Kierkegaard Subjectivity

Kierkegaard explains that a tragic hero is one who sacrifices a loved one in order to save other people. Since this tragic hero is choosing what is best for society over what is best for themselves, this is deemed an ethical act regardless of the fact that it is a sacrifice. Kierkegaard reasons that Abraham is not a tragic hero because he does not fit the standards of benefiting society with his sacrifice. When he sacrifices his son Isaac, it is for his own sake as well as God’s. Kierkegaard explains that if the ethical is universal (based on Hegel’s explanation), then Abraham would be considered a murderer because of his underlying intention and non-existent value of the act to society.

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

Pojman talked about why he thought subjectivism was a useless concept, and pointed out the absurd consequences of the theory. He said if we agree with subjectivism, then there can be no argument nor interpersonal judgment. By reason of subjectivism does not depend on social agreement of principle, and the situation could only be considered as wrong, if one failed to live up his or her principles; if the person felt right then it would be impossible for him or her to do wrong. By strengthen his argument, Pojman indicated subjectivism has disregarded a vital fact, that which people often share commonalities, including, common language, institutions, and habits. He then quoted John Donne, “No man is an island, entire of itself; every man

Howard Zinn was an acclaimed historian and social rights activist, born in 1922. He has written many well-known books, including A People’s History of the United States and A People’s History of American Empire. The reason that these books are so well known is because Zinn is a very special kind of historian. Unlike other historians who might be more objective about history and just give you the straight facts, Zinn is openly partial in his account of history giving readers a more subjective view of these events. This causes his writing to have a bias, much greater than what usually comes naturally in history, and portray history from the side of the oppressed. This undermines typical history

As aforementioned, God is the foundation of values in Christian theism, but for naturalists, values are created by human beings. The problem is, without any transcendent standard of good or bad, how does one derive what “ought” to be from what “is”? Naturalists believe that all people have a sense of moral values acquired by intuition and authority or picked up from their environment. For them, good action is the action that promotes harmony and survival within the community. This is the view held by postmodernists as well, where society determines what social good ought to be. Ethics thus becomes autonomous and situational rejecting the need for any theological sanction.

2013530960 Ask Dai American Literature Christina Davis February 21, 2016 The Failure of Construction of African American Female’s Subjectivity from Quicksand The awakening of the consciousness of black women’s subjectivity drives them to construct their own subjectivity. However, they are often constrained by the body both physically and mentally. In Quicksand, Helga migrates frequently to find a place to fit in, yet she finds no room for her.

The study of culture allows an individual to research and investigate the ways in which ‘culture’ can create and transform a being through individual and shared experiences, everyday life and power. The subject closely examines ways in which a person’s identify is shaped by their encounters with people, texts, institutions and overall understanding. Over time many cultural theorists have put forward many ideas and notions surrounding culture and its affect on one’s self identity, social identity and therefore subjectivity. Theorists such as, Michel Foucault, Pierre Bourdieu and Judith Butler are a minor fraction of academics that believe that subjectivity is not inherent and naturally occurring but dynamic and adaptable according to society and our ever-changing culture. It is through the concepts of performativity and habitus that the ideas surrounding subjectivity being dynamic and fluid are presented.

This goes to show how it should be no surprise that religion has been part of the human nature for so long. When something cannot be proven or disproven, there will always be sides. Although, the only logical side would be to choose the middle. This is why Kierkegaard is correct in saying that a leap of faith would be required in following a certain religion. Having an experience that one would consider divine would be able to sway someone towards religion. On the other hand, there isn’t swaying anyone towards atheism. Neither can be truly correct as there are no facts to back up either side. That is why the philosophy of religion exists in the first

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,

In his famous work Fear and Trembling, Kierkegaard declares that “no person has a right to delude others into the belief that faith is something of no great significance, or that it is an easy matter, whereas it is the greatest and most difficult of all things.” The difficulty of faith lies in the requirement of sacrifice. The story of Abraham’s near sacrifice of his beloved son, Isaac, is what Kierkegaard utilizes to demonstrate how costly faith in God is. Here is a man, who after seventy years of waiting for God’s promise of offspring finally received his son, is commanded by God to slay his promised son with no stated reason for doing so. Kierkegaard, in attempting to experience what Abraham might have experienced in those moments, cries, “Now all is lost, God demands Isaac, I shall sacrifice him, and with him all my joy – but for all that, God is love and will remain so for me.” What bold words! The cost

Somewhat unsurprisingly, the meaning of subjectivity of truth was another point of contention. Hegel derived his opinion from history, noting that each successive generation changed where their knowledge came from thus making it’s origin fluid and unabsolute. Kierkegaard derived his opinion from within, another point of existentialism, and thought that truth was something an individual must discuss from within and be wholly passionate with the decision. Nevertheless, both resulted in the conclusion that truth is not absolute, but Hegel regarded the Truths of humanity with prominence, while Kierkegaard conversely regarded the truths of an individual as much more

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

Kierkegaard says that “An existing individual is constantly in the process of becoming” (Kierkegaard, pg. 115). By this he means that as existing beings we are different than things that have already existed, in that every result is omitted in every thought that we have. Instead, our thoughts are subject to our own will. In comparison, the results of objects that have existed can be clearly seen. Kierkegaard has also said, “To be a particular individual is world-historically absolutely nothing, infinitely nothing –– and yet, this is the only true and highest significance of a human being” (Kierkegaard, pg. 115). So while an existing individual is in the process of becoming they are considered to be nothing. And so, the idea that we are unique

Kierkegaard believed that subjective reflection was the key understanding meaning in life. He kind of complains with the objective reflection stating that it is impersonal and an indifferent relation to existence. As a matter of fact, this terminology as I shall call it, defines just what the objective world and objective reflection is: being independent of any human subjectivity. Subjective reflection naturally focuses on human existence in a personal, inward way without 'detachment' as Kierkegaard put it.

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