Comparing Hegel's And Kierkegaard

Wiesel appeals to logos, ethos, and pathos in Night. The reader’s logic is not so much directly appealed to, but indirectly

The entire subject of philosophy, according to Hegel, consists of the study of the history of the world and the creation of truth. When man first became aware of objects, he viewed everything in the context of death or negation. When the self encounters other people, its first reaction is to view them as objects and risk its life to kill them. After that comes the master/slave relationship, where certain people rise to the top of society and exercise control over others. Ironically, the slave actually has a more stable means of self-validation. The slave identifies with his work, which is never-ending, while the master identifies with his control over the slaves, which could end at a moment's notice. Another ideal, which we derive from Hegel, is that of "stoicism." Stoicism, defined as the recognition of the self as sovereign and independent. The individual tries to lead a self-contained life of reason but is still susceptible to the psychological residue of the master/slave relationship as well as nature's eternal mastery. After this stage comes skepticism, which is an extreme form of stoicism where the self becomes completely rational and destroys nature by doubting it. The self is still limited by the master/slave

Soren Kierkegaard is a Danish philosopher and theologian who attempted to deliver his existentialist point of views. Specifically, Kierkegaard emphasizes the need for humans to take responsibility for their actions and go beyond their “socially imposed identities” (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). According to his earliest major work “Either/Or,” he suggests humans are reluctantly stuck between two spheres of life that they must choose between: aesthetic or ethical. He delves into what constitutes a life as either and suggests the practicalities associated with each choice. He stresses the importance of being responsible for the truth and living according to the truth we’ve committed to. In addition, the existential choice can be

Additionally, both Hegel and Nietzsche use the Master / Slave dichotomy to account for identity and difference in the relationship between the powerful subject and the weak object. Both thinkers see identity and morality emerging out of a relationship of conflict. Moreover, in both Hegel and Nietzsche’s narratives, there is a change in the structure of acknowledgment, where the antagonistic relationship allows one side to define itself by negating the other. Both thinkers find that negation is an integral part of identity formation. Hegel and Nietzsche both concur, in dialectical terms, ‘Being’ is represented by the ‘object’, or Master, and the ‘subject’, or Slave, is constantly in the process of ‘Becoming’. From these similarities, is that clear that both 19th century philosophers have made a massive impact on philosophical thought in todays day and age, despite their distinct

To understand the connection between the occasion for Heidegger’s speech and its content, the setting needs to be clarified. Heidegger’s speech takes place during a memorial of the 175th birthday of famous

Since, faith is the paradox whereby the single individual’s inner ethical is higher than the outer universal ethical, therefore the single individual preforms the absolute duty to God. When the single individual carries out his absolute duty to God it can not be allowed to be interceded and thus the absolute duty cannot be understood nor communicated in the universal. If there was the possibility of faith being communicated than, this according to Kierkegaard would not be faith in its true essence, but rather simply religious trial.

In Concluding Unscientific Postscript, Kierkegaard differentiates between the subject as the knower, and the world (object) as the known: the only way we know the world is through ourselves. Kierkegaard emphasizes the importance of "how" the subject is related to the truth,

Hegel’s critique of Kant’s philosophy is quite prevalent throughout the unfolding of Hegel’s own dialectical philosophy. Several of Hegel’s critiques of Kant’s work can especially be seen in one of his earlier works, “The Phenomenology of Spirit.” This is particularly established once Hegel begins to undertake the developing of Spirit within his Phenomenology. Here, Hegel makes several attacks on Kantian philosophy principles, and at some of the foundations of Kant’s use of pure reason in philosophy. There are several passages within the section where Hegel gives criticism of Kant’s work; critiques that strike at the very heart of what Hegel himself is trying to elucidate through his own dialectic, while discounting one of the greatest German philosophers.

Kierkegaard’s position on faith is represented with the Knight of infinite resignation and the Knight of faith. The Knight of faith is regarded as the one who believes in that which is absurd. For, he is the knight that is able to believe in the things that are

To this effect, I shall explore this text’s connections to Nietzsche's key intellectual influences. First, I shall address the impact of the Schopenhauerian view of the world on The Birth of Tragedy, in particular as regards the opposition between Apollo and Dionysus and the nature and goal of tragic art. Subsequently, I shall refer to the influence of Richard Wagner's thought in order to explore the relationship between metaphysics and art as humanity's "true metaphysical

Starting with Kierkegaard, it is best to understand that he has a deep fulfillment to God and that he feels is the absolute. This absolute is to live in the realm of a paradox and that paradox is proving the existence of God and experiencing it for yourself. To understand this is to go through the different stages, of aesthetic, moral and religious. The aesthetic is all about the individual and focuses on oneself as an individual. The moral is having to be antagonistic towards yourself in

George Hegel introduced to the world to the theory of ideas, known as the Hegelian dialectic, and it is quite astonishing as it contemplates and assesses contradicting ideas and ultimately generates a new idea. Hegel believes that all human ideas (thesis) are often in heated confrontations with their similar counterparts (antithesis), in which both may be equally feasible for a society. Hegel believes that these issues must be resolved through the synthesis of a new idea.

As presented in the Phenomenology of Spirit, the aim of Life is to free itself from confinement "in-itself" and to become "for-itself." Not only does Hegel place this unfolding of Life at the very beginning of the dialectical development of self-consciousness, but he characterizes self-consciousness itself as a form of Life and points to the advancement of self-consciousness in the Master/Slave dialectic as the development of Life becoming "for-itself." This paper seeks to delineate this often overlooked thread of dialectical insight as it unfolds in the Master/Slave dialectic. Hegel articulates a vision of the place of human self-consciousness in the process of Life as a whole and throws light on the role of death as an essential

In this essay, I will try to summarize, analyze and discuss several pages of Søren Kierkegaard’s Training in Christianity. I will try to focus on his approach to sacred history, a general Christian history and Christianity, which he discusses in this work in relation to faith in God. In other parts of this essay I will attempt also to relate these pages of his work to some key ideas of Kierkegaard’s theology and philosophy and support this with some concrete quotations from the text. In the end I will very briefly compare different philosophies of Hegel and Kierkegaard and try to relate Kierkegaard’s work to a few topics, which

Kierkegaard's works are not straightforward proclamations of his philosophy: he wrote under pseudonyms and assumed the persona of these fictional characters in his writing. Thus, one must be careful when attributing a particular position to Kierkegaard -- often the view is advanced by a pseudonym, so various inferential processes must be applied in order to substantiate a claim that Kierkegaard really meant any statement.