Kierkegaard Double Standard

Soren Kierkegaard writings basically speak about how human live and how human choose to live. Kierkegaard philosophize what its mean to be alive. His subject was the individual and his or her existence, the existing being. In Kierkegaard’s view, this purely subjective entity is lay beyond the reach of reason,

The words “the Century’s corpse” and “the ancient pulse of germ and birth” refer to the turn of the dismal century and no hope for change. There is other important information relating to the poet’s state of mind. He is deeply depressed, stating that the world is “fervorless as

“To be, or not to be, that is the question,” (3.1.64). This famous line in William Shakespeare's Hamlet perfectly encapsulates Hamlet’s internal struggle throughout the play. Hamlet tells the story of the young prince of Denmark and his desire for revenge on the uncle, Claudius, who murdered his father. As is the case in many works of literature, Hamlet changes greatly throughout the play. However, because of his attempts to act insane, it can be difficult to precisely map the changes in Hamlet’s character. By carefully investigating his seven soliloquies, where he is alone and has no need to “put on an antic disposition,” one can understand and interpret how Hamlet’s character develops throughout the play.

Twain presents an example of how one year a society may wear a certain blouse and it be in style and fashion and the following year society will mock the same exact blouse and become out of fashion. Human beings yearn and desire to be accepted by society; it is in society’s nature to feel this way and it is an escapable feeling that one cannot simply make disappear. People will even go to the extent of disregarding their own personal morals just to gain society’s approval and often, “self-approval is acquired mainly from the approval of other people”. With these actions from society, it supports Twain’s accusation of corn-pone meaning that society is unsophisticated and basically just act as a heard of sheep. Twain emphasizes that society enjoys taking values and morals of human beings and obliterating them and extrapolating them away as if their morals were the sole reason of society being damaged not the society itself. Through the use of examples and rhetoric devices within “Corn-Pone Opinions”, Twain achieves his primary argument of how humans conform to society and act as sheep following their

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

I feel as if the speaker is tired of seeing zombie hats. They are tired of seeing everyone at the dinner table tweeting about a viral video or updating their Facebook status. The reader is trying to save those they can. There will be some, like myself, that will get it. They will get that it is not necessarily cool to be like everyone else. If their passions are true, than that is great. However, many people in society just follow the heard

As conformity becomes ever more common within a society, individuals isolate themselves, but only because the conformists have lost their ability to reflect on their decisions. Similarly, while Bernard and Lenina watch the sea in peace, he makes comments about individuality and its benefits, which startles Lenina, who exclaims, “And how can you talk like that about not wanting to be a part of the social body? After all, every one works for everyone else” (Huxley 91). Here, Lenina is absolutely shocked that Bernard would not want to be with everyone else. However, the sole reason why people only want to conform is that they cannot begin to express their own thoughts and feelings. A person’s individuality is what sets them apart from the rest of society, and when taken away, they become generic. Even though conforming can cause a lot of problems in a person, they are able to agree with a group of people and are able to convey ideas clearly as well as not feel left out. Furthermore, in the story The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas by Ursula Le Guin, there are many examples of conformity when it comes to witnessing the child that is responsible for the “happiness” in

Philippe Petit is an egocentric asshole. I will argue that his way of being diminished any value his accomplishments might have had. In Kierkegaard’s terms, Petit is an aesthete. Kierkegaard presents three categories in which he identifies and classifies different ways of being a self; these three groups are ethical, religious, and aesthetic. My argument is that in this situation, being an aesthete negated the significance of Petit’s “achievement.”

In Shakespeare's Hamlet there is a constant battle between action and reaction within the protagonist, Hamlet. After learning the truth about the circumstances surrounding his father’s death, Hamlet (who has been mourning and depressed since the passing of King Hamlet) finally felt a sense of self worth and purpose. Although Hamlet may appear as noble or devoted for working so diligently to avenge his father, his blind hypocrisy in blaming others for his lack of initiative make these actions merely a facade masking Hamlet’s own struggle with his identity.

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,

Immediately, the question “Who’s there?” in the exposition develops an angst ambience, foreshadowing a Denmark wrought with corruption. This foreboding sense of corruption is further implored by the supernatural connotation of Hamlet’s Father’s apparition and natural imagery “Tis an

However, I believe that the most important one is Kierkegaard’s use of interpretive confusion to both affirm and deny the interpretations of the reader. On page 102 in his diary, Johannes writes, “That is, a book has the remarkable characteristic that it can be interpreted as one pleases” (Kierkegaard 102). I believe that the intent of this insertion is to imply to the reader that there is ambiguity in every interpretation of the novel. This is not an invitation on the part of Kierkegaard to allow the reader complete freedom of interpretation, but rather a warning about the potential unreconcilable ambiguity and confusion that would occur if one were to interpret every book as one pleases. As an author, Kierkegaard does not let the reader freely interpret this text.

Human beings are inherently social creatures. Individuals thrive from communication and self-expression. Thus, they create intricate interactive structures that stem from the cooperation and interdependence amongst groups. “Society is something that precedes the individual,” as Aristotle contends in his Politics; “It comes to be for the sake of life, and exists for the sake of the good life.” Nevertheless, man has become increasingly dubious of the world around him, recognizing the human tendency towards deception. Public interactions have consequently been defined by skepticism with the indulgence of appetites and, consequently, the gradual loss of human convictions. This culture of distrust can be understood through Renaissance protagonists, who poignantly question their respective societies as they attempt to acquaint themselves with a distant world. William Shakespeare’s play Hamlet and Miguel de Cervantes’s novel Don Quixote demonstrate this fundamental cynicism through the doubt of human interactions and the assaying of society as a whole. As these individuals attempt to find their place in a larger realm, they realize how impersonal and harsh the collective can be to the individual. Each masterpiece reveals the way in which the inherent tensions of relationships make society a hostile environment, unfriendly to man. Society, therefore, becomes a sphere of self-loss

Two of the most prevalent forms of communication styles are direct and indirect communication; these two communication styles impact how members of a culture interact with each other (Morreale & Pearson, 2008). According to Craddock (2002), Kierkegaard, regarded direct communication, “as the mode for transferring information and considered it totally appropriate to the fields of history, science, and related disciplines” (p. 70). Direct communication can be defined as, “speech that specifically states and directs an action. When someone hears direct speech, they know immediately what needs to be done. There is no question about who is in charge, and usually no need for discussion” (Gaddis, 2006, p. 11). On the other hand, Kiergaard believed that, “the indirect was the mode for eliciting capability and action from within the listener, a transaction that did not occur by giving the hearer some information” (Craddock, 2002, p. 70). Unlike direct communication, “a indirect style of speech is not typically authoritative, rather it encourages input from the listener” (Gaddis, 2006, p. 11). The direct and indirect communication styles are often used in different fields, disciplines, and industries ranging from education, workplace, literature, and entertainment, to church services (Morreale & Pearson, 2008). For example, the population relies on the news media as the main source of information and the basis on which they form their opinions and voting decisions” (Fog, 1999, p.

Their happiness and future was questioned by Kierkegaard, as he started to worry that he couldn’t love Regine and stay true to his philosophy so he decided to call off the engagement. Kierkegaard endured many dark times because of this. Kierkegaard was a passionate about this hatred for Georg Hegal and this was in contrast to his love for Socrates and Christ. It is fair to say Kierkegaard’s philosophy is extremely theistic and is based mostly on Christianity, leading many to see him more as a Christian theologian than a philosopher. Kierkegaard’s philosophy is very individualistic and recognisable. I feel Kierkegaard’s use of indirect communication make his work more difficult to understand, however, it also draws the reader in and gives the reader actual experience of his philosophy. One of the most interesting components of Kierkegaard’s thinking is his opinion on truths, in his opinion there are two forms both the objective truth and the subjective truth. Experience is needed to understand the objective truth and it has its limitations; the subjective truth is a central theme to his thinking he believes that ‘truth is subjectivity.’ As stated previously Kierkegaard was a huge religious thinker, he believes that leading a religious life is not about trying to prove God exists but instead it is about a deep spiritual connection and he expresses that not everyone who leads a Christian life of