Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Kierkegaard existentialism
Kierkegaard existentialism
Kierkegaard existentialism
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Kierkegaard existentialism
1. Kierkegaard believes that truth is only a subjective process. Truth only exists from the subjective existing of the individual and cannot be found in a complete system. Objective truth to Kierkegaard is a simply an idea created by the illusion of subjective existence that one can have complete and true objective knowledge of something that exists out in the world. This is evident when he states, “In the objective sense, thought is understood as being a pure thought; this corresponds in an equally abstract-objective sense to its object, which object is therefore the thought itself, and truth becomes correspondence of thought with itself. This objective thought has no relation to the existing subject” (31).
When Kierkegaard states that “truth is subjectivity” and the “truth of subjectivity is faith” he is arguing that since there can never be objective truth, all one can do is turn inward and focus on existential being. Once one turns their focus inward they can they find the real truth of their existence, and that existence is the action relational happening of relating of oneself to oneself, and to God.
2. The knight of infinite resignation to Kierkegaard is one who has realized the loss of all meaning in life. They have accepted the world as something that is beyond their objective understanding and have infinitely resigned themselves of any search for meaning and have achieved a sort of peace which can only come from the loss of all hope for escape. Kierkegaard argues that road to the knight of faith only goes through the knight of infinite resignation. Only by infinitely resigning oneself to the loss of all meaning can one take the next action of taking the leap of faith. The knight of faith takes focuses internally on...
... middle of paper ...
...le are given the freedom to find meaning, and in freedom there is great despair and suffering as people search for existential meaning. In the story the Grand Inquisitor is angry at Jesus for his choice to grant freedom and despair to everyone and argues that his new church is more godlike because he is taking away freedoms. By doing so he will make them slaves, but grant them peace, and in so doing give them meaning so they will not live in the despair of knowing freedom.
The claim that, “man does not live by bread alone… but only the one who works gets it [bread]”, would synthesize the idea that people cannot find existential-meaning through the fulfillment of only temporal desires. However, if one works at continually making the leap of faith and understands the proper mode of be-ing, one will find the metaphoric/spiritual bread which satisfies their despair.
Douglass continues to describe the severity of the manipulation of Christianity. Slave owners use generations of slavery and mental control to convert slaves to the belief God sanctions and supports slavery. They teach that, “ man may properly be a slave; that the relation of master and slave is ordained by God” (Douglass 13). In order to justify their own wrongdoings, slaveowners convert the slaves themselves to Christianity, either by force or gentle coercion over generations. The slaves are therefore under the impression that slavery is a necessary evil. With no other source of information other than their slave owners, and no other supernatural explanation for the horrors they face other than the ones provided by Christianity, generations of slaves cannot escape from under the canopy of Christianity. Christianity molded so deeply to the ideals of slavery that it becomes a postmark of America and a shield of steel for American slave owners. Douglass exposes the blatant misuse of the religion. By using Christianity as a vessel of exploitation, they forever modify the connotations of Christianity to that of tyrannical rule and
exactly what in which individuals, whose main focus is to seek the ultimate truth in life
What is presented to the slaves as a religious tenet is merely propaganda used to quell rebellious behavior. They fear a society in which they no longer serve to benefit from slave labor, and so they fear rebellion, they fear objection, they fear events like the Nat Turner Insurrection. The system the slaveholders strive so ardently to protect begins to affect even them, those in power, negatively. They begin to cope with their fear the only way they know how, by projecting it upon the slaves.
In Frederick Douglass’ Narrative, Christianity is a prominent feature of both slave and slave-owners’ lives. However, Douglass highlights the discrepancies between the religions of these two groups, finding the Christianity of slave holders to be false, malicious and hypocritical. Though he makes clear he is not irreligious himself, Douglass condemns the insincere ideology of slave owning America.
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,
Douglass does not hesitate to describe in vivid detail the cruelty and hypocrisy he has witnessed throughout his lifetime before reaching a period where he is free. He emphasizes the lack of empathy (that which differentiates a human from a robot or machine) within slaveholders. He is restricted from certain unalienable rights guaranteed to any individual such as the right to read and write. Douglass explains how he revolted against the system where slaveholders reign superior. He soon comes to find that deception becomes the battery that fuels the engine of slavery. For if a slave cannot read, the slave will not understand. “He who proclaims it a religious duty to read the Bible denies me the right of learning to read the name of the God who made me” (116). Once Douglass learns how to read, the deception created by slavery which clouded his mentality is evaporated and the disgrace toward morality is quickly seen. The narrative brings to mind what we most generally take for granted, that is, the rights and freedom not only guaranteed to us by our government, but by simply standing as the equivalent to someone other than ourselves. That in of itself raises the question of what it truly means to be
Because it offers them the possibility of community and identity, many slaves find themselves strongly attached to religion. They cannot build a family structure and they cannot be identified by family name, but through the church, they can build a community and identify themselves as Christians. This comfort becomes virtually non-existent for it too is controlled by the slaveowners who “came to the conclusion that it would be well to give the slaves enough of religious instruction to keep them from murdering their masters” (57). The fact that one person could have the ability to control the amount of religion another person has and his purpose for having it diminishes any sense of community or identity that it may have initially provided.
“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
Either/Or, published in 1843, was Kierkegaard’s first publication.The book, written under the pseudonym of Victor Eremita (Latin for "victorious hermit"), has two parts: the first deals with the aesthetic, a word that Kierkegaard uses to denote personal, sensory experiences. The second part of Either/Or deals with ethics. Kierkegaard's work outlines a theory of human development in which consciousness progresses from an essentially self-indulgent, aesthetic mode to one characterized by ethical imperatives arising from the maturing of human conscience. (Kierkegaard) A common interpretation of Either/Or presents the reader with a choice between two approaches to life. There are no standards or guidelines which indicate how to choose. The reasons for choosing an ethical way of life over the aesthetic only make sense if one is already committed to an ethical way of life. Suggesting the aesthetic approach as evil implies one has already accepted the idea that there is a good/evil distinction to be made. Thus, existentialists see Kierkegaard as presenting a radical choice in which no pre-ordained value can be discerned. One must choose, and through one's choices, one creates what they
In Kierkegaard’s two works “You Shall Love” and “Our Duty to Love the People We See,” we are introduced with a moral responsibility towards others since the start. In “You Shall Love,” we are provided with the second commandment: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself” (17) whereas in the other reading we are provided with a biblical excerpt stating how we cannot claim to love God while hating our brother. It is by providing this biblical references that Kierkegaard reveals how, despite that they are commanded to us by God, we hold a moral responsibility towards our neighbor by serving, loving, and caring for them.
Oftentimes, people reach a point in their lives when they realize that they need to think for themselves and take responsibility for becoming who they are cut out to be. Whether or not they actually become that person is questionable. In Sickness Unto Death, Soren Kierkegaard argues that to become the "self" we must avoid despair and the influence of the world, and we must become what God wants us to be. In his essay, Self-Reliance, Ralph Waldo Emerson promotes the idea of individualism and how we must rely upon only ourselves and God to establish and support ourselves. I will first explain Kierkegaard’s idea of what it is to become a “self” then I will show the many parallels between Sickness unto Death and Self-Reliance.
How does the individual assure himself that he is justified? In Soren Kierkegaard's Fear and Trembling, Abraham, found in a paradox between two ethical duties, is confronted with this question. He has ethical duties to be faithful to God and also to his son, Isaac. He believes that God demands him to sacrifice Isaac. But, Abraham, firmly adhering to his faith, submitted to what he believed was the will of God. By using his perspective and that of his alternative guise, Johannes de Silentio, Kierkegaard concentrates on the story of Abraham in such a way that his audience must choose between two extremes. Either Abraham is insane or he is justified in saying he will kill Isaac.
Soren Kierkegaard’s ideas of existentialism were firmly rooting in his Christianity. This would make sense in light of his college major and at one time feeling a call to serve within the church. Kierkegaard surmised, “God is infinite and personal… transcendent and imminent, omniscient, sovereign, and good” (Teachme, 1997). Even though his beliefs were rooted in Christianity he believed that man also had the inalienable right to be himself (Teachme, 1997). That is, he has the right to be ...
Hard labor, and deprivation of both physical and spiritual necessities, defined slavery in the south. Frederick Douglass struggled throughout his youth to keep himself amply fed and, in optimum physical condition. He struggled throughout his life, searching for some rational belief. Through his potentially lifelong struggle of slavery, he was forced to use his reasoning to overcome internal as well as external obstacles. Separated from his family and loved ones, Frederick Douglass was deprived of past cultural and religious beliefs. He also had the burden of watching his masters use religion as justification for the treacherous conditions of slavery. The ambiguous picture that he received about religion developed a question of God's benevolence. If my master has God's approval for all of his wrongdoing, how can religion be developed through good will? If God condones such appalling behavior, how can I follow such lead? Despite the hardships entailed, Frederick Douglass was surprisingly able to use his cognitive thought to effectively search for his worldly niche. He began to accumulate his own thoughts, values, goals and opinions and he began his journey towa...
Throughout the Bible, bread was of great importance. It was a source of food, a currency of exchange, an example of hospitality, and even a gift from God. Because bread was of such great importance in the Israelites lives, it became a term that represented the Lord Jesus Christ. Jesus became known as the “Bread of Life.” This paper will go into more depth about the importance of bread and the “Bread of Life.”