Kierkegaard 's Work On The Present Age

Johannes de silentio is a character made up by Kierkegaard that starts and finishes as a peculiar person who questions how one may take the leap of faith to a religious belief. Our introduction to Johannes dialogue provides his idea of genuine versus cheap faith. His idea of genuine faith would be someone who can continually look up to a religion against all

Soren Kierkegaard, in his essay, the Present Age, writes about two ages—the passionate age and the present age: an age of dispassionate reflection. Kierkegaard believes the present age to be centered on reflection (deliberation, representation, anticipation), which substitutes for decisive action. The present age, according to Kierkegaard is “characterized by an ‘unhappy objectivity,’ in which the individual has become ‘leveled down’ and loses himself as part of a crowd. “ One aspect of this unhappy objectivity is that our age is an age of reflection rather than of passion. Kierkegaard suggests, "the most dangerous, if also the most respectable of all diseases" is to "admire in public what is considered unimportant in private - since

Both, Soren Kierkegaard and Leo Tolstoy, believed that an unreasonable concept may still exist. Kierkegaard believed that the notion of God is beyond human intellectual capacity and so there is need for clarification with evidence. Tolstoy was on the search for the meaning of life and concluded that there is more to life than rational belief. If the notion of God is beyond human comprehension, then it is possible that He indeed exists although we are not able to understand. An explanation is not needed to verify existence. It is just like love; might be impossible to explain, nobody can show how it happens, but it’s there – it

What are the true motivations behind people’s actions? This is a question asked by philosophers for years. To understand why people, do the things they do, you have to dig deeper into their belief systems. Thomas More and Soren Kierkegaard differ in many of their views. The major differing opinion is their views on human nature: why people do the things they do. Kierkegaard believes that humans act because of faith in God. Thomas More says that humans do what they do for the community as a whole. Their views on moral and divine law, individualism, and in punishment of citizens oppose throughout both texts.

Kierkegaard's Fear and Trembling explores the story of Abraham and Isaac by discussing the extent to which one would go to exert their full commitment to a religion. He believes that religion is something beyond or more than belief and practice. The story of Abraham and Isaac is a story of faith versus ethics. God tested Abraham by commanding him to take his only son Isaac and sacrifice him on a mountain. (Gn 22:1-2)

Kierkegaard was a Danish philosopher in the mid 1800s. He is known to be the father of existentialism and was at least 70 years ahead of his time. Kierkegaard set out to attack Kant’s rational ethics and make attacks on the Christianity of our day. He poses the question, how do we understand faith? He states that faith equals the absurd. In “Fear and Trembling”, he uses the story of Abraham and his son Isaac to show an example of faith as the absurd. The story of God asking Abraham to sacrifice his son Isaac signifies a break in the theory that ethics and religion go hand in hand. He shows how the ethical and the religious can be completely different. “I by no means conclude that faith is something inferior

Even though people encounter injustices throughout their life, their ability to self-preserve shows the extent of respect they have for themselves. In the face of injustice, this self-respect allows them to become jubilant. In Henrik Ibsen’s play “A Doll’s House” translated by Peter Watts, the character Nils Krogstad faces an inequity due to his adverse past in which he must place himself as his top priority. Throughout the play, Krogstad’s need for respect drives his choices. When individuals prioritize self-respect over succumbing to the expectations of the injustice, it allows them to achieve contentment.

Humans have shattered the ideas and aspirations,

I hold this research topic to be not just of great scholarly interest as it comes to the study of these two authors: my opinion, is that such a dissertation could shed a different light on how we understand the Theo-Philosophical enterprise, underlying its necessary connection to life's broader context. Nietzsche and Kierkegaard can help us see the pursuit of a better rational understanding of religion, as well as of religious life and practices, not just as a curiosity but as a part of the exploration, crticism, strengthening of our existential commitments and

In chapter 3 of Philosophical Fragments, Kierkegaard begins his discussion on the “Absolute Paradox” by revealing paradox as “the passion of thought.” Kierkegaard claims that humans desperately want to discover something they are unable to contemplate and are, thus, only leading themselves toward the downfall of all thought. We are unable to contemplate the “unknown”, and the unknown— according to Kierkegaard—is essentially God. Humans are foolish in their attempt to prove God’s existence; for humans’ attempted to do so already assumes god’s existence. In other words, , there would be no need for proof. The bible is in no way able to act as the only proof of God’s existence. To argue that the events in the world must derive from an all-good being (God) assumes that these events are all ultimately good—and this assumption is based on the belief that there exists an all-good author of these works.

In Hamlet, William Shakespeare employs a myriad of references to the deterioration and decay of humankind and the state of Denmark. These depictions further emphasize Hamlet’s melancholy outlook on life, the decline of Denmark, and social equality after death. From the opening of the play, Hamlet perceives the immense decomposition of the world. He states, “Tis an unweeded garden that grows to seed” (Shakespeare 24). This delineates his conclusion that the world is futile and fruitless in nature.

Søren Kierkegaard’s (1813-55) pertinence to the discipline of psychology has, in general, been explored in two ostensibly conflicting regards: both as a source of profound psychological insight and as a psychological case study—a potentially neurotic subject for psychological analysis and speculation. In other words, as either a physician or a patient. In 1958’s Young Man Luther, the Danish-American psychoanalyst Erik Erikson (1958/1993) referred to “Hypersensitive Kierkegaard, another melancholy Dane” (p. 240) as “a kindred homo religiosus” (p. 13) to Martin Luther and therefore a potentially suitable subject for a future case study in his own right. Erikson never followed through on this famous ambition, but such a study would seem, ostensibly

Method: Kierkegaard’s emphasis on the approach that God is love to an individual. The arguments that Kierkegaard’s builds are to understand the function and nature of love in the human existence.

In Part I.A., Kierkegaard sets up the basic definition of the words he means to explain through his book. He regards the human self to “relate itself to itself” (9). The key concept to draw from this definition is that it is a distinct feature of being

In the nineteenth century, popular philosophy - particularly the Hegelian dialectic - professed that mankind was developing in an upward direction, becoming more angelic as it were. Man's moral laws were more advanced, as support for democracy and equal rights were beginning to become popular. However, Friedrich Nietzsche believed that mankind was entering a downward spiral towards complete decadence. Modern man, with its "advanced" morality, was, in truth, decaying on the inside. Claims of morality merely masked modern man's decay: