Midterm Paper Phi

.docx

School

University of South Florida *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

2010

Subject

Philosophy

Date

Apr 3, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by UltraStarKudu37

Midterm Paper Rough Draft Connor Strand In this paper I am going to be explaining what Kierkegaard means by a “teleological suspension of the ethical. Unraveling this sentence starts by understanding what each of these words mean, and then putting them together to understand the statement. Firstly, teleological means to be doing something for a different purpose or a specific end. Next, in the statement “suspension” refers to letting go of, or allowing. The final section of the statement “the ethical” refers to what is just, or what is to be considered right or wrong. Putting together these definitions leads us to an understanding of what Kierkegaard meant when he said a teleological suspension of the ethical. It means that there may be times in an individual's life when seeking to achieve a higher purpose or duty, allows for that individual to step outside of the boundaries of what is considered to be ethical or moral, according to particular standards. Kierkegaard will go on to provide examples about how this statement relates to stories throughout history like Abraham and Issac as well as the story of Agamemnon and Iphigenia. In Kierkegaard's "Fear and Trembling," he uses the story of Abraham and Isaac from the Bible to illustrate his concept of the teleological suspension of the ethical. In the story, Abraham receives a calling from God commanding Abraham to sacrifice his son Isaac as a test of his faith. As anyone may see from an ethical perspective committing filicide is unethical. This is true in a universal understanding, but Kierkegaard also takes a look into the religious side which in turn turns a cheek to the Universal outlook. When Kierkegaard refers to "the ethical as such is the universal," Fear and Trembling Kierkegaard (55) he is highlighting a key aspect of ethical principles. Kierkegaard distinguishes between the ethical and the religious spheres when discussing these stories. "The ethical" refers to moral principles and norms that are universal and stand true for all individuals in society. These principles are based on reason and what is considered right or wrong according to society's standards and apply to everyone equally. However, Kierkegaard also suggests that there are moments when an individual's religious faith may require them to suspend the ethical in obedience to a higher calling or divine command, as exemplified in the story of Abraham and Isaac. Although Abraham was not operating within the ethical when he chose to sacrifice his son Issac, Kierkergaard uses the teleological suspension of the ethical to explore the separation between the ethical and religious. The story of Abraham and Issac, although similar to Agamemnon and Iphigenia in the way that there is a sacrifice of a child, is inherently different from the view of Kierkegaard. The difference between the tragic hero and Abraham is clearly evident. The tragic hero Agamemnon still remains within the ethical. Agamemnon is able to carry out the sacrifice of his daughter while operating within the boundaries of the ethical. He as king has the duty of getting the Greek forces to Troy, and the only way that his duty would be fulfilled and the plan brought to fruition was with the sacrifice of his daughter. He is in the limits of what is ethical when making this decision according to Kierkegaard because he is doing so for the greater good. Understanding the difference between the stories is within the motives and interaction with the divine. Although Agamemnon was faced with a difficult moral dilemma, external factors like the

greater good of his nation led to him operating within the ethical norms and laws of society. In comparison, Abraham's willingness to sacrifice Isaac is not motivated by any external factors or a greater good for society, but rather by his blinde faith and obedience to God. Kierkegaard discusses the distinction between what is rational and what is meaningful or desirable, and it is able to be seen that both of these stories contain elements of this theme. First we must gain the understanding what the term rational means in the way that Kierkegaard is depicting it. For Kierkegaard, the rational refers to the use of reason and logic when going about life and making decisions. Rational thinking involves using logical principles and living by objective truths that can be understood through logical analysis. Kierkegaard knows that rationality is essential for everyday life and that it is practical, but he argues that it has its limitations when it comes to addressing existential questions. Rational thinking is heavily related to how philosophers think about god. The use of a scientific approach in order to draw conclusions about God is an important aspect to rational thinking. This way of thought is a more ethical and universal approach that relates clearly to the morality of the Agamemnnon and Iphigenia. This is so because Agamemnnon adheres to the ethical and is taking action with rational thinking. In contrast, what is meaningful or desirable refers to the aspects of life that coincide with an individual's deepest values, beliefs, and desires. These aspects are subjective and can defy any rational explanation. Actions taken based on a devotion of faith, and personal agenda like in the story of Abraham and Issac were Abraham disregards rational thinking and takes action to sacrifice his son based on a deeper existential purpose to himself the individual. Kierkegaard's distinction shows the difference between reason and passion; it explains what can be understood rationally and what truly matters to individuals on an existential level. When Kierkegaard says “Faith is precisely this paradox, that the individual as the particular is higher than the universal, is justified over against it, is not subordinate but superior” Fear and Trembling Kierkegaard (57). He is attempting to look into the relationship between the individual and the universal, in the context of religious faith. Kierkegaard believes the "universal" refers to general truths, principles, and norms that apply to everyone universally, such as ethical or moral principles. The "individual," on the other hand, represents a singular person with unique experiences, beliefs, and relationships. Kierkegaard argued that faith involves a paradoxical relationship between the individual and the universal. While ethical or religious principles are often understood as universal truths that apply to everyone equally, faith goes beyond these universal norms. In the realm of faith, the individual's relationship with God takes precedence over the universal truths and the ethical. So, when Kierkegaard says that "the individual as the particular is higher than the universal," he means that in the context of faith, the individual's personal relationship with God is more significant than the obedience to the universal principles. Faith can take the individual out of the universal, when the individual's experience of faith is what ultimately matters most to them. Kierkegaard deems that faith is not subordinate to the universal; it is rather superior, because it involves a deeply personal and genuine relationship with God that allows letting go of rational understanding and conventional norms.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help