Table of Contents
Either/Or
In ‘Either/Or’, Danish philosopher Soren Kierkegaard offers readers a detailed analysis of human existence, complete with various thought experiments and passages of dense prose.
Kierkegaard opens the book with a distinction between two ways of life that he labels the aesthetic and the ethical. The former is concerned only with immediate pleasure and gratification, while the latter requires us to consider our duties and responsibilities to others. While both approaches have their merits, Kierkegaard argues that the ethical way of life is ultimately more fulfilling, as it leads us to develop our true potential as human beings.
Ethical vs Aesthetic
Kierkegaard provides a mathematical analogy, positing that there are three distinct spheres of existence which he calls the “aesthetic,” the “ethical,” and the “religious.” He likens these spheres to circles which do not intersect; one can move from one circle into another, but it is impossible to occupy two spheres at once. The individual must choose which circle to enter, and once they have made their choice, they cannot return to the other two spheres.
Kierkegaard goes on to say that humans naturally gravitate towards the aesthetic sphere because it is the easiest of the three. In this sphere, one seeks immediate gratification and lives for momentary pleasure.
While both approaches have their merits, Kierkegaard argues that the ethical way of life is ultimately more fulfilling, as it leads us to develop our true potential as human beings. He provides a number of thought experiments to support this claim, including one in which a man reflects on his life and death; the man realizes that he has only lived in the present, and has ignored his potential to be happy and fulfilled in the future.
Kierkegaard argues that this is the case for most people, who live their lives in a state of Either/Or. They either focus on the present and neglect their potential, or they focus on the future and neglect the present. Either way, they fail to live in the present moment and realize their full potential. Kierkegaard’s point is that we must learn to balance our focus on the present and the future, and to live in the present moment as much as possible.
The first section, Either, is an ostensible defense of the aesthetic viewpoint on life, consisting of a variety of pieces of various genres and subjects that praise continual change and sensory sensations. In one of these publications, Kierkegaard examines an aesthetic vision of life (a narrower sense of the term than today’s understanding) through a lengthy praise of Mozart’s opera, Don Giovanni, written by Victor Emeritus, aesthete, one of Kierkegaard’s numerous aliases. This section also includes The Seducer’s Diary, one of his most well-known works. In the second section – Or, he critiques this shallow view of existence and advocates for an ethical perspective: the nutrition of the spirit, not simply the senses.
There is no room for contemplation or long-term planning; one simply reacts to whatever situation they find themselves in without any regard for future consequences. Though living in this way may seem carefree and fun, Kierkegaard argues that it ultimately leads to dissatisfaction and emptiness.
In contrast, those who choose to live in the ethical sphere are motivated by duty and principle. They forego immediate pleasure in favor of doing what is right, even if it is difficult or painful in the moment. This type of person recognizes that human beings are social creatures who rely on relationships with others in order to lead fulfilling lives.
As such, they act in ways that maintain harmony within their community rather than acting purely out of self-interest. Kierkegaard believes that living ethically is more challenging than living aesthetically, but ultimately more rewarding as it leads to lasting satisfaction rather than mere fleeting pleasure.
As for the religious sphere, he argues that those who choose to live in it are motivated by faith rather than duty or principle. They believe that there is a higher power that governs the world and that through faith in that power they can achieve eternal happiness.
They are not concerned with how their actions may appear to others. Rather, they are focused solely on their own spiritual well-being and seek to live in accordance with their religious beliefs. Such a lifestyle may seem restrictive and boring, but it ultimately leads to satisfaction as it provides a sense of purpose and meaning to the otherwise meaningless existence of the world. Kierkegaard believes that humans cannot find lasting satisfaction in either the aesthetic or ethical spheres because they are both transitory; they are based on changeable desires and beliefs that are constantly in flux. The only way to achieve lasting satisfaction is to live in accordance with an absolute and unchanging truth, which is only possible in the religious sphere.
If you marry, you will regret it; if you do not marry, you will also regret it; if you marry or do not marry, you will regret both; Laugh at the world’s follies, you will regret it, weep over them, you will also regret that; laugh at the world’s follies or weep over them, you will regret both; whether you laugh at the world’s follies or weep over them, you will regret both. Believe a woman, you will regret it, believe her not, you will also regret that; believe a woman or believe her not, you will regret both; whether you believe a woman or believe her not, you will regret both. Hang yourself, you will regret it; do not hang yourself, and you will also regret that; hang yourself or do not hang yourself, you will regret both; whether you hang yourself or do not hang yourself, you will regret both. This, gentlemen, is the sum and substance of all philosophy.
– Kierkegaard
The Sickness Unto Death
In “The Sickness Unto Death”, Danish philosopher Søren Kierkegaard presents the idea that humans are in a constant state of becoming. For Kierkegaard, this process of becoming is defined by a continuous striving towards an ideal self that is never fully realized. This ideal self is what Kierkegaard calls the “authentic self”. It is only through coming to grips with the fact that the authentic self is something that can never be fully attained that humans can begin to live meaningful lives.
In order to understand Kierkegaard’s idea of the authentic self, it is first necessary to understand his concept of the “empty self”. The empty self is the self that humans create in order to avoid facing up to the fact that they will never attain their authentic selves. This empty self is nothing more than a facade, a false sense of who we are. It is an attempt to create a false sense of security in a world that is fundamentally uncertain. The empty self is a way of denying the reality of our own finitude. Kierkegaard believed that it is only through coming to terms with our own mortality that we can begin to live authentic lives.
The problem with living our lives from within the confines of the empty self is that it leads to what Kierkegaard calls “despair”. Despair is not simply sadness or disappointment, but rather it is the realization that one’s life has no inherent purpose or meaning. It is the despair of not knowing who we are or why we are here. This type of despair can only be overcome by coming to terms with the fact that our authentic selves are something that we can never fully attain. Once we accept this fact, we can begin to live our lives in accordance with our true nature.
The empty self is a way of avoiding this difficult task. Kierkegaard believed that the only way to overcome the empty self is to choose to live in faith. Faith is the belief in something that is beyond our understanding. It is the faith that leads us to trust in something that we cannot see. We must have faith in our authentic selves, in spite of the fact that we will never fully attain them. This faith is the source of our courage.
“The Sickness Unto Death’ is a German expression meaning ‘the disease to life’. This is an ironic statement because the disease to life is death. The disease to life is the disease that prevents us from living our lives in accordance with our true nature. The disease to life is an illusion.
Kierkegaard’s main task in the book is to teach the reader how to live a meaningful life in the face of despair. This task is accomplished through a series of dialogues between the author and a character named A. In these dialogues, Kierkegaard uses the character of A to represent the average person who is living in a state of despair. Kierkegaard believes that it is only through coming to grips with our own mortality that we can begin to live authentic lives.
The character of A is used to illustrate this point. A is a debilitated man who has lost all hope for the future. He is completely resigned to the fact that he will die, but he is not ready to accept that he will die alone. A is a perfect example of the person who is convinced that he will never be happy and is therefore unwilling to take action to improve his life. A is convinced that he is trapped in a permanent state of despair. This is not true, however, because A is able to recognize that he is trapped and that he has a choice as to how he will spend his life. A can choose to spend his life in despair or he can choose to live a meaningful life in spite of his despair.
For Kierkegaard, “the self is not the relation (which relates to itself) but the relation’s relating to itself.” From the start, he shifts from a Cartesian or essentialist view of the self to an existentialist one. Whereas for Descartes “self” is a common noun, for Kierkegaard, it is a gerund. And the embedded verb, to relate, points to the dynamics of the self. In this case, relating to itself. Kierkegaard argues that the self is essentially an existential relation. It is not a simple or static entity but rather is constantly in a state of dynamic change. Thus, we cannot get to the essence of the self by looking at the way it relates to other entities. We must look at the way it relates to itself. This is why A is so important to Kierkegaard. A represents the average person who is living in a state of despair and who is not ready to face the reality of his or her own condition.
The first despair is that “which is ignorant of being in despair, or the despairing ignorance of having a self and an eternal self.” Similar to the “unexamined life” of Socrates, this is the unexamined self. And for Kierkegaard, this is the most common despair, though the individuals involved aren’t aware of it. It is the despair that comes from not recognizing our own existence. We are so focused on our individual selves that we fail to see the larger picture. This is the despair that comes from living in a state of ignorance. Like A, we are living in a state of despair without even realizing it.
In the Christian worldview, “a human being is a synthesis of the infinite and finite,” and therefore the tension between these poles becomes the source of next two types of despair: “wanting in despair to be oneself” and “not wanting in despair to be oneself.” Kierkegaard believes that the key to resolving these two types of despair is to come to grips with the tension between the infinite and finite. He calls this tension “the agony of choice.” The person who wants in despair to be oneself is the person who is too afraid to face the fact that he or she is finite. This person is afraid of death and therefore chooses to avoid life.
The person who does not want in despair to be oneself is the person who is too afraid to face the fact that he or she is infinite. This person is afraid of life and therefore chooses to avoid death. Kierkegaard believes that both of these types of despair are resolved by coming to grips with the tension between the infinite and finite.
For Kierkegaard, despair is the sickness unto death, one different from an ordinary sickness that leads to physical death. Within the Christian framework, physical death may be a path toward eternal life and a dying person may hope for the life after. But despair, as the sickness unto death, is when one hopes for death as a resolution, but the person cannot die. Hence, the despair. Such despair presupposes life after death. For the atheistic existentialist, such as Sartre or Camus, death is the ultimate end and creates the despair by nullifying hope and achievement and life. For Kierkegaard, despair is a form of sin that can only be absolved through a relationship with God. This is the key difference between Kierkegaard and the atheistic existentialists.
For Kierkegaard, despair can be resolved through a leap of faith, an act of will that affirms belief in spite of the evidence to the contrary. This is what makes Kierkegaard’s brand of existentialism unique.
Fear and Trembling
Soren Kierkegaard’s Fear and Trembling is a philosophical work that explores the concept of faith. The book centers around the story of Abraham and Isaac from the Bible, and how Abraham was willing to sacrifice his son at God’s command. Kierkegaard uses this story to ask the question of how humans can have faith in a higher power when that power demands things that are seemingly unethical.
Kierkegaard argues that there are two ways to look at the story of Abraham and Isaac. The first is what he calls the ” ethical stage.” In this stage, humans try to follow objective ethical principles in order to live their lives. However, Kierkegaard says that this is not possible, because humans cannot know what the true objective ethical principles are. The second stage is what Kierkegaard calls the “religious stage.” In this stage, humans submit themselves to a higher power, even if that power demands things that go against their ethical principles. For Kierkegaard, this is the only way to truly have faith.
The idea of a religious stage above an ethical stage may seem controversial, but Kierkegaard backs up his argument with rigorous philosophical reasoning. His concepts of the three “spheres” and the “teleological suspension of the ethical” provide a framework for understanding how humans can ethically submit to a higher power. Fear and Trembling is a complex book, but its ideas are vital for understanding religious faith.
Kierkegaard argues that Abraham’s actions cannot be understood from either the aesthetic or ethical point of view. If we view Abraham from the aesthetic perspective, then his actions are incomprehensible because they are not pleasurable or immediate. If we view him from the ethical perspective, then his actions are also incomprehensible because they go against everything he believes in. In order for us to understand Abraham, we must view him from the religious perspective.
From the religious perspective, Abraham’s actions are not perplexing because he is willing to do anything that God asks of him. Kierkegaard believes that it is only through a relationship with God that we can truly understand what it means to have faith. Faith is not a mental construct; rather, it is something that must be experienced firsthand.
The Concept of Anxiety
In his book “The Concept of Anxiety”, Danish philosopher Soren Kierkegaard explores the nature of anxiety and how it relates to the human condition. Kierkegaard posits that anxiety is not simply a feeling or emotion, but rather a fundamental quality of existence. He goes on to argue that anxiety is what allows humans to be free beings, as it is only through anxiety that we can exercise our freedom of choice.
Kierkegaard begins by discussing the etymology of the word “anxiety”. He notes that the word comes from the Latin angere, which means “to choke” or “to strangle”. He then proceeds to discuss how this physical feeling of being choked or restricted is analogous to the psychological feeling of anxiety. Kierkegaard argues that anxiety is not simply a passing feeling or emotion, but rather a deep-seated unease that is always present in human existence.
Kierkegaard goes on to say that anxiety is what allows humans to be free beings. He argues that it is only through anxiety that we can exercise our freedom of choice. This is because when we are faced with a decision, we must first experience anxiety in order to realize that we have the freedom to choose. Without anxiety, we would be slaves to our habits and desires and would never be able to act freely. Kierkegaard argues that it is only through anxiety that we can become aware of our true selves and our potential for greatness. In order to live a fulfilling life, we must learn to embrace our anxiety and use it to become the best versions of ourselves.
Finally, Kierkegaard discusses how Christianity can help us to cope with our anxieties. He argues that Christianity does not seek to eliminate anxiety, but rather to transform it into something positive. Christianity teaches us that our anxieties can be channeled into love and care for others, rather than being allowed to fester and turn into fear or resentment. Through Christ’s example, we see that it is possible to face our anxieties head-on and emerge stronger and more compassionate for it. Christianity also offers us a community of support to help us through our darkest moments. In times of anxiety, we can turn to our brothers and sisters in Christ for comfort and strength. By following Christ’s example and embracing our anxiety, we can live fuller, more abundant lives.
Soren Kierkegaard explores the nature of anxiety and how it relates to the human condition. Kierkegaard posits that anxiety is not simply a feeling or emotion, but rather a fundamental quality of existence. He goes on to argue that anxiety is what allows humans to be free beings, as it is only through anxiety that we can exercise our freedom of choice. Ultimately, Kierkegaard believes that Christianity can help us to deal with our anxieties in a healthy way by teaching us to channel them into love and care for others.
The Diary of a Seducer
In his David Foster Wallace-esque treatise on love and lust, Søren Kierkegaard leads us through the mind of a young man seducer with poetic language and philosophical genius. In Diary of a Seducer, we are privy to the machinations and manipulations our protagonist uses to bed women. Though the book was published in 1843, Kierkegaard’s observations about femininity, social pressure and the human condition feel refreshingly modern.
Kierkegaard believed that people need to be broken down into three parts: the aesthetic, the ethical and the religious. Our young seducer occupies primarily the first two stages with fleeting forays into the third. The ethical is represented by marriage and children while religious love is something that goes beyond simple physical attraction. The aesthetic, which is where most people spend their lives, indulges in short-term pleasures like sex, drugs and gambling.
The book is essentially a how-to guide for those who want to enter into an aesthetic lifestyle with all its hedonistic trappings. As such, it’s full of helpful tips on charming women and making them believe they’re the only ones you’re interested in. The message is clear: if you want to be a successful seducer, you have to be a master of deceit. You must be convinced of your own lies in order to make them believable to others.
Of course, as we see from our protagonist’s interactions with Cordelia, his one true love, this way of life is ultimately unfulfilling. Kierkegaard argues that it’s only when we give up our selfish ways and learn to truly love others that we can find happiness.
Diary of a Seducer is a great read for anyone interested in philosophy or psychology. It gives us an intimate look at the mind of a manipulator and raises important questions about what it means to lead a good life. Kierkegaard’s insights are as relevant today as they were almost two centuries ago, making this book required reading for anyone who wants to understand human nature.
Through the diary entries of one such seducer, we see how calculating and methodical the process of seduction can be. We also see how the seducer’s own desires and emotions come into play, complicating what would otherwise be a simply mechanical process. This work is sure to interest anyone who wants to better understand the psychology of seduction.
The diary is written from the perspective of a young man who is determined to seduce a beautiful, married woman named Cordelia. He begins by studying her habits and creating a false identity for himself that he believes she will find appealing. He then proceeds to ingratiate himself into her life, first as a friend and then as a lover.Throughout the process, he remains ever mindful of his goal, using every means at his disposal to achieve it.
However, as he gets closer to Cordelia and starts to fall in love with her, his original goal begins to lose its importance. He finds himself torn between his desire to possess her and his growing feelings for her. Ultimately, he must decide whether or not to go through with his plan, knowing that it may well destroy the thing he has come to care for most.
In the end, he succeeds in winning her over and the two share a night of passion. Though his victory is short-lived, as she ultimately chooses her husband over him, the experience has clearly had a profound effect on the young man. The diary ends with him vowing to never again allow himself to be so vulnerable to another person. Though he has lost the battle, he has learned a valuable lesson about the dangers of giving in to one’s emotions.
The Diary of a Seducer is an intriguing work that provides valuable insights into the psychology of both seducers and those who are being seduced. Kierkegaard’s use of diary entries gives readers an intimate look at the character’s thoughts and motivations, making for a rich and engaging reading experience. This work is sure to interest anyone with and curious mind and a taste for philosophy.
Repetition
In his book Repetition, Danish philosopher Soren Kierkegaard delves into the question of how one can know if they truly love someone. He posits that love is not simply a feeling, but an action that must be repeated again and again in order to be real. This might seem like a simple idea, but Kierkegaard uses it as a launching point to explore some deep and complex philosophical concepts. In this blog post, we’ll give a brief overview of Kierkegaard’s argument in Repetition.
Kierkegaard begins by distinguishing between two types of love: “love for gain” and “love for the beloved.” Love for gain is self-serving; we only love someone because we think they can give us something in return, whether that be money, sex, or power. This is not true love, because it is based on calculation rather than genuine feeling. Love for the beloved, on the other hand, is disinterested; we love someone simply because they are worthy of love, and not because of what they can do for us. This type of love is pure and noble, but also difficult to maintain. Kierkegaard argues that love must be constantly re-enacted in order to stay alive; if we do not keep choosing to love our beloved over and over again, then our love will eventually die.
To illustrate his point, Kierkegaard tells the story of a man who goes to visit his childhood home after many years away. The man finds that the house is now in ruins; however, he does not feel any sadness at the sight. He realizes that his memories of the house are more real to him than the physical structure itself; it is only by continually thinking about and re-experiencing those memories that they stay alive. Likewise, he argues, it is only by continually repeating the act of loving somebody that we can keep our love alive.
In conclusion, Kierkegaard believes that love must be an active verb; merely feeling love for someone is not enough. We must continuously choose to love them every day through our actions and thoughts. Otherwise, our love will slowly die away until it exists only as a memory.