The question “How am I to exist?” is the question sought after by many thinkers and is at the center of existentialism. Existentialism is any philosophy that emphasizes fundamental questions of meaning and choice as they affect existing individuals. (Soccio 391) Existentialists develop theories that describe how a person should to live his or her life. Two existentialist philosophers that will be discussed in this paper are Søren Kierkegaard and Friedrich Nietzsche. Søren Kierkegaard is a very enthusiastic philosopher who believed that the way to live is to have a religious authenticity and avoid the crowd life. Friedrich Nietzsche is a very controversial philosopher who believes that everyone is entitled to their own point of view on life and that there is no absolute truth. Both thinkers express ideas that are different from the norms of their societies and have therefore provoked controversy in their respective times.
Søren Kierkegaard was born in Copenhagen, Denmark with seven other siblings (Soccio 392-393). His was the favorite child of his father Michael, who had felt overwhelming guilt over two sins that he’d committed. When Søren grew up he attended a university and spent the next couple years partying. Before Michael (Søren’s father) died, he admitted his sins from past to Søren. This stunned Søren and prompted him to start studying theology. Later after divorcing his wife Regina Olsen, he taught that to be a Christian, means to live with authenticity. Authenticity is “the subjective condition of an individual living honestly and courageously in the moment without refuge in excuses and without reliance on groups or institutions for meaning and purpose.” (Soccio 396-397) In addition, Kierkegaard didn’t like the Church as...
... middle of paper ...
... philosophers lived in aesthetic stage while in college. Søren Kierkegaard drank and visited the theater while in college while Friedrich Nietzsche drank and had romantic pursuit in college. In addition, both philosophers were controversial for their times. Søren Kierkegaard detested the Danish Church saying that it’s way of life was inauthentic. Whereas Friedrich Nietzsche explained that there is no god and that it’s idea is used only to cover up sins. I believe that Søren Kierkegaard better addresses this question “How am I to exist?” because he more explicitly explains his call to action in his teachings. He explains that we should put our faith in god and live as Christians willing to stand for god. Nietzsche explains that truth is open to individual interpretation and that “God is Dead” however he never clearly tells his readers what he wants them to do.
Take a minute to relax. Enjoy the lightness, or surprising heaviness, of the paper, the crispness of the ink, and the regularity of the type. There are over four pages in this stack, brimming with the answer to some question, proposed about subjects that are necessarily personal in nature. All of philosophy is personal, but some philosophers may deny this. Discussed here are philosophers that would not be that silly. Two proto-existentialists, Søren Kierkegaard and Friedrich Nietzsche, were keen observers of humanity, and yet their conclusions were different enough to seem contradictory. Discussed here will be Nietzsche’s “preparatory human being” and Kierkegaard’s “knight of faith”. Both are archetypal human beings that exist in accordance to their respective philosopher’s values, and as such, each serve different functions and have different qualities. Both serve the same purpose, though. The free spirit and the knight of faith are both human beings that brace themselves against the implosion of the god concept in western society.
How to live one’s life is a question faced by any human being with relatively normal cognitive functioning. Some find beauty in every day life, reveling in something as simple as the gentle shaking of leaves dancing to the whispered song of the wind, or waking up to someone they have decided to spend the rest of their lives with. Others only see the mundane and the tedious, growing bitter and resentful as a relentless existential crisis latches on to the deepest parts of their psyche, casting a grim and ominous shadow over every thought and action. This probing question of how to live is at the forefront of Soren Kierkegaard’s “Either/Or: A Fragment of Life.” The aforementioned views are, indeed, reflected in the fragmented perspectives provided by Kierkegaard’s fictional characters, “A” and “Judge Wilhelm,” who perhaps reflect Kierkegaard’s own divided views. Love and companionship are at the crux of how to live for both A and Wilhelm, despite the glaring contrast between A’s calls for a hedonistic,
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 but rather that it is the highest, also that it is dishonest of philosophy to give something else in its place and to disparage faith” (Fear and Trembling, 12).
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, and not the "what" (content) of the objective. He asserts that the truth can only exist in the subject, for if it lies in the world, we could never access (know) the truth the way we know ourselves. Kierkegaard explains that we can only discover the truth by turning inward: "passionate inwardness" is essential to finding the truth, as it is the way in which the subject is seeking the truth; the more passion the subject has, the closer she/he comes to the truth. "Passionate inwardness" is fueled by "objective uncertainty": if an individual sees objective proof of her truth, she will become less passionate; however, when she does not find reassurance in the objective, her inward passion will lead her to "the" (her) truth. This paradox relies on the subject believing passionately in the truth that exists in her while believing in a lack of objective support for that truth.
“The thing is to understand myself, to see what God really wishes me to do; the thing is to find a truth which is true for me, to find the idea for which I can live and die” (Kierkegaard 95). Søren Kierkegaard was a clear supporter of expressing our own personality. He wanted us to take the time to find our true selves. Even though he acknowledged there were social systems in our society, he still believed we were our own individual human being. The only way to make sense of our life and find our individuality is to embrace our faith in God. Kierkegaard wanted human beings to be able to exercise their freedom. Human beings should not postpone their choices simply because they do not know the universal truth. As humans we cannot postpone our choices because we will never
Further, because existentialism is so bound in a personal transcendence, existentialism is seen as hyper-subjective or solipsistic. De Beauvoir explains that the actual situation of the problem is in the underlying assumption of what an ethical system should achieve. Thus begins the foundation of the project for an ethics of existentialism that is aware of the ambiguity. Existential ethics takes ambiguity seriously and hints towards an ethical system with parallels to virtue ethics. As part of this existential ethics, the subject of seriousness is given much consideration. De Beauvoir contends that seriousness, beginning at childhood, treats values as ready made things, and the process of maturation envelopes us to realize that values are not ready
...d of a Buddhist koan, which is intended to break the hold of logic on the mind. However, rather than breaking the hold of logic on the mind, Nietzsche, with his jibing remarks, swashbuckling writing style, self-contradictions, and secrecy, is intending to break the hold of socially determined "masks," or Isms, from the perceptions of the new philosopher who will arise the day after tomorrow. Nietzsche shows us how to philosophize without Isms. The only question remaining is whether we are strong enough to take his advice.
Existentialism is a philosophical movement rooted in the work of the Danish philosopher Søren Kierkegaard, who lived in the mid-1800s. The movement gained popularity in the mid-1900s thanks to the work of the French intellectuals Jean-Paul Sartre, and Albert Camus, including Sartre’s Being and Nothingness (1943). According to existentialists, life has no purpose, the universe is indifferent to human beings, and humans must look to their own actions to create meaning, if it is possible to create meaning at all. Existentialists consider questions of personal freedom and responsibility.Existentialism, better classified as a movement rather than a doctrine of philosophy, emerged in the mid to
In addition, in Kierkegaard’s “Practice in Christianity,” we are given the distinction between an imitator (a true Christian)
It is evident that both Kierkegaard and Emerson take a strong stance that becoming who one is meant to be is of utmost importance. It can easily be seen that Kierkegaard and Emerson both agree that we should avoid society when establishing ourselves.
classicmoviescripts/script/seventhseal.txt. Internet. 4 May 2004. Blackham, H. J. Six Existentialist Thinkers. New York: Harper, 1952. Choron, Jacques. Death and Western Thought. New York: Collier Books, 1963.
Ross, Kelly L. "Existentialism." The Proceedings of the Friesian School, Fourth Series. Kelly L. Ross, Ph.D., 2013. Web. 25 Nov. 2013.
Søren Keiekgaard was one of the greatest inspritational philosphers of his time and most of his inspirations came from The Holy Bible. He was born on May 5, 1813, in Copenhagen, Denmark, Søren Kierkegaard went on to pursue work as a philosopher, where he critiqued dominant Christian ideology and Hegelianism. He soon became the founder of Extenilism which “is the belief that the world has no intrinsic meaning or purpose and, consequently, that individuals alone bear the responsibility for their actions and decisions”. (Ref) His opinions differed from the mainstream thorolions of his time because his focus was more on the individual and there personal relationship with God, he didn’t think that God could be understood or found by logic. In his opinion, “God was greater than, not equicalent to, logic”. Therefore the only way to understand God, is through the leap for faith which is the opposite of reason. For it demands that one embrace the abusudity of the unexplaiable. Kierkegaard's faith is one that he refers to as authectic faith because it relies on one knowing that the it is impossible to explain and there is no reason for s...
Philosophy, a construct of rich, educated, and, frankly, intoxicated navel-gazers has been a persistent companion of humanity throughout the ages. The most eccentric school of thought, popularized by figures such as Nietzsche, Sartre, and Camus, became known as Existentialism. Holding that all of reality itself was absurd, existentialists sought meaning in their own chaotic lives as part of the shared “human condition”, which Franz Kafka demonstrates in “The Metamorphosis”, which eventually became the staple diet for grumpy literature majors and angsty college freshmen alike. “The Metamorphosis”, together with Nikolai Gogol’s “The Overcoat”, reveals the ephemeral and absurd nature of mankind, and also demonstrates the power in discovering meaning in one’s life.
Existentialism is not a method but a vision, a perceptual resolution of the human world into raw essentials.