel'e

abstruseand ?ara' ln doxicallanguaqe,) a chapf,erof his ?henomenoloqy of (1807) )oiritr \ / called "Lordship and Bondaqel'Heqelhad eaid,

LWEHM, N0.. HAff ilN

67

.=r-

=-

")elf-conocioueneel exislo in itrselfand for iteelf, in that, and by the fact NhaNit exiele for anoAherself-coneciou6neoo." For Hegel, the eelf exiels onlyby virLueof beinqrecoq-

nizedbyrhe orher,TherordexisL,e ae lord onlybecauoehe is seenao ouch by the bondamanand the bondamanbecomeo bondomanbecauoehe is seenao euchby Lhe

lord,eo they eachconetif,uteeachother'e being,

60

ForAe7el,Nhisf act,eeboup aLeddialeclical a comolic eyetemof mutualdepen. and antayonism dence f,heLwo. bebween

KierkeqaardalEAseel the eelf ao conotiLuLed by the Other, There iE one form of oelthoodLhe reliqioue edf-th aN ie conET,'itutedby a lo God, commihmenN and anoLherform of eelfhood-Lhe eLhical self-which ie conbr,iLuLedby a commiLmenL to humanify,or Lo a o p e c i f i ch u m a nb e i n q .

( F o r K i e r k e q a a r dm, a r d a p w o u l db el u e t e u c ha d e f i n i n q himrelationehip t o t h e e L h i c a lH . e c o u l dh a v ec o n s e c r a L e d a n e L h i c a sl e l f. E e l fL o K e q i n a) l e e n , l h e r e b ye e t a b l i e h i n q f o God,) l n e t e a dh e c o n e e c r a L e h di m e e l L

69

TheachievemenV of a Kierke7aardian eelfhoodie evenmore complicaledf,hanit, has beendeecribedhere,involvinq ao iL doeschooeinq oneeelfin one'ehistorical,cultural,and qeographicalcondition,with one'eowngeneLic (wiLhendowmenl ouf,conceiving oneeelfae a mere?roducLof lheeecondiNione-LhaNie,ae a vicNim of Lhem).No eurprieetrhaVmoeV deeVairof achievinq peoVle lrue eelfhood,TheSickneseunto DeaNh is mainlyabouLtrhemanyformsLhaNdeepairNakeeon. Wewill brieflyinopect,a few ol Lheseforme. ie the oppoOeoVair "willinq eite of Nobe lhal eelfwhichone truly is,"This ie wha| he "T,hegickneggunlo deaf,h,"lT,ig noL tha| deopairleadsto bodily deaT,h,raT,herdeepair lonqefor death, 70

Th" lormenf o7 /espair is precisclq \r lhis : nol fo 6e able fo alie,

ThegereonwhodaoPaira' trhe of becominq deoVaira self he fpof;entiallY)ie, so he wiehesto beoomenoNhina, "becauea he He deoVairs himselt, cannoNconoume qeI rid of himself, cannor, cannoLbecomenolhingi' he ie coneumedbY Therefore, but uauallY a deaf'h'wiEh, ie uncon' lhie deailh-wieh scious.Thereare de4reeeof the 6amut' deapairrunninq deeVairlo from unlonEciouE the moetracule conocioueneoeof deepair,And,

Kierkeqaardeaye,"Lhe rnore c o n gc i o u e n e e of , h er n o r e i n L e n o el h e d e e P a i r .7" u L L h e good neweie,Lhe (nore i n l e n e el h e d e o P a l rL, h e c l o s ' e r a L h a n di e L h ee o l u l i o n ,

{^u

DESPAIR UNCON$CIOU$

DESPAIR CONSCIOUS 71

T, LOVE/IY CAR

T HO?EIT N6YFP LEAVES

U n c o n e c i o udee e V a i ri e o n e i n w h i c hl h e i n d i v i d u a l id enLifieeherself wiLh e o m e t h i n qo u l e i d e h e r self, Lhereforeher deetiny ae a eelf ie conLrolledby a whim of fate.

T h i ef o r m o f d e o p a i r V r o d u c e ;a n e m V t i n e e o ," T h e r ei e a b l i n d door in lhe backqround o f h i e e o u l ,b e h i n d w h i c hL h e r ei e n o l h i n q ) '

72

PARTY ATTHECOSTUME DESPAIR

C o n e c i o u sd e e p a i ri o I

moreaaphi*tricat^ ed. 3ut a ?eroon w h oi e c o n ecioueof hie or herdeopair may havea faleeconce?' tion of r,he condiEion, The false concevtioniE knowing lhat one d e e p a i r eb u l t h i n k inq thaL olhers do not (and deopairinqoverNhat f acI ae welt.)TheLru&concepT,ion ie knowinqNhaLdeoVairia a huynan condiiionand reco7nizing oneselfin T,lhalcandiLion, ConsciouedeepairincorrecLlyconceivedie the deepairol introvereion.ln hhis caee, behindNheblinddoor "sitE aE it werelhe aelf and walchee ileelf employedin filling up Iime wiih nol willinglo be iteelf."Thie form of deepair may be Lhat, of a Hamlel, who,incaVableof acLion,hires acLore Lo pertorm Lhe action that, he himeelfehouldpertorm.

7s

Thieallusionbecomes evenmorepert,ineniwhen TO PEEOR NOT TO PEE, we realizethat, accordinq THATIS THEQUESNON NoKierkeqaard, T,he biqgeoN dangerhereis that of suicide.Herelhe unconecioue deabh-wieh becomeo conecioue.1ul the Vooeibility of survival is foundin the fact thaV the deepairbeqineto becomeoaesionate. and wherethere ie paoeion, Ihere is NhewillIo live,lf trheindividual Vaoeeo throughlhe suicidalcrieis, if he hae rejected euicide,he haewilled Whoeeexie' exielence, his bul he doesnoLbelieve Lence?Hieown,He willehimeelf, ie Voeoible, eo he deepaire, eelf-realization

7r{6SETHtNfs/,RE

TRUE0F fflE, So THEq

nusT BE TR|EoFtotl.

(Themaeculine ?ronoun"he"io beinq ueed here becaueeNhis ie all clearly

Kierkeqaardian auiobi ography.He has paeoed Nheeeet'agee Nhrouqh and he qenof deoVair, eralizesfrom his case Lo Lhat,of the whole humanrace.)

'

IF YouHAVEN'.T HAI EXPERIE NCES,THERE ilIUST tsE SONETHIilE

u)RoNGAfrH tbu

6,M

Thisform of deepairmerqeeinf'oNhe nert and lasl form,which KierkegaardcalleNhedeepair of defiance,Now rabher than beinqreoiqnedt'o hie ,$i

is Lheindividual deeVair, offendedbViT',Hie paesionturng inNoa demonicrage,He hielormenl becomee His eelffury. hie and crye' hoodVaooionatrely lallizesaroundthem,AI

lasL he hae a self t'ha| he

has willed,bu| it' io a "demonic lhe eelf,"ln hie raqe,he becomee fiqhTaqainel lhe offendingforces,bul Nhieie a fiqhNNhaLin f act, he does not,wanl t o win."He raqee mosNof all aN lhe Nhal eNernitymiqhl qet, il inho it e head to Nakehie NhoughN mioery from himl' Thie ie a baf,Nlehe cannof,afford to win, becausehe ie lhe batNleaqainst lhe forces of alienalion.lf he wins hie batNle,he losee his eelf.He ie no one, /

TAts ,s N

gut thie demonical self in it,eraqe hae been nl.s3Ry.drivencloeeT,oNhe

YoU,DEETTER, NoT TRYTo TAKEIT

ANAI FRorrln€ /

therefore Vrecipice, c l o e et o l h e p o e e i b i l i ty of whaL

calle"fhe Kierkegaard leap"-a leaVinf,o true selfhood,To wilnese Lhe actualizabionof thio Voeeibility,

we musf,ehudyKierkeqaard'e conce\ion of the lhree kindeol selfhood.

"the oestheticol,"

U ecauseKierkegaardbelievedbhat aeebheticismcould no| really providea lrue form of selfhood,ralher if, wae a form of ALIENATION fronr eelfhood,he epent,a qreaL deal of NimedeecribingiN,diagnooinqil, and preecribingmedicamenf,efor iN,Theeeanalyoeeof rhe aeebhef,icrealm are carried out, by Kierkeqaard'speeudonymouo?er6onae,moe| of whomare Nhemselvee (Obviouoly aeeNheNes. thie is an aeVecI of Kierkeqaard'emeLhodof ironicindirect,communicaLion,)Some of f,heeeaeslhelee are wellaware of their own whileolhere are only capableof qreat ineiqhl introthe VlighT,, weakneseof their fellowe,but blindto Lheirown failinqo.

JueLae LheaeeLhetic realmre?reeenilg a eLeVin a hierarchy, il ie iteelfhierarchical. wifh lhe moat oophiaticated (henceeickeet) aestrheleaf, f.,he lap of lhe scale,

Theloweotrun6e are occuViedhy Lhecomplelely uncoubh-in Eoday'oworld?erhaVeLhe"couchin VoIaNo"bif.,l,ing hia undershifi,, with a can of beerin / rhi s speciesoF anima[ IiPe h a n di n fs surelg no* th.'fr,aif oF ,ftian's tronl of desire aia uofttdr|s'lust L;he atl louxr Ehef,elevision wat,ching his eecra{h"r {o rch be,{n,qs i *heq ond "aqh* E f arnid ouf lg #tc scor€. Sunday

afrernoon lootball qanre.NeiLher Kierke4aard's aoVhieLicat' ed aesLheleenor Kiekega ard himself have anyf,hinqbuL diodainfor Lhis fellow.

A bft higheru? on the ecaleare those whoinhabitbhebusineeeworld,(Theyare -

"tr:;i#:"*?,i22'"' \C[v qood"is NheVleaeure while Vroduced

) C

\ I

f

a\ c\

enqaqingin a clever b u e i n e s sd e a l , )D U N Ihey hardly fare beLNer in Eheeebimabion of the Voeudonymouo wrilers, one of whom oaysi

C

J (.')'-

OFAII RIDICUIOUS THINGS, ITSEEIUS TOIVIE THE NlIOST ISTOBEA BUSY RIDICUIOUS IIIANOF AFFAIRS, PRONqPT TOIVIEATS ANDPROIIIPT TO WORK. HENCE WHEN I SEE A FTY SETTTE DOWN INA CRUCIAI ilIOIVIENT ONTHE NOSE OFA BUSINESS IYIAN, ORSEE HIITBESPANERED BYA CARRIAGE WHICH PASSES BYHIIIIIN EVEN GREATER HASTE, ORA DRAWBRIDGE OPENS BEFORE HIIYI, ORA TITE FROM THE FATTS ROOF DOWN AND'THKES HIIVI DEAD, THEN I UUGH HEARTIIY, (Klerkeqaardhae a thing about fallinq tileol)

F i n a l l y , l h e r ea r e L h e a r i e ' to crat ic hedonisf'owhoEe aLionof aeaLheticulLiv

dem seEElhem oft as beinqhiqhabovelhe of..herqrou?e,Dy far Nhe qraaLeet parf'.of

gaard'e analyeio Kierke of the aesthef,icrealm focuaeeon lhe loP runqeof t'hehierarchical ladder.Thereare Several reaoono lor Lhie.

Firgt, hie naLuralelitismprevente himtrom rnakinqa eyrn?alhetricacruhinyof t:heuneo' phielicaLed,

Fu rtherm o re, he correctlY realizedthaf, NheunaoPhisLi' cat ad werenoL hio audience. le would nof' be read bY Lhem,

Third, moerof E inoiyhts are Kierkeqaard' drawnfrom eelf-analYeie, and he wae wellaware Lhal hewaain imminenl d a n q e ro f l o e i n qh i m E e l f Lo T,helemplaT"ioneof refinedaeetheLicism, Aence,hin work in Lhiefield is no7jue| deecrivlive,bul confessionaland ot

peroonally' io Klerkeqaard grea| urqency

WhaLall forme of aeelheliciem I CALL IT TH|T havein common,from the moet, BE CAUSE THATS booriehlo the moe|,,refined NHAT IT IS is Lhal Lheyare manifeeLatione, qovernedby what Freudwould laler call"f,hegleaoureprinciVlei' and lhe Lhe Vureuilof Vleaeure fliqhLfrom pain, ig a form of l)ence,"aeoLheNicigm" hedoniem. T e o p l ew h of i n d t h e m e e l v e ei n l h e a e e L h e l i cr e a l mh a v et h e i r l i v e eq o v e r n e db y l h e g r i n c i V l e e eh . i ei e e o o f e e n e u o u e n e eT whetherone'eidea of fun ie e L u f f i n qo n e e e l w f i l h c h o c o l a Ndeo n u l e a n d g e L L i n qd r u n k o n c h e a ?w i n e ,b e a l i n qa b u e i n e o oc o m p e t i L o ro u L o f a n a c c o u n l , o r d i e c u o e i n qa f i n e p o i n Lo f a S h a k e e p e a r e aeno n n e f ,

Thereeullof beinqquided by Ihe Vlaacure VnnciVle, whelherconsciouely or unconsciou*ly and whetrher in it"ecrudeor refinedform, is thal one is neverin conLrolof one'eself.TheaeoLhele'e life is governedby exlernal contingencies and arbitrarinees.

05

t

So WHAT,SAXON6 wtrH nY

rlod r f./tlTtvn

u +&

L .YAI JF tT rEE'ts 6ffi0,

ffifii

-

FEm

F u r L h e r m o r ea,e e f , h e l e en e v e ra c h i e v ea t r u l y h u m a nf o r m o f e x i s L e n c eb,e c a u e eL h e ya r e q u i d e db y L h e e a m e g r i n c i V l e e L h a Lm o L i v a l ea m o e b a ea n d e l u q e , T l e a e u raen d q a i na r e , a f t , e ra l l ,f u n d a m e n f , a l lbyi o l o q i c ai ln n a t u r e ,l L i e l r u e N h a t t h e m o r e r e f i n e di e L h e p l e a e u r et,h e m o r e" e ? i r i f u a l "i l e e e m eL o b e c o m eb, u l f o r K i e r k e q a a r dL,h i e e g i r i L u a l i r yi e o n l ya n i l l u e i o n . ln f acl, lhe evoluf,ion of rhe aeolheLefrom craeoneeelo e o o h i e l i c a L i o ine b a e e do n l h e r e a l i z a L i otnh a t o l e a e u r em u e L b e L r a n e f o r m e di n l o a f o r m o f c o n e c i o u e n e oroa l h e r L h a n deelhef,.e r e m a i nm e r ep h y e i c alli l i l l a t i o n . T h e e o g h i e L i c a l e a r e a l i z e eL h a l t h e p u r e u i l o f V l e a e u r ei L e e l fb e c o m e eb o r i n q , ' oe e L h e l e ea r e a l w a y e b u t h e ( " h " " b e c a u e eK i e r k e g a a r d a m a l e )L r i e et o e o l v eL h i e V r o b l e mf r o m w i t h i nL h e a e e l h e L i c e p h e r eA . e d o e e e o b y c r e a L i n qa w o r l do f e x o l i c b o h e m i a n d o e e n o Ly e Nr e c o g n i z e o e n o u a l i t yo f t h e e p i r i t .T h ea e s L h e L e of deEoair. L h a t b o r e d o mi e a c f , u a l l va m a n i f e e l a L i o n

Oneof Kierkegaard'sanonymousaeatheleemakesthe foll owing oboervati on:, "Ooredomis lhe rooLof all evil,The hielory of thie can be Lracedfrom Lhe very beqingode werebored,eo ninqof the world,The Lheycrealed man,Adam wao bored becausehe wa6 alone,and eo Evewae cre' aLed,ThueboredomenLeredLhe worldand increaeedin orooorLion Lo Lhe increaeein

Adam eoeulation. :- -

wae boredalone; =;Lhen Adam

and CainandAbel Lhen wereboredenf amille: of trheworld Lhe ?o?ulaLion increased, andthe wereboreden oeoolee I SN.T THERE ANYTHIUC tl maeoe,To divert LheyconLhemeelvee ceivedlhe idea of conelrucLinqa Lawerhiqhenouqhro reachLhe heaveno. Thieidea ie iteelf

TO DO?

ae boringae Lhe lowerwas hiqh and consLiLuleE a LerribleVroot of howboredom qainedthe uVVer hand,"

91 ; {' )

n

lnra

Kierkeqaard'o eophieNicaNed aeeNhef,e concludes: Thereare NheuneoVhieticahed bores ("Nhemob,Ihe crowd") who bore of,here,And lhere are Lhe ooVhieLicaledboreo ("the elecN,the arielocracy") who bore themeelves,The eoVhiehicated form of boredom hae DEAIH as iVe nalural coneeoLuencez Lheee arishocralic aeetrhelee"eiNherdie of bore-

AtL NEN

AREBoRES...

dom (the paoeiveform) or ehool lhemeelvee ou| of curioeity(the active form)." To avoid Ihe boredom Lo which the pursuit of pleaeureueually leads,the aeethetic aulhor of the above ?aeeaqe Vreecribee whal he calle "the Kohation ltAeNhod.' Thie mebhod will allow you Lo creaNeyour own world of pleaeure,To do eo, you muet avoidfriendship,love,marriage, bueineee,commiLmenteof any ooft, and inNeneeVlea-

GENTLEMAI{ FARMER

o6

eureeand Vaine.You Verform ce(EainactreLhat allowyou to creaf,eyour ownunpredictred pleaeureo.

Hoct) uIADELEINE,

LoVE TflEE..

! !6y, In ovFRHERE

you fall in love- noLwith a YoubadqeraentimentalVeople, woman,but,with the ideaof a woman-IhaN way,if ehediee, you won'Nbe affeched,(ln facl, you'llbe betler offl) "Youqo NoeeeIhe middleof a play,you readr,hef,hird?art of a book."Youremainoutsideof life,a epectatorand a maniVulaf,or.Thiswayyou will reecuefreedomfrom neceooiNy and fill your lifewibhcunningliVtleourVrioee Nhaf,with qoodluck, willkeeVyoufrom beingewamVed by life'oLedium, NeverLhelese, Nhemorefrenziedie Nhepursuil of f,herolation meNhod, the moredeopairing Nheaeslhetebecomee, and the cloeerhe comeeLo suicide.ln hiejournalenf,riee we discovera bitrtercynicizm,a world-wearineeo;

"Thereore well-known oucH.l BoY,THAT w N S F U N ,/

insects thotdie in the momentof fecundotion. So it is with oll ioy; life's supremeond richest momentof pleosureis coupledwith deoth."

07

Herewe seeNhaNKierke7aard linkssey,ual f,hemosv Vlaaeure, exNreme and eouqht-afterpleaoure, with deaT,h. LikaFreud, aevenly-five yearblaler, Kierkeqaard eeemoLo havediecovered f,haLf,he*ecra| of the pleaaureprinciVleie a da:athwish, This discovery coneLiLuLeE an absoluLe indictmentof aeeLheticiem,

lf one linqeroin Lhe aesLheticophereafAer h a v i n qe e e nL h e V l e a e u r eV r i n c i V lfeo r w h a t ie, cynicalapahhycan be yhe onlyreeulL. Kierkegaard's 1aded hedonisl wriLee:

I do nof ure ror onqfh;na. L 4o nol care to' ride, Yo, tfle cxerciy is foo vioknt.' I do nol fo ualk caf€ , ual king .is foo sfertuous. z-douo, For L slvuld tin anal T olo ', lqin'q, rshoald orul haVe anl I do naf cafe ^ :f. Sulnma Samnaf4rrt:

J Ao nof car€ rt-;Tl.

Ti/, ,/

88

;;ffiil anl fou"ii// rb11"i in"fi y"u[sfilpi uthefhcr geu t)dnq qorrsLls or ale n

Thelast lineof thie "ecslaf,iclecture,"ae Kierkeqaard eallE iL,reveale anorherlayerof rneaninq behindhieekirmiehwith LheaesNheticmentality.

8g

{ti"* t'

\a.6

I

6.6.F.llctc'

?erhape Ihe concluaion of the "lecbure"io not,Nheeum and subelance of all ohiloeo?hy,buf,for Kierkeqaard if, i s t h e o u ma n d eubeLance of allHeQelian We VhiloeoVhy. havealready mentioned thal Ihe meNaVhyeiceof GeorqeWilhelm FriedrichHeqelhad deeplyinfluenced Kierkeqaard. Heqelhadthe uncannyknackof evokinq hoslile af,Nacke from lhoee whomhe moeNinfluenced, Thieie VarNicularly f,rueof his moeNfamoue"diecipleo," Karl Marxand Ssren Kierkeqaard. Theverytihles of someof Kierkeqaard'e worksare ?arodiesof Heqel,who,u?oncomVlelinq his lheorieo,believed NhaNmosLall VhiloeoVhical had been Vrobleme eolvedby whaNhe calledhie"7yof,em," He did, however, admit NhaLtrheremighl be a few looeeendewhichneeded Nobetied loqelher,bul he euVVoeed f,hat euchcouldbe a accomVllehed in a shof7poelocripV to hie gyeLemthal wouldbe wriT,Len by hie dieciVlee,

writea his Thiloso?hiial ln reeVonse, Kiarke4aard FraTmenLs^ which,raNherNhanbeinq in the oyoLemaTicphiloeoVhy

5,h

'r* th8 tnngrq,lents thafr four Nimeslonqer exacNly Nhanthe bookto whichit is a poetscriVL.This book,ae we haveeeen.he tilles

Concludinq UnscienLific ?ostecript, Theimplicati on

ooshor| oyoconcerninqLhe temalic VoelecriVt' to

ie obvioue, VhiloaoVhy \ I fregel'o r a r o d i e el e q e l ' e V h i l o e o S i m i l a r l yK , i e r k e q a a r d 'beo o kE i L h e r l O g a n e r c o ri n l h e l r a d i ? h y .l e q e l h a d c l a i m e dt o h a v ed i e c o v e r e d N i o n a l o q i ct h a t h a d b e e ne e l f o r t h i n N h et h i r d c e n l u r y 3 , C ,b y Arielolle. Accordinqto leqel, ArieLoLle'e LAW OF IDENTITY (A=A), hie LAW0F NON-CONTRADICTION (not,both A and nor-A) D MIDDLE(eirherA or not-A) had and Lhe LAV,'I 0F TllE EXCLUDE a l l m i e c o n e b r u erde a l i t y ,T h e i m p l i c a t i o no f L h e e el a w e ,l e q e l e a i d , wae Lhat everylhinqin realily wae elatic and blackand whiLe,To L h e c o n L r a r ya, c c o r d i n qL o h i m ,r e a l i t yw a e i n f l u x a n d c o n e i s l e d of coneLanllychanqinqhueeof qray,lleqel wanted f,o replacelrad i f , i o n aAl r i e b o L e l i alno q i cw i L ha n e wd i a l e c b i c al lo g i ca c c o r d i n gN o w h i c hL h e t r a d i t i o n a l l a w so f l o q i cw e r ee u b v e r L e dT.h e T r i n c i p l eo f ldenLiLywao wronqbecaueeeverfihingwao alwayomoreLhan i L e e l,fT h e T r i n c i q l eo f No n - C o n t r a d i c L i owna e w r o n qb e c a u e e everythinqie boLhileelf and noL iteelf,The Trincipleof the E x c l u d e d\ A i d d l ew a e a l s o w r o n q iA e g e lr e p l a c e et h e " e i l h e r l o r " w i t h a " b o l h l a n d , "t h e r e b ya l l o w i n qa m u l L i p l i c i t oy f g o e e i b i l i f i e e lhaL wereexcludedby ArieLolelianlogic. 9t

t/100

Ehe 1esidesbeinqconcerned with the Vroblemof boredom, with Nheproblem ooVhioticated waealso concerned aeebheLe of freedom,The difficultyderiveefrom lhe facl t,haLt'he indv vidualie forcedNolivein eociely,yeLNhedemandeNhat eocicausea loseof freedom.FromLhe ely Vlaceoon the individual slrucearlieef,momentseocie$yrequireef'hat,Ihe individual wilhince(bainmoreor leeeriqoroue ture hieor her behavior ?arameters,f,haLhe or ehe VlayIyVicalbehaviorROLE9. I

IilANNA PLAY.

,N€. VW CAN 8E A PlLoT,A THtEf,A nlEukosuR1Ed aliltk€R,I ntD &oAEER,, A Ltott A 6()n, A TTGHT-RoP€ E NT ?IESID flle uNtT€D OR. stATEs TATEN, oF ,

I.ttADw@ ttloel UKe NN6-ARouttb-

Thereare ?rofeesional roleg,familialroles,charact er roleo,and roleg withinroles.Theserolee are alltypical wayeof doinqthinqe.lvloeIof them are oociallyueeful, becauseIhey are aqreedu?onformat'sfor human interaclionNhaIelimidinq, dersNan nale mieun and socialcolviolence, laVoeinhoanarchY.

However, Lhereare gome role6lhat are sacially dyefunctional or patho5o fou

anv'-----

l o g i c a lA . ny one?eroon i n h a b i L er n a n yr o l e a t h r o u q h o u tt h e c o u r e e

of evena day (the oaleeVeroon, hueband,faLher,cheeachurchdeaVlayer, con,rnember of lhe 7TA).Sometimeo L h e s er o l e sa r e e u| p e f l m| 2 ) ? e ao n e ut0- 0 n I

lhe oI,her,sornelimea Xheyoverla?al

Lhe ed6e6,aornetimeeLheyare conLradichory, Thereare ruleo,convenLione, proceduresand formaLefor almosLanythinq we can conceiveof ae a human act"ion Any acLivif,yNhaLcannot,be o o a n a l y z e da p ? e a r ei r r a l i o n a lo r evenineane,(YeLirraLionaliLy and i n e a n i t yL h e m e e l v ehea v ec e r L a i n NypicaleomponenLs. Evenun?redicLabrlilyie predictable)It the behaviorieLe wereto be delighted by Lhie diecovery,Kierkegaard wae horrifiedby it, It seemedLo emVLythe word "eelf" of meaninq,Roleoare a kindof protective armo\ but whaLdo thev VraLect?V,'lhatif Lhereie nof,hinqineide l h e a r r n o rp l a L i n q ? W e w o u l dt i k eL o L h i n kr h a L t h e e e l f i E likean arLichoke,whoEelayereof arynorprotect a "hearf|

95

t*l

7 u t w h a t i f L h e s e l f i e m o r el i k ea n o n i o n w , hich h a s n o h e a r L ?l s L h e s e l f ,l i k eL h eo n i o nj,u a L t h e Lotal of iLe VroLecNive coate? The aeeLheLic younq author of the fireL volumeof Kierkeg'aard'e Lhie ?roblemb',y EitherlOr(1t+3) counLered furLivelysli??in4from roleLo role in Lhe mctsl u n ? r e d i c L a bm l ea n n e r( a s d i d y o u n qK i e r k e , 4 a a r d himeelfL ) h e r e b yt h e a e e L h e L h e o V e dL o a c h i e v e f r e e d o r nw, h i c hh e e q u a L e dw i t h l a c ko f p r e dictability.For Lhie,he wae eeverelychaeLiaedby K i e r k e q a a r de' o? o k e s r n afno r L h e e L h i c arl e a l m , mh, oa c c u e e dt h e a e e L h e L oe f f l e e J u d g eV , ' l i l h e lw i n qf r o m L h ev e r yf r e e d o mh e c l a i m e dL o e e e k ,

Theaesf,hele'eeell had been of eVlinleredinto a muli.;iVlicibY t'haL, muf,uallyexclusiverolee event'houqhNheYwereun?resNill diclable,werenevefrheless dictaNedW eociety.Theaeehad deceivedhimselfinto trhetre f,hatrhe wae Vrotrectinq believinq a self behindlhoee nufturinq and roleo,ln facf,,his self wao nolhinq tnvefrbuf,a eerieeof qroheoque, ed imaqeein a brokenmirrorheld up Nosocialrealiry,Theaeolhet e'eself wao morecomVlicated than the self of lhe averaqe?ereon,but'lhe aeglhete'g gelf in his rolee. Noowas exhausf,ed hteaesthefic friendz admoniehes JudqeWilhelm

'

Lice is a, mdsquerdde, li o4 explain,and For hou, this is incx' hau'sfiblc ma.ttriql"pr afnuscnenfiand so par,no one has su'ccceded

if{lVt n:^^'lf,f grtz,fl-inq 4out

'ffiW,

laccecdYn"doir o ottttS'

t

'f"d{ft, iafc.

atea,

drc bg virtuc oF trtts re lftion.

Herewe eeet'he mainVroblemof aeeuhef,iciem, trhefact, Nhat it is eimVlya ?ervereeform of role Vlayinq,Theaeethef,e'e self ie nothinq buLa seriesof meaninqlese maeke,and eventhouqhNheaesLheLedonet'hemao Vrohesteaqainst,oociety,theyare etill the creaNionof oocieby. JudqeWilhelm continueei "Do younof,knowlhat Ihere comesa midnighthourwhen everyonehae Io T,hrow off hie mask?Doyou believe l,haVlife willalwayeleLiLeelfbe mocked?Doyou f,hinkyou can elip awaya litlle beforemidniqhtin orderNoavoidthis? 0r are you nol Lercifiedby it?... 0r can you think of anyf,hinqmorefri1hNfulthan thaV il miqht endwif,hyour naburebeinqresolvedinlo a multiplicity, thal you reallyrniqht,becomemany,become,likelhoee unha??ydemoniace, a leqion, and Lhueyou wouldhaveloet, lhe inmoeV and holiestlhinq of all in a man,the unifyinq ?owerof Vereonality."

Theref,,erence to Lhe d e m o n i a cie a n a l l u s i o n man in Nolhe ?oeoeaaed Luke#: 32-57,whotelle JeeusthaL hjs nameis "Leqion," and whogedavilg Jeeus casf,,sinto a herdof swine,whichlhen,in a mad frenzy,plunqn headlon;q inilaa lakeand are all drowned. unhapVyherd, LikeT;haT, e peroonalitry Ihe aeshheNe' has beenoplintaredinLoa disunilyingtorcelhat allowsEheeerolee Lo cohere.Hence, Lhe echizoidazo' f,hele has no

lf bhe aeetheLehae no eelf,how c a n h e g e L o n e ? K i e r k e q a a rlde l l e him,"CA003E THYSELF!"3uL h o w i e L h i el o b e d o n e ?F i r s l o f a l l ,L h i s a c L o f c h o o o i n qo n e e e l ifs V o e e i b l feo r L h e a e e t h e L eo n l y w h e nL h e r i s i n gI i d e o f d e o q a i r b r i n q el h e i n d i v i d u af ,l o f h e "EiNherIOr," lhal exVloeive Voint l y w i l l el o b e w h e r eh e p a s e i o n a l e h i s l r u e s e l f a n d r e c o q n i z eleh a l s i l l i n gL h e e u c ha w i e he n N a i l w e x t i n c l i o no f h i e o l d , e i c k e e l f ,

-a

self,

:-"

v= - -Ab

r$t '//'-

---*_

-,,--/--/ /' /

)l

7-J) -'rt'

ltl

/ .r"

'/

99

lL ie at lhie volatilemomenE of nearderanqementr EhaI onecan make"THELEAT' Oythe sheerforce of hie paooion,Iheindividual ripe himselfout,of his old form of existence (aeetheliciom), and by loeinqhio eelf,qainohie self. Forthe fireVtrimein hie miserable lifeLheindividual JUDGE1himselffrom 6ome other lhan ?ere?ective Nhat,of narcieeistic 7 F,NDYOU hedonism, AS CHARGED (lt io for this reason t hat, Kierkegaard makee eVokeoman the ethical judqe.)Ae a reeultof the judqemenL neqative he musL?aeeon his old self,trhenewself beqino Io be constituted,

Gul rTr

writes: JudgeWilhelm

M,'tei*herh,rdoA not in thrrirSf instancedenotg )h cf,oicz,

euil;it ienoles-+lu

chooss q*d gn4lrn. H.r.u lhc oaesfion ?rninan*s orE lunula( fe of e.xisfence and

Woald hirnselp IiV€. . is nof evil, 6",t ylaalra

Tn€ j/ood

qnd

Tne eVtl af€

fostt?d.

Thechoicetha| Kierkeqaard's JudqeWilhelm describeehereie not lhe eelecLion of 6ome?arl,icu l a r e L h i c acl o d e ;i L i e a r n o r eb a e i cd e c i s i o n : whebherfo hold oneselfresCIoneible Lo an eLhicat c o d ea t a l l , 1On

Tlie Vrimordial moraldecision is trheXthat marksthe trraneition fromthe aesrheiicrealmto the ethical.onceonemakee

it , onehao Vaesedinto the ethical, and one'oselfhoodcan cryetallize aroundthe EitherlOr.Of course,this X cannot remainabef,ract.ll must be conaummated with a VarAicular com_ mitmentr,but,deepiteKierkeqaard, e ?eroonalradicalChrietiancommitment,there ie nothinqin hiecharacterizationlhat requireethat Lhte decieionbeexclueively Christian rather f,han Kantian,utilitarian, Duddhist, socialist, anarchiot,or humanietAny oneof theee would bea consistenlconsequence of the initialethicalchoiceth^t Kierkegaard requiresae longas itfulfills theeeT,wo imperatives: a commitmenL to eerf-peiection,and a commitrmentLo other humanbeinqe, (Or perhape to oneother human beinq,suchae KeginaOleen. JudgeWilhelmjuel-happeneto be married,and in EitherlOrhe carrieeon a lonqdiecouree on the virAuee of marriagethat ie so idealized and so boringthat it couldin fact onlyhavebeen written by oomeonewhowao no! married,)

firr+-fr.ib

Onceone has Laken"T,heleap,"Nhatris, madeNhefundamenfollowefrom that Lal choice,l,hen oneie t,heVrojecT,IhaI Theindividual'e choice.Onehaetruly CHO?EN 0NEOELF. roleewillno lonqerbefragmented,ralher they willcohereby willbe viftue of Ihe facl thaf, one'emoralcommiNmenf, in eachof Nheeerolee,0f couroe,onemust slill ex?reeoed f,o a cef1ain livein a eociebyamon7oNherhumane,Iherefore exaentr one'oroleewillef,illbe sociallydiclaf'ed,buNI'he eelf deterevenwiNhint,heconfinesof T.,he willbefreelyex?reeoed socialeyetem,Aleo,any of r,heroleslhat' are minief,ic wilh one'emoralcommilmenlwillbe discarded, incompalible

BEA CHRISTHN ONE CAN NEIGHBoq SATESMAN? CAR ANDA USED GOOD

FINEUSry

c. 0l

LeLus ref,urnT,o J u d g eW i l h e l m one lasLNimeae he exVlaine whatrie to be qainedby "the choice,"

anl.,whent d"r" no* "ho/s if wilhers duay in consutnpfion.

The piclure IhaN emergeeie the following:TheX that wao lhe paeeionaLedecieiveneel of eelf-judqementand that wao the crit erionof f,heef,hv cal pereonalitybecomeeLhe focal point around whichrhe whole?ereonali6ycryeLallizee.

Takea lookat this dia7ram:

Moreover,in a cerAainsense,everyfut'urechoicewillbe ThaNie to oay,every an occasionfor oelf-judqemenL, willbe no more willbea moralone.There futureeiNuation t'aken lf LheVarlicularelhicalsNance moralneuilrality. ie chrislian,lhenu?onenlerinqany bythe individual musl aek herlhe individual socialeiluationwhaf,soever eelf,"HowehallLovebe beel eervedhere?'Theindividual willjudqehereelfin eacheilualionandaNeachmomenl who an individual Guiltyi'Similarly, as either"GuilNylNoN ae herparLicular Communiem haechoeenrevoluEionary be Revolubion Nhe shall moralslancernuotaek,"How of humane besNsewed?Howshalllhe humano??ression be combaf,Nedhere?" Andlhie ?er6onLoo willbe

"GuilbylNoiGuilNyi'

How sHatt LoVE BE BE'T SERWD HER,E?

) tI ) )\

6AKS lL mighrbe objecLed lhal the Chrietianand the Communiel

vidualto inhabitand LherebydefinedallfuLureeiLuationsae moraleitualione,eo we miqht wellaek here,woulda true Chrietianor a LrueCommunietr, knowing Nhat halfNheworld'e

ro6

AlLhoughJud6eWilhelm Lelle hia aestheLicfriendNhaLLhe eLhicalinvolvea a balanceof the aeef,helic,the moralana t,hereliqious, and deapitehie life beinqrahhercornrnonplaceand evenboring, lhere ie neverXhelees a cerLainharEhnees in Kierkeryaard'e eLhical realm.Theindividual ie enqagedin a consLanl eelf-Ecrutinyand eelfjud6emenLfrom which Nhereie no reprieve,IL ie almoeLmoreLhanone can bear.And indeed, Kierkeqa ard LalkEabouL "efhical an deopair"LhaL evenluallybrinqeLhe individualto his or her kneee,

fro4

Terha?e L h i sh a r E h n e e e wae 2arl of Kierkeqa ard'e eLr,alegy L o b r i n qh i e r e a d e :Lr o c o n e i d e r n o r ee e r i o u e l y L h e r e l i q i o u e g h e : r el n. f a c L , K i e r k e qaar d n e ve r r e a l l yi n h a b i t e dt : e e L h i c a l e p h e r ea e h e d e e c r i b e si L . A e c l i dn o L r n a r r yK e q i n al,e l a l e r e a i d L h a t ,E i L h e r l C rL, h e b o o ko u t l i n i n qL h e e L h i cal, "wag wriLLenin a monaelery,"

bul don'Nthink f,hat,f,he "leaV"from Nheethical ephereT,oNhereligioueie an eacaVefrom harshneez,

Kierkeqaa rd'6 reliqious realmie oftrena elark landecaVe, /l

AtsR A}JA fl I

C R N IV OT

UNDE RSTAND.'

ln fact, his failureLo understandAbrahambrinqeJohanneelo ouo?ect hie own inlelleclualcaVacilies,becaueehe nolices LhaL almosL everyoneelse oeemeLo underetandr,heoT,oryVefiectly well.(Kierkeqaardian irony ehowinqthrouqh aqain,of couree) Let

ue brieflyreviewNheVerLinenL asVecteof Nheet ory of Abraham ae Lold Genesis11-12, Abraham was a hereditary tribal leader of the Hebrews. Late in life he married his half-sister, Sarah, who was barren. when Abraham was seventv-five years old, God commanded him to take his people and begin a journey to a land that God would show him. God made a covenant with Abraham and promised him that Sarah would become the mother br a son who would be the father of a great_nation.The years passed and Sarah did not conceive.Then when Abraham was {.nef-nine and Sarah ninety, God appeared to Abraham again and renewed the promise.

110

Sarahconceivedand gave birth to Isaac.The circumcision and the weaning of the child were celebratedwith great joy by Abraham, who loved his son. Then camethat terrible night describedin Genesis22: "1.-2, when Abraham was awakenedin the night by the voice of God, saying: Without hesitation and telling no one, Abraham took Isaac, travelled with him three days through that lonely desert, placed the boy on the appointed altar, lifted the sacrificial knife and was totally prepared to make , t i i ' , n . ., .: ., , , ' a the fatal thrust when the Angel of the Lord stopped him, sayirg that Abraham had passedthe test, and allowing him to sacrifice

lnt(fuiil fl,t/t

in Isaac'splace a ram that was conveniently caught in a nearby thicket. So Abraham got Isaac back, returned to his people, and lived in blessedness the rest of his

days.

eneible First,,Abraham is incomVreh Howcan he be becauseof hie cert'aint'y, 6urelhat, he hae correcl'lyunderstood h i em i s e i o n ? Hou oo I. k^bu) t NttsN'Tmy UNcaN6ctou' ntND I

DoL IT THE

vtt?

Abrahamie incomprehenoiFuichermore, aeks: of hio power. blebecauee Johanneo whoaavc slrcnqlhla Atrihlii annluho tvtd his ri'l* hatil uP sa lhat i+ Zia*t gall.

by and horcified Finally, Johanneeie VerVlexed ac| eeemsall Abraham's Abrahambecauee troocloseto beinqan acf'of criminalineanify,

Now,all theeefacLorEmiqhl conEtituf,ea very qoodreaeonfor eim?lyiqnorinqlhe etory of Abrahamand loaac,Sut Johanneo cannoldo thie becauoeiL haealwaysbeenconsidered ae an exemVlary caoeof faiLh(andJohannesie veryinlereEtedin faiLhae a concepLeven Lhoughhe himeelfis an unbeliever), and becauae weare told LhaL"Ahrahamis the faLherof us all,"Johanneooue?eclelhal if he couldeomehowrevealthe Eecref,of Abraham,he would falhom the humancondilion,30 he ie obeessed wiLhlhe eLoryand horcifiedby it al the oame Lime,ThaLig,he "dreads"iT,in Kierkeqaard'o anLiVaLhy senee-h e hae for il "a syrnpabheLic eyrnVathyi' and an anLiVaLhetic of Abraham'ecaoe, DeoViIeLheimVenelrabrlir,y accordit aL leael admiLeof a VarLialanalyoie, He discoversNhal Abraham'e inqNoJohannee, of a "movemenL acl ig a "double-rnovernenll' and a"movemenlof faith:' infinileresiqnaLionl' elemenl,in which Thefirsl ie a negaLive AbrahamqiveeuV leaac,and lhe eecondie a elemen|in whichAbraharnqele leaac VoeiLive for Johanneo(andthio ie lhe back,TheVaradox Varadoxof faiLh)ie lhat eachof these elemenLeoccur>aL LheoameLimein Lheeame acl,

W h e nA b r a h a m makesNhemovemenNof infinile reeiqnabion {and lhereby becomeo whaf,.Kierkeqaard calls "a knight ot Infinite Reeiqnation")he loees eveffihin6 He has 'orenounced fineneao,"which 2;'.'. m e a n eh e h a o /'Lt"/ / r l n o u n c e dt h e w o r l d .H e a l e o t// '.,r, eeemelo have ft z ' / 2 renouncedsocit eLal riqhte and o b l i q a t i o n ea, n d f a m i l i a ld u L i e o and love,le has renouncedhia VoeiLiona6 a moralaqent. vr/henhe T.,akee leaac inLothe deeerLand leaveeSarah behind,he haE loeL lEaac,1arah, his his fuhure,and vaeT.,, hie very self.(He haa los| hie eelf becaueeaE thie voinL Abraham re?reoenEeKierkeqaard'o "eLhicaleelf"; oo oy renouncinqmoraliLy,he renounce;hio eelf.)Furthermore, he is infinitelyreeignedto theee loEeee. ''/;7

114

Whywouldanyoneeverwant to makesucha ?ainfuland difficult move?WhaI is to be qainedby if? Kierkeqaard eayo, "whaNI qainio myeelf . . .andonlytrhencan Nherebeany queoLionof qraeVinqexieLence by vi(vueof failh." Andin a paoeaTeNhat,couldbetrheNouchslone of allexisNentialiem, Kierkeqaard adds:

tnFinit. re1ignafior! -is M qhint we rua abouf .i$ lhe olA fgb,lg, .Th.ftryad is spunuii"i *ears,l+'rcel"lh blqclga-with

tenr!,t+y shirt eun' qi+htgars;butfon .fog

iron anl sleel. if is ^ bettcr prolcetion 1d''ron is in . . . Thc vcrlf Iirc 'fo' )ltat evcrgorJt v himselP rnustseu)it ' ,/ From theee ?aosaqeeiNcan be seenIhaN Ihe X thaV is Ehe lransihional movement, betweenNheeNhicaland the reliqiousis in many reepecle identicalto the X thaN is NhetrraneihionbeilweenNhe aesthetical and the eLhicaL l n e a c h c a o e ,o n e a e o u m e e trhe"lofLy diqnity which is aeoiqnedNo each man,T,hal of beinqhie own ceneor, whichie a far VrouderLiIle than trhal of CeneorGeneral to Lhe whole Roman Kepublic;'

1r5

a q

Theditrerenceis trhat the gecond"lea?"ie for in rnorehorrible, lhal tiret, movemenN onefell awayfrom one'eold eickeelf,buI in Nheeecondmovementronefalloaway from humankind, Abrahammuel eacrifice lsaacae wellae himeelf,)sren muet, sacrificeReqinaae wellas himself,

No eurVrieetrhat,in hieownmind,Kierkeqa ard aeeocialee lh e etory of Abrahamand leaacwith Lhe much-avoidedVaeoagein the NewTeelamenl:

Accordinqto Kierkegaard, lhe acV of infinihereeiqnaNion ie a Vurelyprivaf,eexieAbraham's wholcaction sfands h no relafion *o lenNial Vrojecf,and if univcrsal,. . . Br.rhisoct the cannof,bejuelified nor "the he hnt.ov,ers+lfyc/ m a d ec o m p r e h e n o i b l e c*hicaitenfticly. wibhina eocial conNexD,

lndeed,oneof Lhemoel disNurbinq aeVecteof the eLoryof Abrahamemerqeswhen aekehimeelf Ihis Johannee queotion:WHAT19THERELATIONOFAFRAHAM'3UNDERTAKINGTOETHICS, MOKALIry A N D L A W( a l l o f w h i c h Kierkegaardcalle "lhe univereal")?Johanneo anewers in horcor:

117

W ?OULNE N4DADDYI ?ES,THOII^HI NAY HAVE To SACRtftCE ?ou Abrahamhas annulled Nhe et,hicalfor what,he t,akest o bea hiqher?ur?oee. calleLhisacb of Kierkeqaard moralannulmenta "TELEOLOOICAL9U97EN9IONOF THEETHICAL," and f,herecan be no moraljuotificalion "Abraham'e relat'ion for sucha eusVeneion. ie quite oimVly to leaac,ethicallyo?eakinq, by oayinqtha| a fat'hershall ex?reesed lovehie eon moredearlyIhan himeelf," guch a loveie incomValible wilh beinq willing?o kill one'eeon,evenkillinghim

"OYVIRTUE Eo which,accordinq 0F THEAbgURD;' lf, is Nhismof'ive mot'ivat'ion. wagAbraham'e Johannea, de eilent'io, to Johanneo thal ie so perplexinq

to0(S LlKE r r's

-TTNE

110

To GO INTo

GUILTY!

4 t

t

t

I I

I

I]fi He is not'onlyVerVlexed; aNtrimeshe ie Vooibively ouf,raqed, He oaye,"Abrahamenjoyehonorand qloryae Nhefat.herof faiNh, whereaehe ouqhNt o be proeecuhed and convicf,ed of murder." AL oneeNageof hieanalyeie, Johanneeeue?ecLe trhatrlhe honor NhatrAbrahamenjoyoin trhe?o?ularmindis duef,o a common misundersrandinq of r,heerory,Manyeay of Abraham,"TheqreaN LhinqwaoIhaf, he lovedGod eo muchthat, he waewillinqt o sacrificeIo Him hie besL."

119

Johanne;imaqines a VreacheA whoeloquently? wilh juet, eucha mi inq interVretatio Abraham.)ne Lenersis so m eermonEhat h o m ea n d

eon,Thenext )unday the Vreacher thunderedown on f,heman'o empty ?ew,"O abomina The thee Nowanf, devil?ooeeeeed lhe attitude thatr of couree,ie f,ha| Nhieie Vrecioely Voinf,, trhepreachershouldhavehad f,owardAbraham,For Johanneethe queelionis whetherfaitrhcan makeit "a holy act,to be willtnqIo murderone'gsonl' lf notr,Abrahamis doomed.lf so, weare facedwilh an ircefaif'hwaeiuoL euch and for Kierkeqaard, solvableVaradox, moveawayfrom faiNh'eneqaliveforeruna ?aradox.LeL,'e and lookat t'he"movementof ner,"infinitereoiqnationl' f aitrh"it self.

Accordinq to Kierkeqaard, al the oameinetanNNhaN -and reoignation AbrahammadeNhemovemenl of infiniNe of fait'h-and lost eveffihin7- he also madethe movementr reqainedeveffihinqin a newway,Abrahamtherebybecame *THEKNIGHT FAITH."He believed God'sold promiee.He 0F believed thaNGod wouldno| requireleaacof him.Thiehe

aac,.o. fle

tae o6the human l."ng

f" fancf ian.

0

121

I I r-'.a HI\

Vrlrt

\ \ \

t\,. \\ -\

B U T .H ..6'S rilE FATHER /

"rt' J

O FA 5 A L L !

,.' '4

3 o , i L i e A b r a h a m ' ea b e u r dm o L i v a L i otnh a l m a k e sh i m u n i n t e l l i q i b l eL o J o h a n n e cT, h ea b e u r d i t yi e n o LL h a LA b r a h a m believedLhaL l*aac wouldbe reEf'ored.(Aft,erall, A,braham h a d G o d ' e ? r o m i e e ,T) h e a b e u r d i L yi e L h a l A b r a h a mh a d a l r e a d yq i v e nu p l e a a c i n f i n i L e lay n d y e L a L L h e s a m eL i m e h e b e l i e v e tdh a | h e w o u l dn o l h a v eN oq i v eu p l e a a o . lwo muLuallyexclueiveideasaL Lhe eame Abrahambelieved L i m ea n d a c L e do n L h e e ec o n l r a d i c t o r yb e l i e f ei n t h e o a m e V r o j e c LA. b r a h a mi e n o l e i m g l yi n c o m p r e h e n e i bhl ee, i E m a d ! e o c a l l A b r a h a mi n a a n e . J o h a n n e ld o e e n o Lh e e i L a LL " H ur n a n l ye p e a k i n gh, e i e c r a z ya n d c a n n o f ,m a k eh i m a e l f i n L e l l i g i bLl eo a n y o n e .A n dy e l i L i e t h e m i l d e e te x V r e o e i o n , T,osay he ie crazy,"

However, lhe bare facL LhaL Abraharnie ineaneie noL whaL a e L o n i e h eJEo h a n n e e(.M a n y? e o ? l ea r e i n e a n ea, t \ e r a l l , ) K a L h e rw , h a l i e i n c o m p r e h e n e i bi leet h a t b y v i r L u eo f h i s i n e a n i l y ,A b r a h a mb e c a m et h e F a t h e ro f F a i l h .T h e r ei E a n i n L a n q i b ldei m e n e i o no f A b r a h a m ' em a d n e e ew h e r e b yh e e e L a b l i s h eaEn a b e o l u L er e l a L i o nL o G o d , a n d b e c o m e e g r e a LL h e r e b yJ.o h a n n e zp r a i e e eA b r a h a mi n h i e l u n a c y , oayinq:

12g

AdopLinqa term from 7laLo, K i e r k e q a a rcda l l eA b r a h a m ' ec o n d i r , i o n"d i v i ne ma d ne e e . " Kierkegaard, far from condemninq A b r a h a m ' em a d n e o oa, d v o caNesit. Now, he doee (t *u't umrrsrnm\ noI advocaLe iL tu snYs/ \ A doRD b e c a u e ei t i e m a d -

(7;ps "-'^, hi e f e l l o wh u m a n e , .Vl 4'2,)',

b u T , , hies n o f ,u n i n ' . [ , n r t e l l i"q i b l eL o G o d , - - j * 3..-.- ^ . ) A t_.__t "o?eakga Abraham -W=r.',;-..7y'-:';' d i v i n el a n q u a q e.,. h e ' e ?ea k e w i l h t o n q u e s ' , " .:..2:.

rememberinq Somareadersof Fearand Tremblinq, LhaNJohann66de ailentiois nat a believer, maintain ie noLeeriouswhenhe calls Lhat Kierkegaard "divinemadnesEl'RaLher,il is Abraham'lcendinion claimed,Abrahaynonlyappearat o be madfrom Lhe Well,Abrahamcer' pointof viewof r,henon-reliqious, buNis iY Iainlyis unintelliqible NoLhenon'believer, in fellowiniXiaNee reallyLhecaeeLhaLAbraham'e realmunderslandhim? Lhereligiouo

124

Johanneede eilenLio, af, Ieagf,,vehemently denieeil, and lhere is litfle reaeonlo doubLLhaL he e?eakefor Kierkegaardwhen he eayo:

Thekniqhlof failh cannoLcommunicaLe wiLhhie fellowknighLof faiLhbecauee onlyGod canjudqewheLher Lheknigh|'emadneee is divinelyinoViredand not, demoniacal, Dehaviorally,Nhe two different tyVee of lunacy a??earlhe eame.Kierkegaard's "Kniqhl of Failh" is indeedleft, in "abgoluT,e igolaf,ion" on Nhe deser| of Moriah,ll ie not eurprieing,ao one crilic oayo,lhat Kierkeqaard'eoeveriLyhae driven more ?eo?leouL of the reliqiouoephereLhan into iL. DuL KierkeqaardVrobablywould not m i n d ,A n y o n ew h o c o u l db e d r i ven ouNof the reliqioueeVhere by rheNoricalonedid no| belonq Nherein the firsN olace. 125,

%*abouI,,KniqhIgofFaiNh,,inKiarkeqaard,g|ime,or ue ourVrioee in our own?Whatwouldthey be like?Kierkeqaard of hie ownradical (and defueesoomeof f,heexploeiveneoo lell ue Nhal Nhey doct rine)by havingJohanneede eilenNio cannol be def,ecled.Terha?eeverylhird ?eroonwe see is a Kni4hl of Faith,for allwe know.For lhey blendriqhl in wiih oayo of Faith?Terha?e, eloe.Whois LheKniqhN everybody Naxcollector, ehoVkee?er,Ihe LhepoeVman,lhe Johannee, lookiuof like qirl nexf,door.Sehaviorally,Ihey lhe f,een-aqe elee,Theditrerenceis lhaN Lhey everyone havealreadyloeLall worldlyf hinqeNo and qotheneveryinfinihereeignaf,ion EhinqreshoredNoIhem bYfailh, Theyare in Nheworld,but not of it. -?erhapo oneof # Lhemis evena cranky, T l; eccenlricwriLernamed <:=-: h SsrenAabyeKierkeqaard, --->---)

who has loeVhis Nruelove, K e q i n aO l s e n t, r o i n f i n i t e ?r/5, 4y',, reeiqnalion,buNhae abeoluNelaihh Nhar she will be reslored to him "by virtue of the absurd."

\

-.->C)

^

(w2

hI

l f K i er k ag a a r d b e l i e v e Ld h a t o f h i m s e l f whenhe wroLeFearand Tremblinq, he had abandonedNheidea by Ehetime he wrot,e i n h i e d i a r y ," l f I h a d f a i t h , I w o u l dh a v e r e m a i n e dw i L hR e q i n a ,l "u o l a E h i o d i r e c L atLack on the frivoliLyand eupefiiciality of rhe DaniEhChurchin Lhe IasLyear of h i e l i f ee i q n a l e dt h e a b a n d o n m e not f h i e d o c t r i n eo f i n d i r e c Lc o m m u n i c a L i oann d of hie viewLhaLNheKni4hLof Faitrhcould rernainundeLected in Lhe crowd,Whenhe Vaeeedout Vam?hleLein Lhe Elreete of C o V e n h a q eS n ,s r e n K i e r k e g a a r da, L r u e K n i 6 h Lo f F a i t h ,h a d e a l l i e df o r L h ,a n d i n Ioaing,he won,juaL likeLhaNohher Kni1hlof FaiLheomewhereon Lhe deeert of La Mancha,

fi

\'lh

$

1

tq,

;: r

Rr

/-:.+\ L ! -, - ^'

/.-

lr

\

I

a

).

\

rgul

,5 t2-

-;\)

)|{r

127

Absurd,The.Kierkeqaard'e reliqiouo hero,Abraham,acte "by vi(f,ueof r,heabgurd"in Nhat,Lhe reagongfor hig acf,ionscannol,be madeintelliqible. Abraham'sfaith reaoongrun oul. For takeg overwhen"reaoonable" Kierkeqaard, are abeurd,becauee all existentialdecieione Ihey are aclivationeof bolh freedom*and faith," and theee lranecendall eyetemeof raf,ionality,lSee Fear and Trembllng.l Aesthetiaiem.Thelife-modeof NheVereonwhoeemoti' in vationio Vleaoure or sensatrion,(Thef,ermoriqinaNeo the Greekwordfor "perceplion.")For Kierkegaardthie is form of existence,becauseit is ultimalelya a eub-human varialione, form. Evenits mosf,eophieticaNed bioloqical into eVirifualily,lailand seneualism whichIry Noconve(V and a dealh-wish,l)ee leadonlyIo boredom, deeVair,* EitherlOr,l Aeethetic 5phere,The. Thewholeworld-viewconeNit'ut' molivation,and inqa frameworkof reasoninq,?erQe?f,ion, quidedW sensualisn\.l)ee EilherlOr.) socialization Anguioh. )ee Dread. Anxiety. 1ee Dread.

Bad Faith. As a t echnicalphiloooVhical t ermlhie Vhraoewaecoinedby Kierkegaard'e waywardLwenliebh-cenf,ury diocipleJean-?aulgarLre. lt, is a af,temVtat, eelf-deception in whichonedeniesand uneucceeefulVaradoxical ly f,rieoLo fleefrom one'ofreedom,"reoponoibilily, and anquish.* Behaviorism.A twentielh-cenLury lheory,baeedon Ihe work peychological of JohnWateonand his diocipleb.F.Skinner, accordinqto whichall accounls of humanaclivif,ycan and ehouldbe reducedt o deocriplioneof bodilymovementre("behavior o"), Kierkeqaa rd's work is f ervenlly anli -behaviorisf,ic, "inwardbecaueeit maintainethe imporl,ance of an innerlife ("eujeclivitry,"* neoo")that may not neceoearily be externalized.E.g, Lhe"kniqhLof faith"* ie radicallydifferentfrom obhers,but f,hisdifferencecannot be detected by observinqthe "kniqhf'e"behavior.Of course,Kierkeqaard'o enemiesare not Watsonand )kinner,whomhe Vre-daf,ed, but G.W.F, Heqel,lowhom Kierkeqaard altributes NheviewlhaL "Nheoulwardis the inward,and Ehe inwardjs the ouf,ward." Christendom. Kierkegaard'e VejoraliveIerm for lhal whichueually?aoeeo ae Chriof'ianif'y," but'whichin facl io onlyiIs ouNward traVpinqo, dioguioinq a comVlacenL and comforLable instituNional falsificationof true Chrietrianitry. l)ee Attaak u?on Christendom.f Chrietianity. Nornrallyrhouqhl of as any of a numberof variationeof the religiouo doclrinethat' Jeeueof Nazarelhis lhe eon of Ood,and lhar, belief in hiedivinit'y, imit'aIionof hie life,and Vracf,ice of hie elhicalcodemay reeu| judgement, in a divine qranting ehernallife. However, Kierkegaard deniesthatr Christianilyie a doctrine at all. ltrio for hima form of "opirit,,"of "inwardneeg," a "cL)re" basedon an absurd*faith* thaL, if achieved (alwayoby individuals aloneand neverby qrouVaction), guaranteeoa form of VaeeionaEe eelfhoodand authenlicitywilh an etrernal coneciouoneaa. lSee Trainingin Christianity.J Deopair.Theoppoeiteof faiIh,. A loeeof hoVethat ie a f ailurelo willbhe eelf lhaf, one truly ie, Kierkeqaard callsit "f,hesickness 129

unlo deaNh," becauseit embodiesa desirefor self-annihilalion. lSee The 9icknese unto Death,) Detnrminiem. TheviewthaV there is no freedom,*ralher thaV all ie neceeeify.A viewincorVorahed in D,F.9kinne?'6 behaviorism* and implicaNed in Karl Maa'e dialectical* maNerialism (accordinq to whichthere are lawsof hiotoryand economice Nhal qovernour liveo) and in 9iqmundFreud'eVeychoanalyeio(accordin7No whichmuch of our behavioris determinedby unconacious moNives that are not in our conNrol.)2eterminismie Ihoroughlyrejecledby Kierkegaard, who makesfreedomhis basiccateqory. Dread(or Anguiohor Anxiely,deVendinq on Nhetranolation), A comVlex peychical for Kierkegaard catreqory that is foundalionalof bolh conecioueneeoand selfhood,ll is bhefear of one'sownfreedom,*a fear of "nothinql' (becaueeone'efreedomis capableof makinqrealthal whichie nownon-exisNenN).ltr is also a "oympaNhetic antipathy and an antiVathelicoympath.y"a desirefor whal onefears and a fear of whaVonedesires. Namely,it, is ein (eoVecially in the caseof Adamand Eve). lgeefuConae?t of Dread.) Dialeclic,The (or Dialeatical). A term borrowedby Kierkegaardfrom O.W.F. Heqelaccordinqtrowhichall individual ideae,objecNo, evenl,e and ?ereon6, hiet'orical periodeare definedW trheirrelalionehip of opVoeition-and-de?endencyNotheir own"olhernese,"Thecontradictoryfeatruresof lhese relationohiVeare resolvedby acto of "medialion"wherelhe opVoeitionsare 6yntheeizedinto a coheeiveunity, Kierkeqaard has a lovelhaNe relalionohipwith "dialecf,ic" Heqel'o (i,e,,a dialeclicalrelationehip).He useethe notionconlinuouolybut rejecf,sthe ideaof "mediabionl'OVpoeitions alwayl remainand in fact, are ?reouVVoeed by the ideaof freedom"and choice("Eitherlot''),Only commitmenN and faith* ("byviftue of Nheabsuri"*)can overcome oVpooition. DivineMadneas, A VhraoeKierkeqaard from ?lato, who in borcowed ?haedruehae )ocrahes oay,"Nhegreateot,of blessinqzcometo us lhrouqh madneee,whenil ie eent,as a qifr of the Godsl' Kierkeqaard usedlhe idea of "divinemadness"in hisjournaloand in at,leasl six of his booke.lts mosl 190

whereit deoiqnaleethe develoVed Vreoentationie in Fearand Tremblinq. "madneoo"of Lhe ?atriarchAbraham,whichis a form of fair'h"and io con' traeted witrhif,s oppooile,demoniacalmadnese, a frameworkof reaeonconsNituf,inq EthiaalSphere,The. A wholeworld-view f'o "lhe motivalion,and eocializalionquidedby a devot'ion ing,percepilion, decieionlo judgeoneeelfin t'ermsof a univerlhaN io,a paesionaNe eNhicall' and an absolut'e lhe rule involving queel for eelf-pertection salizable"moral NoaNleaef,oneother fellowhumanbeinq.(Oneof Kierkegaard'o commitrment "Throuqhher lReqina?)| feel oymVathyfor everyman|') oayo, Voeudonymo l)ee EitherlOnJ Exietentialiem,A lerm coinedby Jean-?aul1aftre to namehie philoooVhy who ie nowoft'en inoViredby the wribingoof Kierkegaard, of the mid-194Oo, radicalfree' A VhiloooVhy emVhaeizinq called"trheFatrherof Exief,entialism," and commitindividualism, oubjectivif,y, self-creation, dom,reoVonoibility, communicalion"* and Kierkeqaard's methodof "indirecf, menf^ Following "irony,""manyof existenlialigm'o novelisNs Vractioner;havealso been (1art,re,1imone de geauvoir,AlberLCamue,Miquelde Unamuno), Vlaywrighlo (1artre, Unamuno, poeticdioOabrielMarcel),or at leaet haveprioritrized Unamuno).)ome and ecience(Martin Heideqger, couroeoverVhiloooVhy (FyoderDoeNoyevoky, greaVnovelietshavealso beencalledexielenNialiste Franz Kafka). Faith. 1ee Knight,of Faith, The. Sut,f,hereare com' Freedom.A keycaleqoryin Kierkeqaard'o VhiloeoVhy. of genuine Velingideasof freedom.Thereie freedomao Lheavailabilify whichin lurn ?reou??oees lhe ideaof freedomae alternativee("eiNherlor"), (that whichis rhe caee) Here,freedomie oppoeedIo acNualiNy poeeibiliNy. (that neceoeitry and lo whichmueNbethe caee), 7uNthere ie also freedom ae ?aoeionatecommitment,toa Vrinciple that, onechoooeoao one'o?eroonal law-lhal is lo eay,acf,ingon f,he"eilherlor."Theaesf,hele's"ercoris in in infiniteVoeoibtlity, freedomae oeekingfreedomexclueively whichVrecludes commilment.3y leavinqall Voosibilities infinitelyo?en,he abolisheehis own "eilher/ or," leee EitherlOr,l GoldenMean,The. Arietolle'eidealin hie eearchfor vifi,uousact,ion,The "goldenmean"io a VaIh of viftue found half-waybef,ween exceol and deficit, E.9.,in the caseof the correcl aVtitudein lhe ?reoence of an enemy,Nhe deficil ie cowardice Theqoldenmeanin and Nheexceoeis fool-hardinees, lhis case ie courage,7ut,lhie Vath of vifi,ueis an exVerimenlal one. lt can-

t5t

noLbe eet'abliohed with a maT,hemalical formula. Kierkegaard'o queel for aubhenlic e elfhood ie similarlv experimenhal. Hedonism.The philoeoVhy w"thich claimsthat, Vleaeureie the hiqheeNvalue. Hiet'orically aooociatedwith EVicuruein Greecein the third cenlury9.C,and wit'hThomaeHobbesin the sevenleenlhcenlury. Kierkeqaard'o aeethele*ie a hedonist,.f)ee EitherlOr.) lndireatCommunioation.The onlymodeof communicatinq"oubjective I'rulho,"*accordinqIo Kierke4aard, involvinq f,heuse of philoeophical irony" and Veeudonymoue auLhorehiV, whoee qoal io Lo creaf,ea rhetorical in whichlhe readenvironmenf, er'o normal aggumpt,ionoare pulverized,creaf,inqa clearinq in w h i c hh e o r s h e c a n f i n d h i s o r

her owneubjectivef,ruth, l)ee Conaluding Uns aientifio ?osls crivt.l lrony. ln Kierkeqaard, clooely relatredto indirecf,communicaLion." A form of discoursein of the whichNheexpression ie inconqruouo meoeaqe wilh Nhecont enl of Lhe mesoaqe,

the lit eral 1omef,imes meaninqis the direcl oVpoeireof the intended meaninq.Theuaeof Voeiry, oxymoron,parody, earcaem,undersNaNeand evenfalsehoodto communicatea me66aqelhat, menf,,oversf,aNemenl, the a??arentmeaninq.All of Kierkeqaard's must,be inlerpretedby invert,inq (whichio whylhere workeare ironicand must,be interVreNed Voeudonymou; readingoof Kierkegaard lhal are verydifferentrfrom f,heone in are Vlaueible thie book). lSee The Conae?t qllrony,f

Nermfor the individualwho hae losNt'he Knight of Failh, The. Kierkeqaard's finile world in an act, of "infinite reoiqnation*"and has recoveredit, in a eimultaneou1act of f ailh, an acf, IhaI ie carried out' by vi(Dueof t'he in the has placedhimor herselfdirecNly the individual absurd,*and trhereby reliqioueophere."lgee Fearand Trembling.) I'erm for Ihe individual Knight of lnfinite Reeignation,The. Kierkeqaard's act' of self-recovery.3y whohas givenup the finite worldae a philoooVhical the individualwhomakeslhe moveof infinitereoignabion qivingup worldlineee and placeshim- or hereelfin a deel,royof,heworld'eVoweroverthe individual a Kniqht'ol Failh". l)ee Vooitionof self-definiilion.A Vreludeto becominq FearUdTrembling.) Law(or ?rinaiple)of ldentillly,The,Oneof lhe three foundatrional 7rinciVleo founderof the ecienceof logic. "X (whereX of logio,accordinytro Aristrotrle, can sf,andfor anylhinq)ie idenlicalNoif'self,""X=X."E,9,, "'lf ie rainingin equale'll ie rainingin Alhene'."lt hhelhree foundalionalVrinciVlee A1hens' Yel'Hegelwant's are false,nouhingeleecan belrue, accordin7loArietrof'le. lhem wit'ha newdialectical* and reVlace NoabolishLhem,NhinksKierkeqaard, loqic. Law(or ?rinaiple)of lhe ExcludedMiddle,The. Oneof t'he I'hreefoundalionof loqicaccordinqIo Arietotle, ()ee aleo al principles The Lawof ldentlty" and The Lawof Non-ConiradicDion"). Accordingt'o the -Xl' "X v -X." lawof f,heexcludedmiddle,"ll, ie lhe caeeIhat eilher X or nof, E.q, oncewe'veaqreedon the meaninqof "At'hen;"and of "rainl' t'hen "Eitheritris rainingin Ailhene,or it ie noNraininqin Alhens." No third Voooibility exist'e. Law (or ?rinaiple)of Non-Cont'radiation, The, Oneof lhe lhree loundalionalVrinci' pleeof logicaccordinqNoArieholle,(W also The Law of ldenlii,,y"and The Law of the ExaludedMlddle"). Accordingto Nhe "ll' i9 noI trhe law of non-cont'radict'ion, caoethat Y ie Nrueof X and aNtrhe eametimeY ig not lrue of X." "-(X. -X)." E,q.,"ll' is notrNhecase thaT"it and'il is not' ie raininqin Atrhens' rainingin Athene'aNNhesame momenf.^"

Lea7,The.Themomentof VaoeionwhenonernoveefromoneeVhereof existence (e,q,the ethical.)T,oanother(".q,the religioue*) by euddenlypurfiingbehind oneselfone'oold self. Thioleapio pertormed"by virt,ueof the absurd,*" becauoe all the old criteriaof ralionalityhavelhemeelveebeenlefl behind,Kierkegaard quof,eoan unidenNified GermanpoeL:"EineeliaerSorunqindie Ewiakeif'- 2 blessedleaVinto eternity. Luthemniom. TheTroteetanl reliqiouomovementbasedon the 'r,eachinqo of MaibinLuther(1483-1546),a monkwhobrokewith lhe CalholicChurchwhenhe nailedhieninetry-five theseslo the doorof the churchalWitNenburq, demandinq reformof the church,including abandonmenN of the oyotemof indulqenceo, eliminationof eccleoiaslical corcuptrion, for abueeeof church?ower. and Vuniehmenl Ullimahely, Lutherdeniedthe validilyof the ideaof the TaVacy(denouncinq the currenl ?o?eas the Devil),aboliehed the hierarchyof prieef,e, marrieda nun,and tranolationsof lhe biblein lhe handsof the peaoanto, Vut,vernacular Luhheraniem wasthe officialChurchof Denmarkin Kierkegaard'o day,buN Kierkegaard camef,oIhe conclueion that, it, had otrayedfar from the true ChriotianiNy,* l5ee f$,taak u?on Chriewndom..) Monasticism. Themedieval eolulionto NheVroblemof lhe temfiatione of the becoming monkoor nune,wouldrenounce the worldand remove world.lndividuals, from il,,remaininqbehindlhe hiqhwalloof monaeteriesof convenf,s, themselvee and devof,ion. oft,enin remotnlocations,adherinqtn a stricf, orderof diociVline Thieie noi Kierkeqaard'esolutiont o the Vroblemof worldlineeo,and he crif,icizesit, His soluf,ion(al leasNat, one of Faithand poinf,in hie life)ie lhe "doublemovemenf)' of Fait,h"*liveeamong lnfinitereeiqnalionl The"Knighf, other humana Abrahamrelurneto hievillaqe, livesin an exVenoive Kierkeqaard aparlment in r/V CoVenhaqen,

'; ff!rr;

_'x#?

of wrif,in4o NewTeatament,The.A comVilaf,ion addedto the JewishDible(viz,,lothe ")ld Teelamenl")W lhe earlyChrislian* lhe four church,comVrioinq "Ooopelo"(Malthew, Mark,Luke, and John),the "Acf,sof lhe Apoef,leo"(a deocriVf,ionof the evenle trhat befellTerenJohn,?teVhen and Taul

(lett'ereof 3t. Nhe"EVietrlee" after the crucifixion), in NheMediterranean Taulto varioueChristiancommunitries l94

of 9N.John baoin),and Nhe"Revelatione of lhe endof the Divine"(VroVhecies is believedby time). ThaNewTesf,amenf, Chrisliansto demonetralelhal Jesus of Nazare\his lhe Chriet,,i.e.,thaf, He ie the VeeoiahVroVhesied in lhe )ld TeehamenN. ObjectiveTruth. Truth for whichthere are Vublicf,eef,sor critnria f,hal can be apVliedidentically by morelhan one?ereon. E,q,Nhetruths of maf,hemal,ics, ecience, or hiotnry, Allhouqhobjeclive Nrutheare nol comVlrtelyobjertivefor Kierkeqaard (becaueeallknowledge conlaine an elemenlof belief),iuhey differ from "oubjecf,ive lruAho"* in lhal lhe emphaeioof objecNive trulh ie on lhe brut,hof the contenl of trheasseftion rat'herlhan on lhe trulh of the peroonalree?onee rn ft,. Kierkeqaard accefio t'hat,Nhereare objertiverrut'ho (i.e.,thar maNh,ecience, and hietnryare ?osor ble)but,insieleNhat,Iheyare "eeeenNially indifferent)' rn humanexislence,ln an exieNenNial eense,Nheydo nol mattnr. l)ee ConaludingUnsaientrfra ?osteafivt.1

- - J

?ieliom. A fundamentalisf,ic form of Lulheraniem" NhatetreseedVeroonal and an acute awareneoe of sin over doctrrine ritrual.Kierkeqaard's and ?iey falher, Michael,was raieedin Nhietradilion, ?.eligioueSphere,The.A whole-world viewconelitulinq a frameworkof reaooninq,Vercefiion,motivatrion, and socialization 7uidedW a devotionto the divine. ln Concludinq UnscienlificToetscri?t.Kierkeqaard further dividesthie ephere into "religiousnees N' (thooefeatureoof religiouslifethat allreliqionohavein common)and"reliqioueneao Dl' a reliqionof Varadoxthat,io recoqnizable to the readeras Kierke7aard'e "D" Vreeu??oeideaof Irue Chriotianity,*Keliqioueneoo eo "N', but not vice-versa.lgee ConcludingUnecientrfta?oetsad?t and Fear and Trcmblina.l

- - J

5urd. Originally from the Latin wordsurdusmeaninq"deafl'deoiqnateoan inexqualit'yor an ircaNional residue.That whichis still left overwhenall 7reooable analyoieio comVlrte.Togerherwithlhe prefixab meaning"from"or "awayfrom" 7roducing"ab-ourdl'*roughly,out of thaV whichcannol bevoicedor heard. Exisf,enceis for Kierkeqaarda "o.)rd,"

r95

5ubiectiveTruth. A privalelrulh, a Lruf,hfor whichonecan liveor die. Theeeare not I'rubhsabout'facls, but abouNvaluee,or about the foundationalcale7oriee Nhatqroundbolh facle and valueefor an individual.Here,unlikelhe caeeof "obieclivetrrulhl'"there are no Vubliccrileria Nowhichonecan aVVea|and oubjeclive trut'he cannot'be communicated exceptindirectly(oeealoo lndircat Communication*), becaueeeachindividual must learniheeetruths individually fr om him-or herself. l3 ee ConaludingUnsaientifta ?ostean?t] Synofiia Goapels,The.Thefirot three bookeof the NewTeehament* ("Matthew, Mark,and Luke,)whereweare qivenfirebhand,eye-wilneolaccoL)nlo, oneoliqhtly differinqfrom the otrherin detailand emphaeio, of the leachinqand aclivityof Jesueof Nazarrthduringthe lasNfour or fiveyeareof hie life, Theyare quotred moreby Kierkeqaard ihan are other parte of the Oible,lhouqhhelakee someof hie ineViraf,ion from the "EViolle6"of 3N.Tauland from bheOldTesfament. Teleologiaal 5uopensionof the Elhiaal,The.Theannulmenlof lhe univereal " demandeof eNhice in lhe nameof a purVoee Nhalie hiqherlhan lhese demands. Kierkeqaard aekswhethereucha 6u6?eneion of moralduf,ycouldeverbejuelified (eincejuot,sucha treleoloqical waorequired oue?enoion of the ethicalaVVarent,ly by God of the bibllcalTatriarch,Abraham,lheFabherof ue all), Kierkeqaard'e ie a maintoVic in whatrhetook lo be his best anewer,or lackf.,hereof, Varadoxical book. l1ee Fear andfiembling.) Unlvereal,The. Thereare at, leaet lwo differenf,wayeKierkeqaardueesf,,hist erm. generalconcepteembod(A) In hietheoryof lanquaqe,"the univereal" deeignaf,ee ied in lanquage that, are neceeearily abstractedouf,of (andthereforeawayfrom) leaf, leaf is differenf,from everyobherindividual E.q.,everyindividual exVerience. buf,in orderIo beableNocommunicalewe must havenoun6,verbe,adjectriveo, differencea and find oomeabstract,qualadverbe,etc. NhaNou??re6eallindividual and ibyNhaIall leaveeare meant,trohavein common,Thereeulf,ie thaL lanquage whichie paralwayealienaf,e ue from acf,ualexVerience, lhought,beinqunivereal, Or De omnibusdubitandum,l (9) ln hio Iicular. lSeeJohannesde Climacue. deoignaf'es lhoee from Kant, and Hegel,"lhe universal" theory, derived moral (E.q., i.e.,generalized wilhouf,conf,radiction, actionsthat, can be universalized, imposoible No conceive loqically lying lt, io but cannol. honeotry can be univeralized, alwayeliee,there are no liee.)Thieie lhe alwayelying. lf everyone of everyone "fhe universal" is Lhemoralgoalof Nheindividachieving Kantianside. ForHegel, for of one'oownindividualily Nhaf,goalrequiree the eu??reoeion ual,buNachievinq Ihe hiqherqoodof family,community,otratreand humanity,WhenKierkeqaard he io aekinq of lhe etrhicall'* ouepenoion lhere can bea "f,eleoloqical aekewhef,her "T,he juetification in Nhe nameof a univereal" ie for eueVendinq any trhere whether (henceunintelliqible) individual lgee FearandTrcmbling.J VurVooe. Vurely 196

Bibliography L Kierkegaardbmain works in Englieh Tnnelation (Daniehpublication daNeein brackets, Asheriskoindicale poeudonyrneunder which Kierkeqaard publiehed,) TheConae?A of lrony.Trane.LeeV1.CaVel, 3loomington,|ndiana: Indiana Univeroity 7reee,196B.11841,) *

EitherlOnVols,| & ll. Trans.DavidF. )weneonand LillianMarvin9wen6on, GardenCity,N.Y:DoubledayAnchor1ooke, 1959. 11843,edited byVictor Eremita", Vol.I wrif,LenW "A: * Vol.ll written W "A: a.k,a.JudqeWilhe,lmIl at 50

EitherlOr. Trans.HowardV.Honqand Edna H. Honq,7rincrton,N.J.:Trince|,on Univereity7rese,1987, FearandTrcmbllng(with The giakneas unto Deafh). Trane,WalterLowrie,Garden N.Y:DoubledayAnchorbooks,1954. CiT,y, de oilentio*l 11843,Johanneo atoo Fearand Trcmbling(with Repitition). Trans.HowardV. Honqand EdnaH. Hon6, Trincetron, N.J.: ?rincehon Univeroily7ress, 19b3. also Fearand Trembling,Trane,Alaetair gooks,1985, Hannay,NawYork:Tenquin

,* i'q

:i,

Repitition (with Fearand Trcmbling). Trans.HowardV. Hongand EdnaH. Honq, Trinceton,N.J.:?rincetonUniveroity7res6, 1983. 11843,ConeNanlin Conetantriue.*)

;t I r

I,l

.* it

!i

Johannee Climacue,or De OmnibueDubitandumEst. Trans.T.H.Croxall, London:Adam& Charlee7lack,195B.11b42-1543, poethumouely, Vubliehed Johannee Climacu6.*) ?hiloeophiaalFragments. Trans,DavidSwensonand HowardV,Honq, Trincef,on, N.J.:TrincelonUnivereity7reoe,1967.l1BM, Johannes ClimacuoJJ The Conaeptof Dread. Trans,Waller Lowrie,Trinceton,N.J.:Trincelon 844, VigiliueHaufnieneio.*) UnivereilyZrees,1957. 11 aleo TheConaeptof Anxiety,Trane.ReidarThomteand Albefr,g. Anderson, Trinceton, N.J.: TrinceIonUniversity7reoe,1980. Lowrie,N.Y.:thocken Aooks,1967. ?tageo on Life'sWay.Trans.WalNer FraterTaciburnus,* Afham,* Wilhelnr,* Quidanl,*ediNed Williarn Judqe \1brc, by Hilariue Oookbinder.*) The ?reeentAge, Trane.AlexanderDru,NewYork: HarperTorchbooks,1962.

11846) ConcludingUnoaientifia ?ootocript,. Trans.DavidF. 1wensonand WalNer 7reoo,1960. 11b46,Johannes N.J.: Trincef'onUniversit'y Lowrie,Trincef,on, Climacuo.*) Works of Love. lrane. HowardV. Hongand EdnaH. Honq,New 1964. York: HarVerTorchbooke,

11o44 Purity of Heart ls to Will One Thing. Trans.DouglaeV.Sleere, NawYork: HarVerTorchbooke,

1e56.UB4n The ?oint of Viewfor My Work as an Author. Trans.Waltrer ed. benjaminNelson, Lowrie, NewYorkzHarperTorchbooke, poerhu1962. l1b4b, publiohed mouoly.) 194

The giakneoounto Dealh (with Fearand Trembling). Trans. WalterLowrie,OardenCity,N.Y: DoubledayAnchorb ooke. O49, Anli-Climacuo,*J 11 also The 9icknee,6unto Death. Trans.HowardV,Hongand EdnaH, Hong,Trinceton,N.J.: Trinceton Universily?reee, 1900,

M c (t

-Training in Chrielianity. Trans, WalterLowrie,Trincelon,N.J.: Trinceton University Treee, 1944, l1B5O,Anti-Climacuo,*f also \r o?ncllce in Christianity. Trans. flowardV, Hongand EdnaH, y 7ress,1991. N.J.: Trinceton Univereit Hong,Trincef,on,

I

* Attaak upon Chriotendom.Trane.WalNerLowrie,Soston,Deacon?rees, 1e59, 11854-1b55,) The Journals of Klerkegaard,l6S4-1O54,Trane.and ad, AlexanderDru, London:FontanaBooke,1969. The LastYearez Journale105g-1855. Trans.and ed, KonaldGreqor7mibh, London:Fontana Library,1968. ll. Kierkegaard'e?hiloeophyAnth ologized. A. KierkegaardAnthology. Ed. Kobeft Dretall, Trincefon,N.J.: Trincelon Univereity7reee,1973, lll. Reaommended 5eaondary5ourcee, Aqacinoki,1ylviane.AparAe: Conce?tions anclDeaIhsof gdren Kierkeqaard. Trane.KevinMewmark,Tallahaaeee: Florida)tate Univeroity7ress,1988, Collins,Jamee. The Mind of Kierkegaard.Trinceton,N.J.: Trincelon Univereif,y7rees,19b3, 199

Gardiner,Tatrick. Kierkegaard. Oxford: Oxford ?reee, UniveroiNy 198b.

q,rb.lfur Ut-l t*\.lis rr i drorg gfto'Ett'd

1:.t1.51n** eer.hvir {ctte lq" l'6k, hrrns rlrgc \rF \tt{dd ft til s"o ilrlJr("

\t

Hannay,Alastair, Kierkegaard. London;Koutledqe and Kegan?aul, 19b2,

Lowrie,Walter. A Short Life of Kierkegaard,GardenCity, N.Y: Doubleday Anchor,1961, Mackey,Louis. Kierkegaard:A Kind of ?oet. 7it'f'oburqh: Univeroif'yof ania ?reee,1971. ?ennoylv Greqor. Kierkegaard'sThought. Trincelon,N.J.: Trinceton Malantrechuk, 7reee,1989. Univeroit'y VcDonald,William.Kierkegaard and ?oet -Modernism. TallahaseeezFlorida glat e Univereit'y?reee,19b9. Mooney,EdwardF.,Knights of Failh and ReoignationzReading Fear andTrembling.Albany,N.Y: Slate lJnivereityof NewYork Kierkegaard's ?reee,1991. ?erkine,Kobeft. Kierkegaard'sFearand Tremblingz Critioal Appraioale. birminqham:Univereilyof Alabama?rese,19b1. Taylor,Mark C. Kierkegaard'e?eeudonymouoAuthorehipz A )t'udy in Time 7reee,1975. andthe 9lelf. ?rinceton,N.J.: ?rincelonUnivereitry Thompoon,Josiah. rhe Lonely Labyrinthz Kierkegaard's?seudonymoue gouthernttlinoietJniveroiNy ' 7rese,1967 Worke. Carbondale,ll.: ThomVeon,Joeiah,ed. Kierkegaard:A Collectionof Cril'licalEeoaye. OardenCity,N.Y: Anchorbooke,1972,

140

\uc= Attock upon christendom. Trons.wofter Lowrie,Boston: BeoconPress,1g1g. 'oD= fhs conceptof Dreqd. Trons.wofrer Lowrie,princeton, N.J.: PrincetonUniversitypress, 1gS7 ol= Theconceptof rrony. Trons.LeeM. copef, Broomington, Indiono: fndionoUniversity prers,196g. 'rP=concluding unsci3nrif5.poshcript. Trons.Dovid F.swenson ond wolter lowrie' princefon, N.J.: princetonUniversifypress, 1960. Either/or, vol. r. Trons. Dovid F.swensonqnd

LirfionMorvin swenson, Gorden ciry,N.y.: o.rui"J"yilh;r;;ksr'1959

I= Feqrond Trembling.. Trons.Woltertowrie,Gorden City,N.y.: )oubfedoy AnchorBooks,1g54. 'Johqnnesclimocus, or DeomnibusDubitqndum Est. Trons.T.H. ,roxoff, London:Adom& ch;d";'r[.t, 195g. = TheJournqfs of Kierkegoord, f 834-lgs4. Trons.qnded. lexonder Dru,London:F;il;; ;;;, 1969. Eifier/or, vor' ff. Trons. Dovid F.swensonond Liffion Morvin r'enson,Gorden City, N.y.: DoubledoyAnchor Books, Ig*g. 'The Pointof view for My work qs on Aurhor. Trons.wofrer vrie' ed' BenjominNefson, N"*i;;' HorperTorchbook s, rg62. Thesicknessunto.Deorh. Trons. -t wqfter Lowrie,Gorden (; Doubledoy city, Anchor Books, iSA'.-

Theleft columndeeiqnatee?aqenumberefrom Kierkeqaard For DeTinners, Theriqhl columndeoiqnaNeo from numbere Kierkeqaard'e workskeyed ?aqe on ?. 141.First,and last wordsfrom eachquotationare listed.

7 7 10 11 16 16 16 23 26 34 37 37 39 42 43 44 46 46 52 59 60 61 65 67 70 70 71 71 72 72 73 75 BO 01 B5 b6 B7 142

"Whois it?,bad Nohim?: "Ao a child,,,crazy uVbringingi' "Ood had vetoedlhe marriaqe," "lf I had...wiNh Regina." "Abracadabra's ecref,of 'Chrie|,endom"' "OnecannoNlive..offof itl' "Thishae f,o.,Goda6 a fool," "a??roached each..away emVtyhanded." "ln ihe'relalion f,o lhem." "Trubhio oubjectrivit yi' " Alldecieiv enese,..inoubjectivity." "Onlyin,,trobe in errorl' " no|,hin gneooth aN pervadeo bein9." "lhe VoeoibiliIy,at,any moment)' "Youcan counN..cannot comel' "whowokeuV...he was dead," "deceivinq hio...inIo lhe truthI' "lhrow lhis bookdown." "cannol congcioueneoo,,,? roduces,duplicit'y!' "However of dread." deeV..,objecf "Onemay..,b ecomedizzy," " Dread io.., anlipalhet'ic eympahhy." "Man ie opirit...no|yeVa oelf," ")uch a derived...ilself Noanof,her." "willinqtro be...one lruly ie." "TheTormentr...able lo die," " becauoe he,,.cannot, become n ot'hinqi' "f,hemoreconsciousness..,Nhe deoVairi' "Thuowhenthe'rid of himself." "a blinddoor'.isnot'hing." "oiNoag itr were...l'obe it'gelfl' "He raqee.,nioery from him," "ThieeVeciee..by lhe ocore." "0f all ridiculoue,.l lauqhheaftilyi' "goredomis t'he...uVVer handl' "eil,herdie of boredom...(t'he actriveform)." "Yougo to eee..paftof a bookl'

Tic ?oV JoK JoK AuC AuC AuC Col Cu? Cu7 Cu? Cu? Cu7 CUY Cu? Cu? ?oV 0 JC CoD CoD CoD 1uD 7uD 1uD )uD )uD 7uD juD 7uD 1uD 1uD E E24 E E E

176 76 73 Bo 212 l9z 59 199 551 169 2O7 214 75 76 bB 149 39 172 148-9 1O1 55 3B 146 146-7 153 15O 151 175 151-2 1Bg 196 2Oo 284 282 2b5 295

B7 BB Bg 97 9B 99 1OO 1O1 1O4 1OB 1OB 112 115 115 117 118 11b ll9 119 12O 121 122 123 124 125

"Thereare,,soupledwiilhdealh." "l do not care...care at all." "lf you marry.,all Vhilooo?hy." "Lifeis a masquerade.,.this relal,ion," "Do you nol know,,ofperoonali6y|' "chooeelhyeelfi' "Ihe leaV" "My eilherlor,,evilare Vooited," "Thechoiceiteelf,.inconeum\ion," "elhicaldeopair" "waowriT..tren in a monaltery," "who7aveotrenqlh,,becomee blind." "what I gain ie,,,virlueof faiNh," "lnfiniNereeignalion...for himeelf." "Abraham'ewholeaclion.,snNirely," "t eleoloqical ouopension of lhe ethical', "by vift.,ue of lhe abeurd," "Abraham'erelahion,fthanhimeelf." "Abrahamenjoyo.,ofmurder! "a holyact,..,murder one'ogon." "believedby viftue,.seaeedlo funclion." "HumanlyeVeakinq,,he io crazy." "Abrahamwae qreater,,,hatredof oneeelf.,, "epeakoa divine,,wiIhf,onguee," "Faitrhis this.'is unilhinkable."

E25 E E37 063 E o CUP o o Cu7 ?oV F&T F&T F&T F&T F&T F&T F&T F&T F&T F&T F&T F&T F&T F&T

19-20

164 226 94 173 167 234 1B 36 57,59 56 69,70 64 46 67 65 41 46-7 06 31 123 B1-2

DREADIS A SV/N?ATHETIC ANTIPATHY AND AN AilN PATHETIC

SVNPATHY

14It

Index 109-25 and lsaacetory,5, 10-11, Abraham absurd,the%128 acluality, S2-53 Adam,SB-61,B5 aegf,hef,icism,66, 12b aee6helic eelf, 76-77, 7b-92, 96-100, 102,104,108 (?lato),23 Alcibiadee T9 alienation, Allen,Woody,6S anguieh.5ee dread anxief,y,)ee dread arisNoarals,b2 Arietolle, 66, 91 aut hentricily / inau6henf icitry, 62 59 auIhorshiV, bad faith, 53, 55, 62, 129 behaviorism,l29 belief,S+55 berqman,ln6mar,45

tormenf?F /espair is. preciselg Tl" fhis : to die, hol

be able fo

body,66 boredom,B4-Bg S u k u n i nM, i c h a e l , l O b u e i n e s s m e9n1, Camue,AlberL,44 Chrietendom,l29 C h r i e L i a n i l y1, 2 9 a e c h o i c e 1, O 2 ,1 O O K i e r k e gaar d 'e c r i t i c i e m o f, 1 5 - 1 7 c o m m u n i c a L i oe n .e e i n d i r e c tc o m r n u n i c a l i o n Communiem,10S-6 C o n c e Wo f D r e a d .T h e ( K i e r k e g a a r d )2,8 , 5 8 - 5 9 , 6 4 Conce?Lof lrony.The (Kierkeqaard),23 ConcludinQ U n s c i e n L i f iT c o e t e c r i p tt o t h e T h i l o e o ? h i c aFl r a q m e n l o ( K i e r k e q a a r d )3,2 , 9 1 conSctoueneee: cerLainLyof,49-52 reliqioueeDalee of, 54-56 u n c e r l a i n L yo f , 5 2 - 5 5 Corsair. The (newepap er), 12-1+

Danish LulheranChurch,Kierkegaard's crit icismof, 15-17 death,42-46, b6-BB dealh-wish,71,74 defiance,TS DeOmnibusDubilandum EsN T HoPEIVE (Kierkeqaard), 51-53 6oTnY flE Deecar\es,Ren6,4B-52,55, 66 ON ITR,AI'HT deepair, 6+65, 7O-75, 129 delerminism,lSO dialectic,91,13O "Diaryof a )educer" (Kierkeqaard), 9 divinemadnese, 124,13O douW,5+55 dread,5B-62, 113,13O duck/ rabbit (Wilt qenetrein), 3B ecslalic leclure,B9-9O EiIherlOr (Kierkeqaard), 46, 91-92, 96,102,108 "Eilher/ Or" Voinf,,99, 1O2 elihes,B2 Engele, Friedrich,lO ethicalself,69,75,100-106, 1OB,114 ethicaloVhere,131 exigf,ence: conceVlof, 33-34, 39, 43 t.hreeophereoof, 76-77 existenlialism,1,32, 131 in liNeratureand film,4+46 existentialtrruLh,21 facls,39 f airh, 113,120-25, 126-27, 131 Fall,lhe,5B-59,61 Fearand Tremblinq (Kierkeqaard), 10-11, 64,109,124 Feuerbach, Ludwiq,lO freedom,59-60, 62, 94, 131

146

Freud,1iqmund,56,03, bB qy, 12b-36 qloooary of Kierkeq aard'o Nerminolo qoldenmean,131 Gold echmidl,, Mer, 12-14 Goopelo,24 Hamlet,73 03,132 hedonism, Heqel,OeorqeWilhelmFriedrich,10, 67-69, 90-92 SS Heraclitus, Hume,David,36 indirectcommunication, 21-22,2+27, 46,79, 132 innocence,62

inf,rovergion,73

irony,22-25,132 Jesus,2+25,99 Kafka,Franz,56 Kierkegaard,AnneLund,4 Kierkegaard, MichaelTederoen, 3-6, 12 death of, B

Kierkegaard, 7ren: death and funeral,17,20 life otory,1-17 profeeeionao wriler, 20 writrinq Veeudonymoue sT,ance, 26-27, 46 of,141-43 quotraf,ions religiooiNy of,5 reliqiouo traininq,T romanLicf,aclics and engaqementof, 9-11 ochooling,6-7 kniqhN of faiNh,12+25, 133 knighlof infiniNe reoiqnat,ion, 133 knowledge,26,27

\or'

116,134 Leap,Nhe,75, 1OO-1O3, l o q i c , l a wosf , 1 3 3 Lutheranism,134 madneee,124 marriage, 69,1O2 Marx, Karl,90 malerialism,66 mind/bodyVroblem,66 66,134 monasticiam,

the

FINITE *hc

(

TEMPORAL\( thc

lhe

I8LE NECESSARY POSS

BODY neqativef,houqhN,39 NewTeehamenN,114 27 non-knowledge, normality,65 59, 42, 45, 46 nothinqneso, qhI, 32-34 Ih o u e objectiv objeclivef,ruf,h,35, 4B-51, 55, 135 9-12, 69, 1O2,126-27 )leen, Reqina, originalein,5b-61 of,her,Nhe,67-70

SOUL

SELF=SPRIT=TREEDO

"?aperefrom OneSurviving" (Kierkeqaard), B parableo,24 14€^

OTHER

ThenomenoloTy of 3?irit (legel),67-69 ( Kierkeaaard\. 7 hiloeophic F al raamenle 91 90-91 philoeophy, pietism,l35 7 1 a N o , 2 2 , 3132, 4 p l e a e u rV e r i n c i p lB e ,Z poooibility,52-53, 59-60 Toelocriol

-_.-r-_

(Kierkegaard),

+2-43 UilONG So WH|-T,S reliqioue self,69, 77,108-25 rI ev lti tr ut iJn tt v v tJa

u tTH nV

SAY,I F I T 6@b, FEELS

fioTtvnfl0N?

cr Y ; nt h et rvct v r

DO ff/

135 r e l i q i o u ee l a N e o of consciouene6o,54-56 r o l e e / r o l eV l a y i n g , aA-q4 1n7 v

I

v v t

t v v

KotaLion Method,

B6-b7 Sarlre, Jean-?aul,

"ffi,

27-29,53-54, 56,60,62 S c h e l l i n gF, r i e d r i c hv o n ,1 0 S c h l e q e lF, r i l z , 9 , 1 1 eelf, 65-71 s e l f- c o n sc io ue nes s , 6 B e elf- realizalio n, 7 O-7 5 a P n t6r vP n c r rv v cY n l iv t \g n , 4 9 - 5 0 Jvt Yvt

o e n o u a l i e m6,6

Seventh3eal.The(tilm,Sergman), 45 zexualVleaeure, BB SickneeeunT,o DeaLh.The(Kierkegaard), 64, 65, 70 Socrales,22-23, 25 eophietic ated aeeLhetee, B2 eoul,66 StranaenThe(Camue). 44 eubjective thouqht,32, 34, 39, +3, 136 149

oubjeclivet ruth, 21,27-2b, 32, 35-36, 4246 suicide,74,B6-b7 surd,135 )ynoptic GooVelo,136 lel eological ouopeneionof Nhe elhical, 11 b, 1Zo truth. )ee objeclivetrubh oubjectiveNruhh Universal,136 unoophietric atredaesNh eles, BO valuee,36-39 Wiltgenolein,Ludwiq,3 B

160

IFYt|UIII(ED KIERI(EGAARDIII ...f,hen

il/r,6{u,l(ul+-O wouldliketo intrroduce you Notwo other books by aulhorI illuetrator DonaldTalmerz SARTRE For 6eginners ie an acceeeibleyeL ooVhioticated i n f , r o d u c L i o nt o t h e l i f e a n d work of the famoue French e x i o f , en f , a i l i s t V h i lo s o V he r Jean Taul )arf,re. Sartre, Lhe b e e l - k n o w ng h i l o e o p h e ro f t h e z o i l c e n L u r y ,w a o a m e m b e r of Lhe French underqround durinq Wodd War ll, a noveliel, a glaywriqhl, and a major influence in French political a n d i n l e l l e c t u a ll i f e . Paper,$11.00($15.95Cdn.), lsBN 0-86316-177-4

STRUCTURALI9M For beginner6 ie an illueLrated tour f,hrough the myef,eriouelandoca?eof slrucLuraliemand poet.elructuralism. The journey'e sLarLin4 poinl ie the linguieLic theory of Ferdinandde Saueeure, Ihen,jumpinqoverLhe Lwo world wars, iL vieiLe Lhe key ideae of oome of f,he biqqeel nameo in French Nhouqht, between 1950 and 19BO: Claude Lbvi-Otrauee; Koland Oa rth es; Louie Althueeer; Jacqueo Lacan: and Jacquee Derrida, Structuralism For geginnera triee lo make oenee of lanquaqe ae well ae Nhe radical claim of the dioappearanceof Lheindividual.

Paper,$11.00($15.95Cdn.), tsBN0-86316-193-6

Great ideasand great thinkers can be thrilling. They can also be intimidating and complicated. ThaI;ewhere Writnrsand Readers ForEeginnere"booke comein. Wfitnreand you Readersbrouqht' lhe veryfiretrFor Eeginnerd"bookover lwentyyearoaqo. amideta )incef,hen, number of imiqrowinq t alors,we've Vubliehed eome70 tirlee(ranqinq fromArchikclureln kn andfromEineteint'o Elvie)int'heint,ernationally ForAeginnerd'seriee,EverybookinNheeeriee acclaimed daNeandUNcomplicaf'e UNin|ini 6ewe6one?ur?oee'.I'o is f,ooim7orI'anL Knowledqe greaNlhinkers. f,heworkeof t o t'heexpefi'o, t o beconfined Ptato For

byfob Cavalierc ' illusfialed ry Erblrrb

Foucault For Beginners

by LydiaAlixFillingham Susser byMoshe illuslrated

fllustrationsby Joe Lee, from Clowns For Beginners

byW.Tetrenmctrel byAtbettfidl nbsfiabd

And knowledqe,ae you will diecover in our "DocumenLary Comicbooke]'ie funl,Eachbook researched,humorouelywrit' io painoLaklngly Len and illuelraled in whalever obyle beet suiilslhe oubjec|al hand.

Chomsky For Beginners by DavidCogswell; by illustrated PaulGordon

Race For Beginners byS E Anderson byThe lllustrated Collective Cro-Mat

McLuhan For Beginners byW.Tenence Gordon; by illustrated SusanWiilmadh

:,::.:.:. ;i:{:,qt

ai@w

l-Ching For Beginners byBrandon Toropov; illustrated by JohnKane

* ThaI' s Wrltnrs and Readers, where For Beg inner st if it' doesn'f'oay... booksbegan!Kemember,

ilha{anl

...if's noLan oriqinalFor Eeginnero'"bookl

Eastern Europe For Beginners byBeck,Mastand Tapper

forBeginners Foucault rsBN0-86316-160-X Lydia AlixFillingham lllus.byMoshe Susser

PlatoforBeginnerc rsBN0-86316-039-5 Robert Cavaliere lllusbyEricLurio

Nietzsche forBeginners r s B N0 - 8 6 3 1 6 - 1 1 8 - 9 MarcSautet lllusbyPatrick Boussignac

Brecht forBiginners tsBN0-86316-100-6 Thoss Michael Boussignac lllus.byPatrick

ZenforBeginners lSBN 0-86316-116-2 JudithBlackstone & ZoranJosipovic Rosenblatt lllus.byNaomi

lor Beginners Judaism l s B N0 - 8 6 3 1 6 - 1 0 1 - 4 Written & lllus.by Charles Szlackmann

TheHistory of Glowns forBeginners rsBN0-86316-199-5 Written byJoeLee & lllustrated

TheArabs& lsrael lor Beginnerc t s B N0 - 8 6 3 1 6 - 1 6 1 - 8 RonDavid David lllus.bySusan

Musiclor Beginners Glassical rsBN0-86316-162-6 Lynch Stacy Combs lllus.byMichael Lynch

TheJewishHolocaust lor Beginners tsBN0-86316-182-0 Stewart Justman lllus.byRebecca Shope

Addiclion & Recovery lor Beginners rsBN0-86316-198-7 David A.Brizer, M.D. M.D. lllus.byRicardo Castafreda,

Sexlor Beginners lsBN0-86316-01 1-5 ErrolSelkirk lllus.byNaomi Rosenblatt

forBeginners Babies rsBN0-86316-169-3 David A.Brizer, M.D. M.D. lllus.byRicardo Castafreda,

Heidegger torBeginners lsBN0-86316-1723 EricLemay & Jennifer Pitts lllus.byPaulGordon

Healthcare lor Beginners tsBN0-86316-170-7 David A.Brizer, M.D. lllus.byRicardo M.D. Castafreda,

forBeginnerc UNICEF |SBN 0-86316-197-9 Written & lllusby Clark Christian

TheU.N.ForBeginnerc lsBN0-86316-185-5 lanWilliams

forBeginnerc Sartre ISBN0-86316-177-4 Written & lflus.by Donald Palmer

forBeginners BlackPantherc tsBN0-86316-196-0 HerbBoyd

JazzlorBeginners rsBN0-86316-165-0 RonDavid lllus.byVanessa Holley

E4|.ndtdEW!.:AidifBookco'26.2EEdgnGl@,London,En!|and,N78EF,phone(071)607.5792'fq(071}6o7-67l4.frln|h:TomrBooh'phone61.2.938.5155''d1 Eook are availableand di9ttibutedthtouOhwt the UniN Sla/h6,Cand4 Austnlia, Enqland,EuoN aN Connonwulth

oren Kierkegoordwos one of ; of the nineteenth cenfurymen who ever wolked ;motic

Phifosophicolfy, Kierkegoordwos the ,,bridge,,thot led from Hegelto Existentiolism. KierkegoordobhorredHegel'sobstroct,know-it-oll ideolismthqt tried to copturereolityin q few words. Kierkegoord's ottockon sociol ond religiouscomplocency ond I his single-honded ossoulton troditionolWesternphilosophygeneroted o crisisthot producedo rodicollynew woy of phifosophizing ond modehim the founi"l. of rheschoolthoi would loterbe colledExistentiolism. To Kierkegoord, reolitywos personof, subiective-itbegonond endedwith td individuol-ond philosophy

wosnotsomething onemerelytolkedobout,it wosthewqy you iir"d.

Forsucho brilliontthinker,the woy Kierkegoordlivedwos...somewhot too interesting His "obstroct"loveoffoir?His obsession with deoth? His "Leopof Foith,"his cynicism,his morvellous sense of humor-how do you put oll thot into one mon? For storters,you reqd Kierkqaard For Bqinners. It exploins,ploinlyond simply,the greotDonish thinker'sobsession with the porticullriryof humonexistenceos well os his demonstrotion of how the creotion of on outhenticnew k;ndof individuolis possible.

A lfudKtut-, BEGINNERS DOCUlT,IENTARY

coMtcBooK

PHILOSOPHY SERIES

us $11.00 uK t6.gg cAN$15.95

lsBN0-96316-192-g