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