Table

ofCantents

CNLY/N
.suB
Jtcrtvrr?/.t
ALL DECIS IV6Nf SS THERE DEcISION,
IIVHERES IN To SeeK
S U Bf , E C T I V] T ? oEJEcnvry/s
To Br ttv
6RRa,t
 KIERKEGAARD
(1813-1O55)
livedonlyfofty-two
yearz,Yefin hie ehoft
life,he wrohemorethan
lw entry-five booke, AfLer
his dealh,hieworke
olippedinNoobecuriiy.

'u#rrf:

h a
I l(-/

ry
izedEuro?ean
Nhinkinqand
frhe
LhaT,
 w2?

,,,8U7T}IEYTAR,N
OUTTO8E AEOUT
YOUANDME TOO,
 - --.l
t--

Y
J/eI'e sla(V our eNorybYralking
J
a6our,goren'efahher,Michael,

MICHAEL TEDEK9EN
KlEKKEGAARD (1756-1838)had
eVenIhieyoutrhin dire povefi,Yin
Denmark's windsweploanddune
counf,ryof NorfhernJutrland,where
aNonemomenV in his childieh

deoVairwhiletendinq CUDJ
eheepouf, on bhe barcen HNMEL
healhlandhe had raieed
hie lifi,lefiel lo heaven
and had cureedGod, a
major ein in NheLufheran
Tief,iemin which he had
beenraised.

As a younqman he had
comelo Copenhaqen and
Varlayeda emalloavinq
---=>
(
s

inlo a sizeablewealf,'h,
ot eepinghimeelfin booke
8EAT
SOIVIEftMES
WOUID
and makinqerna(Vsocial WHEN
THETABTE SqREN
connecf,iong. WASA SIITATI
EOY,

I t

d @
lf aren Kierkeqaardwao born in
C o p e n h a g eonn M a y O , 1 B 1 Zf,, h e
lasL of eevenchildren.Hie mother,
Anne Lund Kierke4aard, was his
old fathels aecondwife and had
beenT,hemaid of T,hefiraL Mre,
Kierkegaardduringthe periodof
h e rf i n a l i l l n e s E ,

- ttv(,
rLl a ,- tf(
"ItlIfE - j a - ;- t

\ Frz.^?tc, - L t
\
\-. t
 J/n a cerlain senee,younq goren wae eacrificedon
or he almoqLwa6,
lhe alf,arof hiafaNher'sreliqioeiNy,
luoL a6 youngloaacof the Diblicaletory waealmoeL
sacrificedon hiofahher'laYar,

lL ie no merecoincidence qaardwaefaeci-
that Kierke
nafued by the olory of Abrahamand lsaacall hia life.
ThieeNory,taken as a melaphor,illuminaNes
muchof Kierkeqaard'eadulr'behavior'

FOR,EXAMPLE, IIE EELIEVEO

TIIAT}IIS "NOR,MALITY"IIAD
SEENSACRIFICED ONA RELI-
Gl0us ALTAR. llls sPEclFlcMls-
SI ON_a,ASI CALLY A RELIOI OUS
ONE_PS,EVENTED }IIM FNOM
SEINGLIREOTIIER PEOPLE. IT
PR,ECLUDED MARRIAGE,PAR,ENT-
FAMILYLIFE,ANOA
IIOOO,
CAR,EER,,
 .--{
J tt)

<eovihe his morbidobseosion,MichaelrecoTnizedhis

oon'oqeniuoand Lriedto nurlureit, Even
thoughMichaelwas self-educa1ed, he
wae veryknowledgeable, ... ANDTHNTH
and he took
ErsHoPsA1D...
.
muchof younqgoren'e inetrucilion
inlo his ownhande.

He wouldhaveIhe boyeavee-
dropon his dinnerpalbiee
%
wilh Lheelite of
Copenhaqen, and after-
ward he wouldmakeesren
siL in the emptychairof
eachqueotand set forXh
Ihe ar7umenf,whichlha|
?eroonhad eo?oueed dur-
ingLhedinner.

nNDarnnrbfanr?
He wouldteach gorenqeoqra-
gHH, THEEtrret rcwfti
tnP_osstgLe.
phyW t akinghiehandand
tr nlsry,T
ButLritr. ,, otrollinqthrouqhIhe liviny
fr.t
roomwith himVretendinq iL
waea foreiqncounhryand
makinghimnamefamoue
eighNo NhaN Lheywould"oee,,in
thal country,gsrenwaoeent,
to LatinSchoolwilh inslruc-
Lionefrom hiefather to brinq
homethe third best grade.
LtfrLEs,?Ell's "TRAllllllolll
fiHE NAMEOF
CIIS,ISil1,AIIITI'
0il8 0Flils LATET 800R$WN
flAnsflAilow0a0 nilsE TflE
EVESROWS 0F CllllD?slcil0u-

%r^r,herwoutd
ehowthe litLleboycol-
from a
oredilluetraf,ione
ehackof cardedepicl-
ingf amouopeopleand evento, euchae Napoleon ridinqon
hie eteed,or WitliamTellshoolin7an aVVlefrom his son's
head,Sorenwouldaek queef,ione: Whoie lhal? WhaNdid he
do?Thenfrom lhe middleof Lhe Vile)oren'efather ?ro-
duceea pictureof Jesuson the cro56,Theboyaeks,"Who
it? WhaNdid he do?Tellme,. ,.
Whywerepeopleso badNo
him?"Thefalher telle hie oon,
"Thisis the gaviourol the world,
He wae killedby thoee whomhe
wouldsave."Yearelaf,er
Kierkeqaard wrof'e,"Ao a childI
waost ernlyand oeriouoly
brouqht, up in ChrieNianity.
Humanly epeakinq, il waea
crazyupbrinqingi'

ASA Ctllto LlAo AnEADv

8EE'YMAOEIITTO ATIOIOMAN,
 ^/-.4
a lftf

-Z*ialty liberaued lrom his mor'

bid VaeL,oneof the fireNlhingo
Kierkeqaarddid waefall in loveand
becomeenqaged. VoeN7eoplewho
readabouf'his romancewilh hie
fiancbe,ReqinaOlsen,do noNlikelhe
way he comVorled himeelfwilh her.He
meNher when he wao NwentY-
one and she wae fou(Deen,lhaf,
is Eo oay,threeyearebetorehe could7roVerly
court,her.He oVenlI'hoeeNhreeyeare
well,inqralialinghimeelfwif'hherf amity,
aboul her he
findingouI everyft'hing 6tpr
could,placinghimselfin a Vooit'ion
influenceher aeslhebicf,asf'e,and
f,o c)
evenbefriendinq her boyfriend,Frit'z
Schlegel,uoinghio poeitrionof confi-
denceto undermine ?oorFriLz,
,/'t ./t t

Wn ln hie peeudonymouo elory,

ficNional
"Diaryof a geducerl'Kierkeqaardt'ells

ryil,ffi,
of the eeductionof a younqwomanby
a manwhostudieshereveryqeolure.
Thereaderol f,heef,oryrealizesNhaI
f,hewomanie doomedbecauee of the
totalibyof the eeducer'eVlan.Similarly,
Ihoee whoknowNheNhorouqhneee of
Kierkegaard's NowinKeqina
VloT,linq
feelf,haLshe,Loo,was enaredbefore
she hada chancelo react.)ure
enouqh, whenKeqinalurned sevenleen,
{- gsrenwooedherand wonher.The
)
enqaqemenL parLylook Vlace,andlhe
announcemenf, wae published.
r')
 ber of the bourgeoieeetabliehment,
whensuddenlyfor no reaeonhe shared
with anyoneelee,he brokethe enqaqe-
ment,ln hiediaryhewrotethat he had
doneeo becauee"God had veloedT,he
marriage!'Keginawaoheai1broken and
beqqedhimIo retrurnto her,Herfather
humiliatedhimselfpleadinqKeqina,6caoe.
Kierkeqaardwae inLractableand cold. He
allowedhimeelfro be eeenfrolickinqin quee-
tionableneighborhoode
of CoVenhaqen.

ThenhedieaVVeared
rw-ro from Denmark and
eneakedoff to Derlin,
whereheenrolledat Ihe
Univereily
in a coureeon
HegelianVhiloeoVhy
underthe prominen|
Trofeesorg chellinq,and
wherehieclaeematreo
included
noneother
than FriedrichEnqelo,
LudwiqFeuerbach and MichaelDukunin-eachof whomwould
larerexerr,a Vowertul
influence
on EuropeanEhouqht,

Afuertrheterminationof lhe academicquaraexhe reNurned T,o

copenhaqen,bur whenhef,hought,he eaw Keginanodal himin
church,hefledt'o Derlinaqain.Whilein Derlinqhieeecondtime he
wroteoneof hiegreateetrbooke,Fearand rremblinq.hiebook
abouVAbrahamand leaac,and iL contrained a eecreLmeesaqe
for Keqina.
 Moreover, Kierkeqaardwrole in hiediarythaL by
aesuminqreo?onoibilityfor Nhebreak,hewould
freeReginaLo loveagain.Yet, wnenhe returned
hhat shewa6
from frerlinand diecovered
enqaryedT"oFriEzSchleqel,Kierkegaard was
beeidehimselfwithjealoueyand a senseof
loee.Somelime laf,erhe wrote in his journal,
''IF I HAD FAITH,I WOULD
(Regino
morried HAVER,EMAINED WITH
who wos
Schlegel,
modegouernorof
the DonishVirgin
l s l o n d sH. e o n d
Reginohod o good
life there.Butofter
Schlegel's
deqth,
Reginomodeit
cleorthqtshestill
lovedihe now long-
deod Kierkegoord.)
He went to hie grave still love-sick.
tl
 It, seems that,Kierkegaardhad only three oignificant
human relationohipothat had a major inrpaat on his life:

one wif,hhie faf,her, onewith KeqinaOleen,

Thiewaoa vulqareaLirical journalthat Vurpoftedf,o

eerveliberalpoliLicalcaueeeby mocking the hauLe-bour-
qeoioieof CoVenhaqen, ln facf,,iNwaeaNleaet,ae much
of a lilllalinq Veep-ohow for Ihe qooeiV-monqering
voyeureand would-be imi-
t at ors of trheu??er-mid-
dle claseIhaf,lhe
newo?a?er ?arodied,
z
sw
barbs. exceol eoren
Kierkeqaard,whom he
greally admired.
Igl 6a,
 "l14rn oneof Kierkeaaard'e
bookewae
reviewed
favorablyin TheCorsair.
Kierkeqaardwrole a earcaelic leLLerto
tn6NT
A Cotn?Lt
FRoin VOU,MY D6AR
Lhe ediLor,sayinglhal beinq
SlR, rS AN 11115uLT t TheCoreair wa6 a
o r i n e u l La, n d t h a t
wouldmuchmore
ofer Lo havehie
tk aLLacked, which
wouldbe LanLamountLo
a c o m p l i m e nTLh, eh u m i l i a L -
e d O o l d e c h m i d Lb e q a na
dailyaLlack on ?oor
Kierke4aard, whichwae relent-
leeeand devaef,aLina.

fry t"hen .
Kierke4aard's weak
epinehadgivenhim
aLooVedVoat,ure
and hieekinnyle6e
with auffEthat were
too hiqhto be etyl-
ieh madehiman
eaEyt ar6et for f,he
caricaturistr's
?en.
 He becamea lauqh-
inq elock throuqh-
oul Denmarkand
wae eneeredaf, by
LheqenLeel folk and
ineulledby etreel
urchineand loute
wherever he wenL,
GoldechmidL
becameaehamedof
himeelf,but the
mockeryhe beqan
laeted longafler
TheCoreair folded,
Kierkegaardtried Lo
?uLa braveface on
it, but the "Coreair
affair" wae eurely
lhe oecond-moeL
?ainfulevenLin hie
life.

14
 A_-,n hie laeNyeare,Kierkegaardabandonedh i e
"indirecLcommunication" and athackedthe
official DanishLutheran
Churchin a moel
direc| manner,fur-
Ih er alienat,inqwhaar,
fewtriendeand eu?-
Vorberehe had,

Accordinqto Kierkeqaard, Vrimi-

tive ChrieLianity had beena
eViritualrevoluf,ionLhat had
challenqed the etatue quoand
had thereforebeenan offenee
lo all complacency. buI Lhe
contem?orary Churchwas hhe
veryeymbolof eelf-eaf,iefied
bourgeois smu7neee, so he
criticizedit relenhleeely
aN
everyoccasion,
He calledwhat the Churchwas preachinq
"lemonade twaddle."He eventuallyVr:intrd
?amphleteat, hie ownex?enee
NhemouNLheway reliqioue
and Vaoeed
zealoLeoften
do in the eLreeLsof our ownciiliee,
*vN
'o
_i;;
r/V
(The?amphletre, however,were much
morearbiculate Ihan trhoseof t oday,e
typicalreligioue ?amphle-
teer,and all the wordewere
epelledcorcectly!)
Hereare oomeshorl exam?les:

AEMCADAERA!AI,II,EN, WORID
AIIyIEN,
WITHOWEND,
AII4IEN!ATTHONOR TO
THISIS THESECRET
THEPRIESTS!..., OF

ONE IIW OFFOFNOTHNE.

CANNOT
THISONEHEARSSOOFTEN,ESPECIATTY
FROMPRIESTS..., THE
ANDPRECISEIY
PERFORI,I
PRIESTS THISTRICKCHRIS-
TIANITY DOES
ACTUATTY NOTEXIST_YET
TIWOFFOFIT
THEY

THISHAST0BESAID;S0BElT NOWSAID.
WHOEWR,THOU ART, WHATEWR IN OTHER
RESPECTSTHYIIFEI,/IAY
8EI,/IY 8YCEAS.
FRIEND,
INOTOTAKE PARTIN THEPWTIC WORSHIP OF
EOD, ASITNOWISWITHTHECUIMTHAT IT IS
THECHHfiNANffY OFTHENEWTESTAIITEM), THOU
HAST ONEEUU THEIESS,
CONSTANTTY AI,TD
THAT
hNE:TH0U
A flREAT D0fr N0TTAKEPART lN
TREAflNE CODASA FOOL,
 Erkeqaard was paseionaT,ely
involvedin thie polemicwhen,on )cT,ober
2, 1b55, he fell to Lhe sLreeN?aratyzed.A
manth and a hall laLerhe wae dead.Therewao
a n e a r r i o t ,a t , h i s f u n e r a l ,a e a n u m b e ro f
an7ry thealoqy effudenf,saL Lhe univeraiLy
wereoubraqedaf, Lhe way Lhe ChurchLried lo
t ake over in deaLhthe man who had oppooed
il so bifferly with hie IasL breath,

I Z*t-4 --*-+7
. -=---

Ae had wanf,edlo havewriLLenon hie tomb-

sLone
ui*?tYiwbt
If nbibtbus[,,,
b u t i n e L e a dh i Eo t r o n er e a d a ,
" $frrpn Adhye Tkterhpqs$rb
Tf.ntutbe ltb of ffilay, tgt3
@rebttsetttll 0f ^#obember
19b5."
At leaet the laet na(neie aVVroVriate.
ln
DaniehiL meano"qraveyard."

17
 lLt
6v
t.|^^t.^^lard'efinal
tf,,4ar KaEa

i l l n e e oc o i n c i d e d
wilh
L h e m o m e n Lt h a L h e
had exhaueT,ed Lhe
l a e l o f h i ed e a d
father'e money,
K i e r k e q a a rn de v e r
r e a l l yh e l dd o w na
l o b i n h i e l i f e ,b u L
p e r h a ? ow e c a n c a l l
h i ma p r o f e e o i o n a l
wrif,er,le geemgLo
h a v eo g e n LL h e q r e a L e E l
p a r Lo f h i e w a k i n ql i f ea L h i e
wrif,inq d e e k ,a n d h e c e r t a i n '
ly Vroduced a l a r q en u m -
b e r o f b o o k ei n
L h e f e wy e a r e
lhaL helived.
(lowever,iL'O
l u c k yh i ef a L h e r
l e f Lh i m a l a r q e
eum Lo liveoff of,
b e c a u e eh i e b c o k e
werenol exaclly beeL
eel\ero.)

20
ullAut
AidKierkeqaard
w rireabour?
About a cerLainkindof TRUTHLhal he
c a l l e d" e u b l e c l i v eL r u l h " o r " e x i o L e n l i a l
L r u L h , "T h i eL r u L hi E ,a c c o r d i n gL o o h i m , l h e
m o e l i m ? o r f a n t k i n do f l r u f h , b u t u n f o r L u -
naLelyit cannol be comrnunicateddireclly.
l l i e c o m p o e e do f d e e pi n e i q h L eo r r e v e l a -
L i o n oo r c h o i c e ea b o u La n i n d i v i d u a l 'lei f e ,
and lhey are different in Nhecaeeof each
i n d i v i d u aKl , i e r k e q a a rfdi n d eh i m e e l if n t h e
paradoxicalpoeitionof wantinglo write
bookeabouLtheee t ruLho-LhaL ie,of
w a n t i n ql o c o m m u n i c a l eL h a Nw h i c hc a n -
noL be cornrnunicaled,T herefore,he devel-
o ? e a n d e m p l o y ea l h e o r y o f i n d i r e c Lc o m -
municaLion.

\'
THAT
VENYTHING

----7 L-

.-==-_^_<
=_=T=</--

a1
 %*eqaard derives
muchof hie ineVirationfor
lhis Iheoryfrom hiefavorite
philooopher,old Socralesof
Arhene@69-3993,C) tn hie
diecueeions, oelensiblyrecordedby
hie dieciVle?laho,eocraNee'form of com-
munication je seento be oneof lRONy.

},E NAREIISAISEXACTLV
W}IAT}IE MEANS,

He overslates, understafes, missNaNeo,

_ Voebicizee, and mytholoqizee.The claesical
!,--,'t-..'t examvleof SocraLee' irony wag his asserrion
''\
of hie own i4norance.

WheninformedthaL the oracle T KuoN NorHtNG'r

al Delphi(epokeeVereon
for
AHICHIS A HEITAVA
lhe gode) had calledSocrates the LoT thoeE THAN
Yau K Now
wjeeel man in Athene,Socralee
claimedto be slunned. Howcould he
be the wieesNman in Athens if
he knewnothinq?However,
u?onconeiderafion,
5 ocraT,ee
concludedNhaf,he wae indeedwieer
l h a n o l h e r V e o V l eb e c a u o et,h o u q h h e
knewnoNhinq, he knewthat he
k n e wn o t h i n g ,
 -75l

tL,/aher peoplealeo knewnoNhinq,buNthought they knew

somethinq,)ocraf,es'ironicclaimof ignorancewao used,of
couroe,to undermine the arcoqantVreheneelo knowledqeby
hio oVVonenNs.Weknowhowdevaetabinqhie ironycouldbe,Dy
trhemiddleof oneof Ihe TlaLonicdialoguee,
Alcibiadee.
Socrateehas reducedoneof hie adver-
sariesT,oT,ears,Alcibiadee aeks,

"SOCRATES,
WIAT IIAVEVoU
ooltEf0 ME?I ItOuilen,
Kn0w w10 I AM.u

Accordinqt o Kierkegaard,
9ocrahe6"approached
eachman individually,
deprivedhimof every-
t h i n g ,a n d s e n l h i m ,_-.eE
awayemVtyhanded,"Whal Socratee
gocrateebecamethe
trauqhlhad no objectiveconlent,,raNher,
neqativeconditionwherebylearnerelearnedsome,r,hinq about
lhemselvee. Kierkeqaardwrof,ehie Maefer'otrheeie(really
equivalenlLo our Doctoral dieoer1aNion)
on eocraf,eo, and he
calledit TheConcept,of lronv.

)nce he had received

the Master'edegree,he liked

"the M -froJty."
29
 --::7-/D
Ltt_-Z
at l,lerkeqaard and Socrateewerenot Lhe
o n l yo n e ew h oh a d" maeLeredirony,"3o had
lhe Jeoueof r,he
SynogLic Goepele
(MatLhew, \r1ark yHArS HEAVEN LtkE?
and Luke),It, ie
nol,eworthyLhaL in the CRops.
firet three Goepele
J e e J e r a r e l ye v e r NO RFAl.t?.
" L e l l ei L l i k ei l i e , "
r a L h e rh e g r e a c h e o B RFAD.
u e i n ga n i n d i r e c t
form of communica* No,,qsA
LLy
L i o nt h a t
Kierkeqaard rRF;mF
t_rDDF^/
LakeeLo be
e e e e n L i aaln d 1]o, REALLY.
notluet inci- F/sff.
d e n L aL l o hiE
L e a c h i n qF, o r
exarn?le,
wnenever FaREET
J e e u e i e-- 7 lT.t
aeked
a b o u LL h e
k i n q d o mo f
God,he
o ? e a k ei n
?arablee,
I n Ma L L h e w
1 3 a l o n e L, h e r ea r e e i x e u c h p a r a b l e e ,

(leaven ie likea farmer VlanLinq cro?e,it ie likeyeaeL

in bread,il ie likea Lreaeurehiddenin a field,it ie like
a buyerof ?earle,it ie likea fieherman'enet.)

24
Jeeueuoeeindirec|communication in a
marvelouovarietyof waye.Not onlydo
we eeeiNin the parables
"gftp Ansdana ofheaoen, h,
/r%,eq, mffstardY"nd.o
buNin Nheharsh oayinqo
1frfr thp deail {r{rtg, tian- deafr',
Lhe sarcaem

"fr,ioa*@qrnich
e a a trt(rtl to entet ptu-
Sopp arhbea*,rtb)6".ct
catne/ to hercs
t/n-Wh tfo, Ue gfu npzdU',
in Nhebizarceaclions

thc, f
ilqfu tt ee..':fr,bnu>
Ameagfiuttgf@nur.ei]
and in the poetry
oghp AfuAdol?t,
f,q"d b, to*htngrori'.
KierkegaardimiLateethe methods
of )ocratreeand Jeeuein chooeinq I ' / v 1C o N F U S E D . .
lo communicaf,e indirecllyand
ironically,

He doeeeo by
----=::_
wrilinq allof his J

philoeoVhical works
oecref,ly,Vubliehing
them underVoeudonyfre' - ,
and lhen disclaimingall reepoy
'
oibilityfor lheir conlenl. n
Kierkeq aard emVloy o f ourt,een
differenl Voeudonymo
in hie work,includinq
name6like"VictrorEremita" (VicLorNhe
HermiN),"Johanneode eilenlio"(John Nhe
)il ent), " Co nsl a nf,inCo nsf,antritts"
i, (Conetrantin trheConotanl), "Johanneo
C l i m a c u o( "J o h nC l i m a xo r J o h nf , h e
Ladder), " Anf.i-Climac us" (AnT,iclim ax),
"Nicolaue Notabene"(Nicola ue Nofle-well),
' and "HilariusOookbinder,"
Eachof lhese
auf,horshas hie own ?eroonali$y,
oIyle, and
ouLlookon life.WhenKierkeqaardfinallyadmil-
Led (what everyoneknewby Nhen)that he was the
aulhor of the peeudonymouo works,he claimed:

IN THEPSEUDONYNTOUS
WORKSTHEREISI,IOT
A flNCE WORD
WHICH ISMINE.I HAVENO
OPINIONABOUT
THESEWORKSEXCE?TASA
THIRDPERSON,
NOKNOWIEDCEOFTHEIR
MEANINCEXCEPT
ASA READER,
NOTTHE
PRIVATE
REIvIOTESI TOTHEIvI.
REUTION
 i.,* 1.\'uT[ ,".ri*r*.nR..
l'4 or\qt
rr I drcnl
5rro
ajF.o-ENd-
-rlrott fl lcryrlu.
I a\.l(otcr' 1 lA'\
"{ \

ot
y'ts[Lrt (cn kilha
\rr
da.hv;s {ctte \rtl< 5fu1fr
sfrUrch.nnrt la l.6v I-,fer mooL ecnolarl
iru \atcl* sr1 ti\
srn ilratl'd hrd
U,qnore xterKeqaara e
el].t Ulli
E{at'
d i e c l a i m efro r a l l p r a c t i c a l
?ur?oaee,That,is becauee
hieeliqhrlytwietedehadowfalleacrooeevery?aqeof Lhe
?oeudonymouo worko,and becauaethey are all parl of hie
qrandioseVlanf,o deceivehie readereinto lhe trur,h,LhaNis
Lo eay Lo communicaLe a
e ubjechive Lr ubh indi recT,ly,

ln f acl, Kierkeqaard'e ?eeu-

donymougworkedon'|,com-
municate any objecLive
Lruthe al all, no| evenany
conce\a KaLherlhan
beinqknowledqe, Lheyare
a n L i - k n o w l e d qTeh, i ei s
becauoeknowledge, ae
KierkegaardconeLrueeil, ie
alwayeabeLracl,
and exioNence is alwave KIERKECAARD
STEALS
UNCUA6E
concrele, FROMKNOWIEDCE
TOUSEIT
As Kierkeqaard'o wayward AGAINST
KNOWIEDCE,
diecipleJean-?aulgarlre oay6,

Kierkeqaard'sworke are form6

o f n o n - k n o w l e d qt hea l m a c -
queradeae knowledqe at Lhe
o a m et i m e t h a t t h e y i n d i c l
knowled qe, Kierkeqa a rd'e worde
self-desNrucf,beforeour eyeo,

27
Theyhavean Eecherlike
qualily, They lead ue
nowherebut,back in|,oour
own selvee,Sartre oayo
LhaT,Kierkegaardueee
objecT,ive conceVlo" reqreo-
eively,eo thal the eelf-
deelruclion of fhe lan-
q u a q en e c e o o a r i l u
yn m a e k s
the one who uoeo i1,,"For
example,the very Nibleof
Kierkegaard's bookThe
read is a
paradox,for accordinglo
him,"dread" (or "anxief,y,"
a o a n o N h etrr a n s l a t i o n h a e
lE) ie nof,a concepL,rather
it is "lhe non-conceolual
foundationof all concepT,e,"
(lf rhe liret dread,Adam'e
dread,and the fireI, ein, \
Adam'ooin,are idenfical,,.
as Kierkegaardholds,and if
Adam'o ein is Lhat,of dis-
obedienLlyeaLinqthe fru.it,"
o*Y aq"'.'{
"!:,I'
*therl- ?{,,!y
F,a
aIl knoi,vle
dqe lconceVY
trual houghtJie qrounded
in dread.)Kierkegaard'e
Veeudo-conce?Le force uo
away from our own con'
cepbe- back inboour own
freedom,and inNoour own
eubjeclivelruthe,
As 1arDreoayo,"KeadinqKierkeqaard,
I climbbackao far ao myoelf.I want,
lo catch holdof him,and it is myeelfI
calch, This non-conce\ualworkie an
invitratrion
f,o underetrand
myoelfae
Lheaourceof all conceVtoi'
29
 SCRIP . KIERKE-
TUR
GnhRDsAYEtuLl
. ,.

7k

/'-D
a\-
I ]-

eJ he bookin whichKiarkeqaarddeveloVomosl
clearlyNheidea of "eubjecNive lruNh" ie Concludinq
UnecienLific ToetecriWLo Lhe Thiloso?hicat
Fraqmenle (1846), which hae becomea EorEof
Sibleof exiahenf..ialiem. ln hhis work,wrilT,enunder
lhe peeudonymof "JohanneoClimacuel'r,,hedie-
linction ie drawn betweenOOJECTIVE and ?Ub'
J E C T I V EL h i n k i n g ,

92
 {| )t
-/-
V o Lhink oblecLivelY ia lo
Lhinkrhe univerEal.OblecNive
N h o u q h tc a n o n l Yq r a e pL h a N
whichcan be univeraalized, A
sentence like,"Thio book ie
qreenl'is No be analYzedEo:We
?oinl af' an oblect and caleqo-
rize it, in f'erme of univergalcon'
ceVtro, "1ook,"and "Greennee7."
to
As in TlaLo'e?hiloeoVhY,
ihink the bookie to elevateil from Eheuninlelliqibleworld of par-
world of qeneralconcepte.The book'e
ticulars to the intelliqible
cannoLbe LhouqhL,because Lhinkinqie alwayo
Vafr,iculariLy
abstracLingLhe generalfrom the Var\icular,Kierkeqaardradicar
izee YlaLo,lf onlylhaL whichcan be conce?t'ualized can be
lhouqht,Ihen "exieLence" Cannol be Nhouqht,becaueeiL ie alwaye
concreNeand neverabeLract',
E x i g h e n c ieg a " ; u r d " w h i c h
is left' overwhenall analY-
e i e i E c o r n p l e L el t.r i e f h e
u na na l y z a bel r e s i d u ew h i c h
is si^?ly "there,"ll ia, eaYO
Kierkegaard,likeNhefrog
you diecoveraf' the boL'
lom of your beer muq afLer
you havefiniehedyour beer.
The "concapf"'of exiElenco
ie a Varadox,whichwe
e n c a u n f , eer e Ve c i a l l Yd r a -
maLicallywhen we f'urn f'o
our own exiELence,

55
 fll, EN6INEER,
J.M A NUCLEAR
.VVhen I am I GRADUryTED sunnAcun
LAUDE, I IIIG TO SKI, READ
doneeaying
ROSERTBROWNIN;,AND EIRD-
everyAhinq that 't<H. I LIVE tN SAUSALITQ
U
can be eaidabouV rN e, TouNHottsE un{ A V)EU.
myeelf(r'y name,
whereI was born,what,my
anceelryie,whatmyjob ie,
whereI live,howI feel,eNc.),
there is etill eomethinqleft
over- MY EXISTENCE. My
existencecanno| be
lhouqhl,and ir ie not,suf-
ficienlsimplyLo ?ointaL
it,,ae in the caeeof Vheqreen
book.

My exielencemuet be lived. trhouqhlthar ie eseenlially

It, muet,be exieted.Dut relatedto doinqie what
lhinkinqand exiebinq are Kierke7aard calle*gUgJEC-
not,Eheeame (evenif TIVETH)UGHT,'and Lhie
Descartee did eay,"l lhink, idealeadeLo hie notorious
lhereforeI am"),ExieIinqie claim:
a form of DOING,nol a
form of rhinkinq.YeN 7R UTH
it is a form of doinq ,s
whichmuet be relat-
ed Lo thoughL.
suEtrECTNtry
(Unthinkin7 acLionie noV
Kierkegaard'o eoluf,ion) The
queelionio,whaLis hhe
natrureof lhis paradoxical LeT,'g
thinking- and-doing which
Kierkeqaard advocahes ae
examine
rla

his solulionto the Vroblem Tnt6,

of exietence?Thekindof
The opVosiNeof eubjecliveNruths are oblecNive Nruf,he.Theee
are lhe NruNheIhaN can be abetrracted from realiNy,conce?'
tualized,and tesled-for examVle,f,helrulhs of science,
maNhemaNice, and hiolory. ln each of these caeee lhere are
objechive, exlernal crileria to whichwe a??ealwhenwe opeo-
tion lhe lrulh of a claim,We can eay lhal individualpeople
are in lhe truth if whal they asee(Yie Nrue,Here,Kierkeqaard
oaye, the accent, is on fue)lltJALnfr on Yhe HOW. These
EruNhs,however, ar7 exieLenLially
_--:_:.-=-- indifferenL,[hat ie to eay,
nothingin your life woul,diedl you diecovered
lhaL, one of lhege "lrulhe" wao falge.

(lf newreeearcheelablished
LhaLCaeeardid noLcroee !I
WHAT
lhe Kubiconin 49 D.C,,
or thaN "force" doeg
,rftssl sst??|
no| equal"maoe limes RI V E R
acceleralionl'or even
LhaL Lhere ie eomeLhing $d
fiehy abou| lhe foun-
daf,ionsof mat hematice,
you would noNbehave
much differenfly,and you
cerLainlywouldn'L
becomea
difterenrpereon,)dcfu ull .1
Y'^
 I
I

"SubjectiveNruNhg,"on f,heoLherhand,are,,NrL)Lhe,' for which

r'hereare no objectivecrireriaro whichonecan a??eal,andyer,
for Kierkegaard,rhey arerhe moer,imporLantkind'of truthe,ln
Lheircaee,the emvhaeie ie on rhe How ratherrhan on the
WHAT.Theeeare exisLential Lruf,he,jn T,hatrheyare eeoentially
relatedLo one'eexisLence, LhaLelusive"curd"ir-,irr,ie alwaye
there.Theeetruf,hsare noLabouLobjective facle, bur aboul val
uee,and abou| Lhegroundinqor foundarionof valuee,
"f S" tnpLlES
r.,to
Kierkegaard holdsthe okeprical view (whichi AN'OU6H1"
he probably got from readingthe eigh-
teenthcenturyScof,tiohphiloeopher
HUME(1711-1776)
everp_qqrounda_d
?rovethal t
il_g\bli,cf,ive
orLurinq babiee cauoeethem
DAVID
Lhat no moralclaimcan
fact. (youcan ilB -'

Vain,but you can'|,?rovelhaL il ie morally

wronqLo Lorlure babiee,)

uHRE %NCNY
tS TH nnR,AL

a\r -,/
t:/ //
// \-
YeL KierkegaardrecoqnizedLhat values,moral,
reliqiovte,
and aeehheNic, wereeeeentiallyrelat-
ed to our idea of selfhood.
 ONLYIN
suBJEcTtv
rrY /s
'ArL THERE DEctSloll,
DEc,s IvENEss
To SEEK
,N HEREs IN
OEJECTIVITY /S
SUB f,E CTIVITY TO tsE IN
^Z
a.7f you truly believe(ae
o??oeedto merelysayinq,
thar, God ie
that, you believe)
love,or lhat caueinqunneces-

NhaNbeauNy
or
earymieeryie wron1,
musNprevail,
Nhenf,heeebeliefewillbe
ffi
ex?ressedin your aclione.
(Thioie what'Kierkeqaard
meanLwhenhe eaidNhaNhere
the accenf,is on Nhe@.) And,
accordinqNoKierkeqaard, if You
chanqeyour beliefsconcerning
issueelikeIheee,noNonlYwill
your behavior chanqe,but Youwill
becomea differenN person,ln a
senee,YouMow
eiqnificanf'
valuessinceyour eelfhoodie Nhe
w@nq of your acNions, As
pon an re morv, Kierkeqaard
ed bv value f acls.lNo
*lact
by iloelf can molivaf,ean
6ay6:
acfion,A facl can be Nheprebexl
for an action onlyin Nhecont,ext
of valueo.
 Yel, in some reepecLo,even of our worldeand haveus
facts are deT,ermined by valuee, a o e u m er e e ? o n s i b t i t yf o r l h a t
The factreLhaL revealLhem- authorehiV,recoqnizinq f,haLiL
eelvesLo f,he ?ereonmoT,ivat ed deriveefrom valuesthat, we
by ChrieLianvalueeare difrer- havechoeen.Taradoxically,
enl from thoee lhat reveal Kierkegaardrefueeslo aeoume
Lhemeelvee Lo Lhe ?ercon moLi- r e o ? o n o i b i l i tfyo r h i e a u h h o r o h i p
vated by Lhe valueof of the idea that we
pleaeure,and Lhoee
" , ' , m u g l e a c ha e o u m e
LhaL reveal
,., ree?onoibilily for
Lhemeelvee Lo o u ra u t h o r -
LheVolilical
ohip.Thar is
revoluLion-
,^ becauoe
ary are dif-
Lhe idea
ferenL
itEelf is a
from
eubjecLive
Lhoee ' lrulh
LhaL
revealedlo
cannoLbe
f,heconger-
' communi-
vative,(Think , caLed direcL-
of the famoue ,'ii, rirrrr
Iy. When
fiqure now known The0uckHabbit Kierkeqaardlib-
ae "VlitLqeneLein'e
eraLeethe idea
duck/rabbit."My atLitude f r o m h i e o w na u L h o r e h i V
Lowardthe fiqure ie whaLcauo_ and
Vlacesil in a circleof indi-
ee it f,o revealiteelf ao a duck rectrcommunicationil becomee
raLherLhan ao a rabbiL.) a VooeibilitythaL each of ue
Kierkegaard wouldhaveuo rec- can realizeand apVropriaLe
for
oqnizeLhaLwe are the authore ourselvee,

30
 tr
t7t followsfrom all
of bhis Nhat,we can
neverjuof,,ifYlhe most'
ISNOSUCH
THERE baeiceNral,aof values
ASEXETENCE Ihat, makeu? our lives,
THINC
WITHOWR,ISK.
A^r-, ni\=a hencewe can never
,,? 6.4i ' y ' " fr:( ^ C' l be cefraintrhaN
we havechoeen
%z "the riqht valuesl'
Thismeang,amonq
oNherlhinge,Nhaf'
l h e r e i s n o s u c hl h i n q
ae exief,encewilhout'
af'
riek,and NhaNexief,ence
itroverycore muel be exVeri-
encedae anquiehor dreadby everysensifivesoul.

of somebhinq pooibive,
KierkeqaardoayoNhatrsub-
jecf,iveNhouqhLis neTaT'ive EXPERIENCE
IS OPEN-
AIO UNFIN$HN.
ENDED
Lhouqhr.Thieie because
qhf ?on-
e Nhou
eubjectiv
derslhe "nolhingneee
beinq."
lhat, Vervadeo
 ---
of
{t he Vhraee"noLhinq-
ne6o Vervadeebeinq"calls
aLtenT,ion lo Lhe Lenuoue-
n e s s a n d e l u e i v e n e sosf ,
exiELenc e. ThiE ten uo uo neee
ie expreeeedin Lhe lhortqhL
of "T,heposeibilityof deaLh
aL any momenL."
Kierkeqaard'e obEee-
WHATDIDYOUEXPECT
FPOIVI
A
IIANWHOSETAST
NAIVIE
eion with deaLh
IVIEANS
e e e m em o r b i dL o
eomeVeople,
7uL Lhereie Eomephiloeo?hyhere
and not,juet peychoVathology. ThaL
philoaophymay be eeenin a eLory
LhaL Kierkegaardrelatee in t,he
ToELecri?L_:
Lwo men meeLon Lhe
ef,reetEof Copenha7en and one
inviLesthe oLherLo dinner.The
proo?ecNive gueel accepte the invi-
f,alion,oaying,"Youcan counLon
me quite definiLely."
Ae he walkE
away,a tile blowafrom lhe roof and
sLrikesthe man dead,Kierkegaard
eeemoto find thiE eLoryLo be hilar-
ious.)ne couldlaughoneselfto
deaLhover it. but afEermockinq
LhiEman wha makeean abeoluLe
commilmentin LhefuLureand who
was enuffedfrom exislenceby euch
an inei4nificanL
Lhinqae a quet of
wind,Kierke4aard concludesthaL he
hae beenloo harehon the chap.

42
 I
a-, urely he couldnof,haveexpectedr,har,T,hefellowreeVondNoLhe
invif,alioneayinq:"You can counLon rne,I ehall cerf,ainlycome; but, I
muENmake an exc&ptionfor lhe conEin6enGy thaf,,a tile hapgeneto
blowdawn from a roof and kills me; for in that caee I cannov com&."
7ut in factr, LhaNis exachlywhaL KierkeqaardexVecLs,|f one qrae?e
deegly("wifh tnwardnese," ae Kierkeqaardcallo it) LhaNone can alwayo
correcLlyadd f,o every senl,enceane utNers or Ihinks lhe rider,
"However, I may be dead in the next rnoment,in whichcaee I cannot
aLtendl'Lhonone has discoveredona'sdeath afi a subiectivei;rul'lh,
a*d ane is in a VooibionNoordar onetsVri-
orilies accordingly,

?erhapoit will no longer 6eem

eo impor\ant IhaL one'esocke
be wiXhoulholes,or lhal one'fi
shirf, maLcheeone'6 jackeL,This
individualwittbe able f,a make
decioionsLhaT,are Lhe rebulLof
af,inq atbent ion on
c oncenT,r
human exislenceac il ie lived,
neilher in f,he paet,nor in lhe
dieNanVfuLure, buT,in the naw,
frierkeqaard'sqoal ia not to
caueeua lo shiverin lercor af,T,hediecoveryof the lenuoueneasof
exiaLence,
raf'herha hopeslhat by facilitaling i,ftediscoveryof our
daahhae eubjecLiveLrurh,he can hetVue Lo diecoverour lives.

45
 ll is acluallypoooible to
liveone'swholelifeout'
sideoneself,it io pooer
bleto liveVurelyin
Lermsof ritualizedfor'
maf,eand socialroles,
and nevercomein con-
t,act, wiilhlhe trulh of
one'eown oubjec,t ivity.
Dut,Kierkeryaard does
everyfrhinq ?ooeible to
VrevenLtrhat Lragedy,
Nhetragedy t'he man
of
"whowokeup oneday
WHATA SHAME
TOHAW
DIN EEFORE IIVEO,
ONE and discovered hewas
deadl'
Muchof the existnntialisN W Kierkeqaard's
lileralure influenced Vhiloo'
o?hyaleoconcenfrat,es ae a oubiect'ive
on T,hediecoveryof existrence
Nrutrh.Merseaultr, the protaqonisVof Albert Camus's(1913-1960)
novel,The ?lranqer.haeneverLrulylived
a day of hie life,yet,he finallydio-
coverehis lifein the shadowof
Nhequillotrine.Theniqhtbefore
hieexecutionfor a murder
he cannof,recallcommif''
Ning, Merseault violent'ly
Nhrowea prieoNout of his
Vriooncell.Thieis the
firsNhumanacf' he hae
everVeriormed, HeqoeoNo
the barredwindowand
emellero6eein lhe air, He hae
neveremelledrooeo before,He
eeeolhe moon over f'he frame of lhe
guillohine,and he sNares aN it'. He had
neverlookedat, the ynoonbsfore.guddenly,and for lhe first' I'ime,he
livee,Thefac, lhaN ha willdie tomorcowdoesnof'matt'er.He hae lived.
Not everyone can oayao much,
ln anotherocenein trhe
oamefilmIhe kniqhN, who
io Vlayinqcheoowith
Dealh,qoeoinf,,o a church
and revealst o Nheconfes-
sor his olrat eqyf or
defealinqhie advero ary.
TherobedconfeooorVullo
backhis hood,revealing
himselfae Death,and he
trhankstrheetunnedkniqh|
for lhe revelaNion.
Antoniusbloch,whonow
knowsfor cert,ainhe will
die,qrabethe bareof Nhe
VrieoN'o cell.He ef,aresin
horroraNhis ownclenched
fist,,trhenelowlybeqineto
notrice the veinsand (nu6-
cleein hislaul wriel,and
oayeour loudlo himeelf,
"Thisio my hand,I can
moveiT,,feel lhe blood
Vuloinq Ihrouqhif,,Thesun
ie still hiqhin lhe oky,and
l, AnNonius Bloch,am ?lay'
ing cheoewith Death,"
A q a i n , I h i ei s t r h e
Kierke gaardian meeeaqe,
The Voeilive-exi etrence-
can onlybe undereloodby
an acule awareneeo of trhe
negative- lh e nothinq- "
neeowhichVervades exis-
lence."

45
 ,J: accordinq
Lo Kierkegaard,
theeekindeof
exieLentialinEiqhT,e, alon6with moral and reli-
giouevaluee,are "ErJblective f,ruLho"in Lhat there
are no objechive criteria to esNablioh their validi-
Ly, and, No be made valid,flheymusL be apVropri-
ated by Lhe individual,inLernalized, and reflec1ed
in one'odecieioneand acNionE. gubjecf,ive LruLhs
are not' pieceoof knowledqe,rather they are v\/ay6
of arranginqknowledqe and acLivaNinq iL.Theoe
"f,ruLhe"are qroundedno| in eomefactg abotfi
the exlernalworld,buL in lhe discoveryof the
evasiveneoo, lhe f,enuouaneos, and the uncer-
Lainty of life,lhat ie lo eay, in Lhe nothinqneoe
of exielence.Thie diecoverymueL be made by
e a c h i n d i v i d u af ol r h e r e e l o
f r h i m e e l af l o n e .
Kierkeqaard'e geeudonymous authorehiV,with iEe
" i n d i r e c Lc o m m u n i c a L i o ni ,6" r n e a n Lt o f a c i l i f , a y e
t h i e d i e c o v e r yK. i er k e q a a r dc a l l e i L " d e c e i v i n lqi e
reader inLothe LruLh."

A t o n e p o i n Li n h i e b o o k
EiLherI Or, Kierkeaa ard'o
-=-,'=4'
,
hie reader,if you reachLhe poinl
L h a L i e L h e Y n o r n e noLf d e c i e i o n .

/ THROWTHIS
BOOK
DOWN!
46)
ONSCIOUSN
NTHA
PnoBmnt
 --
r-, ./-
I l -
\J'

U he diecueeionof sublecLive and

oblecLiveLruLhemay havelefl' rhe
impreoeion thaL onlyeubjective
LruLhsare VhiloooVhically problem'
aLicalfor Kierkeqaard, whileoblec-
live LruthE are elraighLforward.7ul
we oeethal evenso-calledobiective
LruLhoare frauqhr with probleme
whenwet'urn Lo Kierkeaaard'e Lreal'
menLof the f amouequeeLfor cerLainLy
of RENE'DE5CARTE9. DeocarLee (159b-
found
165C),Lhefather of modern7hiloeoVhy,
LhaLclaimeof knowleAAe woAdwaniunreliable
aboutlheefr,ernal
unleeet'heycauldbe qroundedu?oY1 soYne
abEolutely cerlalnfoundation,Ueinqa melhod
in Lhe moLlo,"de
of doubl surnrnarized
omnibuedubit'andumeoL"("ev'zryEhinq i'zLo
be dauW,ed"),OescarLeo concludedlhaL
eveffihinycouldbe doubted exceol
coneciouaneos,

lie f aYnoLd ) ei c L u r , P e r h a P leh e

mosLf amouEin \l"teElern ?'hllos-
o?hy, " l T l - l { N K{ F
, T E K E F O KIE
AM," ie t'he Vroclem aNionctfthe
abeolulecerlaintY diecoveredin
o n e ' co w n c o n E c i o u e n e o e .

E v e r y t h i n ge l s e
ie euepic:ioue

4&
 Youcan'l LrueLbhe
THAT
HOWDOWEKNOW
GOING
WTIAT'S brouqhlin
ONINHERE... informaLion
lhrouqhNhesenseo,
becauae"Yhegengeo
are knowndeceiver6,"

tn UDE
AWAKE
(1?
t

GOINSONOUTHERE?
LIKEWHAT'S
ISANYTHING
?,/
\t

You can'NT,rugf'common z

eenoe-our ordinaryway of
t h i n k i n qa b o u LL h e w o r l d -
b e c a u e ei L i e i m p o s e i b l teo
?rovefor cerLainaL any ?ar-
ffi
l i c u l a r m o m e n Nt h a L y o u a r e
nof,dreamin4inef,eadof beinq 'tr'h
v, 6,
on
7r,,o,1't
rrf,
in a wakinqat aLe, fi-
.\ DREAMS
CARTESIAN
-\
-l );Y x"J' * i-rn 'rl-l;;7-:'l \
/\I-- =
f /(,' t Y
Lr'" .)-
I
D , v ) D E T )B ? tT\E1-F Attl' lLL':HFDI
TONN T HE 7 9] i - E T ,I You can'|,f,,rugNmaLh,
, . l :

, - 1 1
becaueeyou can'L VroveLhaL
realiLyae you conceiveif, hae
noL beenconeLrucf,ed by an
a l l - p o w e r f u" le v i lq e n i e "a e a
eyoLemof undeLectable
malhemalical errore.

THEEVIL
GENIE
INVENTS
1- MATH
49
 rNr,(Ec7

plrofons
I

1ut the onelhinq you can "doubLinq"io a form of "think-

lrueN, accordinqLo DeecarLee, inqi'WhaLmakeeconecioue-
ie Nhecerlainly of your own neeecerLainfor DeecarLeeie
congcioueneoe, becaueeevery iLe immediacy. lt preeenLiteelf
Limeyou eay lo youreelf,"l DIKECTXro Lhet'hinkinqsub'
THINK'(or"l jecL, lL doee
am lhink- not,Vaoe
EVENIF I AN any
inq"),you DEcEw1D gy YourN Lhrouqh
r mediumlhal
are EVERY
ol',6R uJAf,IF I
_w- THrHK"fAn: rilENL An miaht,conlam-
inate or fal'
evenif lhe
eeneeoaeceve, it. NoNeven
oifis'r
evenif you are in a n e v t lq e n t u e
a dream eLale, couldgeL bebween
evenif you are in the eubjecLand her
a world crealed conecioueneee, 9o
by a malevolenl any aenNence Lhal
demon,Thevery doeenolhingbul
efforL t'o doubL exlreeoconscioug'
f,heVroVoeition neoeae it io exVeri-
ends up Vroving encedie necesearilY
il. becauee Nrue,

Such a sentenceie,
"I THINK, I AM.''
THEREFORE
 -d"*;z
=*v

Uponf,hecefi,ainNy of conscioueneee and eelfhood(whichare

he ie abletrobuilda complicahed
identicalfor Deecafi,ee),
deductiveeyotemIhat allowehimIo concludefinallyNhaNobjec-
Nivef,rufheaboul Ihe externalworldcan befound in f'he ecience
of malhemalicalVhyeice(of LheNyVetrhaI he,Oalileo, and in
NhenexNqenerationlsaac NawDon Vracticed,)
DuI Deecarl'eewouldbe quickto
admit that ecient'ificknowledqe
of Ihe world ie onlyae good ao 0ll
the foundationon whichiL reel'a,
namely,Nhece(bainly of con-
sciousneee. guNaN leae| lhis
f oundalionwas unaoeailable,
Deecarteebelieved, ae did moeN
VhiloeoVhere for Nhenex| 2OO
yeare,

NeverLheles s, Kie rkeqaa rd

aeeailsiN,in a bookironically
Litled,De OmnibueDubitrandum
Eet, (1b42-43) wrir,renpeeudo'
nymouoly, onceagain underLhe
nameof JohanneoClimacue,
ASITS
ISO]ILYASGOOD
A STRUGTUBE
FOUNDATION.
Wehaveeeenthal Deecart,es believed
himselfT.,o
haveovercome doubt by dio-
coverinqlhe immediacy and ce(Dainlyof
consciouoneeo,"J ohannee Clim
acus"
arquedthaNf,hereis neitherimmediacy'ntnrb
ooo.
nor ce(Vaintyin coneciousneeo, 17 LoaKs LtKf
S4RENKtERkE-
Johanneooayoi 51125 ulTH
A FAKEN6E
AND
iloysTAcNE

Cqnbt consciotlsncssffon remain ln

WhaIdoesthis complicat-
ed aeee(Cion mean?lT,
meansf,haf Nherecould
be immediacy and cer-
tainty in sensation.butr
lhis immedi ale cet'bainty
woulddieaV?ear ao eoon
ae lhe exVerience ie
coN8C lOusNEs s ex?reeeed in thouqht'or
F- lanquaqe, Forthoughtand
lanquaqe are not'the eameao
realiNy.Theyare o??osedto
H0IDS
coNclousilEsS realiNy.Theyare realitY'o"of'herl'
TOGETHERSETSOF To Nhinkof somet'hinqor lo name
CONTRADICTIOl{S ""' ii is NoopVoseit wirh otherneee,ln
consciouonelo, whichie (actualr
Nhaf.,
ry) ie confronledby Nhatrwhichis no! (voooibiliNy) , To rhink,
"thiu is a doorl' is t o be consciousof it ao eomet'hinq t'hat,could
be open,or thaf' couldbe locked,or could im.Vrieol, ^'' lt' ie some-
LhinqthaL waeo?en,ie noL nowo?en,buNNhatrull be openlat'er'
a2
lJ o coneciousnee' berweenacrualiNyand voeei-
is the collieion
blily, beNween what,ie and what,ie not,,conecioueness is Nhena
of "doubreneee."
forit' of opposif,ion, Kierkeqaard voinf'eoul NhaN
the word"'dot)b1," is aleoetymoloqically relaledto doubleness'
(Thieie Nruein boNhDaniehand Enqlleh,) He concludes f'hal con-
ecioueneoe, far from beinqa form ol ce(Dainf'y, ie a form of uncer-
rain1y,Far fromovercominq doubl,ae Deeca(Dee believed,con-
sciousneelis a formof doubf,,becausein conociouenees, NhaN
whichis ie in queoNion - de omnibuedubit'andum eeN'

inq hereie the uncerLainbY of

all thouqht-uncerNain
becauoeunefable.WhaEthe
old GreekVhiloooVher HERA-
CLITUe(c, 47O b.C.)believed
Nobe f,rueof t'he world-thal
iNwae in a consNanN shaheof
flux,thaV "you can'l et'eVin
Ihe game riveT 111,1i56',_
lo be
believee
Kierkeqaard
Nrueof conecioueness,

We can fail T,oknowNhieonly

by chooeinqnol f'o know it, bY
beingin a sLaf'eof what,Jean-
?aul eafi,re calls "bad failh."
The reasonfor chooeinqnoNtro
knowit is clear enouqh.ll i6
becaueethere is a kind of ler-
ror in coneciousnegs,)a(l're
has beenmoet' impreeeedwilh
Ihis aoVec| of Kierkeqaard'o
Lheoryof conscioueness,

55
earLreoayslhaL coneciousnees is "an imVersonal, monshroue
oVontaneity., a verbiqo and headds,"conaciousnees
of Voeeibiliby|' is
lerrilied by ite ownoponLaneityi' Hegoeoon lo oaythat for T,heper-
son whodoesnoLdeceive himeelfor herselfin thie reepecl,alllhe
guardraile ol eocialcerLaintyand etablibycollaVee, Kierkegaard and
SarLreseelhe complacenf, eelf-eatiefiedbourqeoie inhabitranLof
Copenhaqen ae livinga kindof inaulhenNic
and ?arie,reepeclively, life.

aard'e analyeie ulti-

Kierkeq
mahelyleadshimto juelifya
cerLainkindof religioueT,houqhI,
an oVtionlhaL Saf\re t'hinkeie no-^n
longero?enNo us. Kierkeqaard'e ,^l
ar1urnenlruns eomelhinglike dr
T,hie:The neqaT'ive ie Vreoent'+
in all coneciouoneoe, Doubf,
accenlualee lhe negaliv e,
beliel chooseeLo cancel
the negative.EverymenLal
act ie com?ooedof doubt'
and beliet,buNit, is beliet
Lhat ie Lhe Voeitive,il ie
beliefNhaNsusNainothouqht and holdsthe worldtoqether.
beliefunderehande
Nevefthelees, ae nol juolified
iNeelfao uncerLain,
bAany obleclivefact,,
54
 tf rHeRf'S
th lJfr SURE
nr',iireArvnr Yo1:D'
A VerooneueNainehhe relabion-
- rF I'n - -r-,-
i"'clru'rTELL
onili,l c rHERe's
r're. nAVB
eh'iVbef'weenconsciouoneaoand AN E V IL
f,he world Nhrouqhan acN of belief, \ G E N I E ,
A comVlelefailureof belief,f'hatrie,
Ihe mAximizinqof doubt',wouldleadvo
lhe kindof madneoot'ha| is Ihe conee'
quenceof Descar\e;'radicaldoubt (W.
omnibusdubit'andum. . .) takenlo it'e
loqicalexlreme,

9o, for
Kierkegaard,
S?
SAruTRCLAU "objecf,ive
Fnsrg'PguuuY?
T OO f H - F R I R Y7 Lruf,hs"abouNIhe
EXTFRA/AL
woRLD? worldare qroundedin belief,not in
ce(DainNy. Thar beliefcan be a naive,
'
unqueet io ninq, childlike ?re- VhiloeoVhical
belief,buI at, oomepoinl Kierkeqaard 6eemo
Nofeel,everyone comeslo ou6?ecT' hie or her
naiveh6-lhaf, is lo oay,begineNo phi-
looophize.Thenf'hereare only lwo Voeoi-
Eilher one flees inlo bad failh
bilibiee,
fthat ie. oreNendenol Io ouoPecN)or
one comeeEo lhe realizalionlhaN normal
are morelikereli-
of conecioueneee
sNaf,ee
qioueeNaNee than we had
of conecioueneee
realized,
in Nhaf, raf,herLhan I BEUAft IN I BEI'EVEIN TH6
THE FATHEP, THE TABL6,fiE CHA'&
beingeLaNeeof cer- AND TIIE COFFEE
sON,AND 7.H-
Nainty,both are liorY 6HasT
com?o6edof a
elranqe mixNu re of
doubr,and belief,
T h e r e l i q i o u o? a r a d o x o, f t h e
would-be
d i e c i p l ew h o e a i d L o
J e g u 6 ," M a o L e r I, b e l i e v el e
. lp
L h o um e i n m i n eu n b e l i e fn, "o w
becomeea ?aradoxof everyday lhe ficlion of Franz Kafka, ear'
c o n s c i o u s n e g ol t. i s l h e
of r,hie
reco7niT,ion
q u a r d r a i l e ,a"e 7 a r N r ec a l l e i L ,
or of what Freudcalle "lhe pey'
choVathologyof everydaylife,"
l l i e p e r h a g eb e s t e x ? r e o e e di n
t i c u l a r l yi n h i e e L o r yo f
" K . , "l h e m a n w h o

paradoxin Nhe c o u l d b e c o r n ea
'
Kierkeqaardian c o c k r o a c ha, n d
Y oPS.l1 cauLD wrv w h od i d .T h e r ei e
a c c o u n to f
ttfTo A HU4ANBEIN6!
conscious- a maaneeeaT'

neeeLhat Lhe heart of

eubverLs normalily.

the emooNh, O n l yb e l i e cf a n

c o m fo r l a b l e overcomelhe

emuqneoe m a d n e e oa n d

of everyday the doubL,Ye|

life,revealing evenbelief,

a h i d d e nk i n d LakenNo iNe

of f,error,noL exLremeform-
r e l i g i o u eb e l i e f - i e
l u e t i n L h ew o r l d ,
but in conecioue- ileelf a form of mad'

ne6o iteelf. lt qivee n e e ea n d d o u b l , b u l o n e

of
cenLralityLo Lhe experience w h i c hl i N e r a l lhy a e ,f o r
"l,hecollapoinqof r,'he a savinqqrace,
Kierkeqaard,

56
 lT's RleHt gER6, f
vtT
\-.t

at l,{erkeqaard'stheory c>fconecictuE_
neee leade direcLlylo hie l,heoryof
dread,or "anquieh,"a6 T,henewerLrang-
Iation has ii,..(/era, we'lluee Lhetold
l r a n e la t l o n . E ve n t h o uq h "a n q u i e h , '
is eLymoloqically closerto the
Daniah" Anqeel,"the phenamenon
LhaL Kierkeyaarddescribesseeme
beLLerdeei4naLedby Lhe
T,erm,"dread.-This is beceuse
whateverelse AnqeELie, iL ie
a form of fear LhaL one o<?e-
r i e n c e ei n l h e p i l o f o n d o
oLomach.)Hia f,heory
a ? ? e a r si n a s m a l l b o o ke : n L i -
'2- -ii'/ "
lled rhe concevLof Dread,wriffien in 1b44 and
V u b l i e h eu d n d e rt h e V e e u d o n y m e r " W a L c h oor f
V i q i l i u eH a u f n i e n e i o
t h e M a r k e L V l a c e( "C o V e n h a q e nm =a" r k e t V l a c ei"n D a n i e h ) T. hie
bookvurvorLeLo be a peycholoqical deriberation
o n l h e p r o b l e mo f o r i 4 i n a sl i n , i n w h i c hV i a i l u s
llaufnieneieLries lo reconeLrucL
Adarn'omenLaletaLe beforeLhe Fall.
A c c o r d i n qt o V i q i l i u eV, r e - l a paar i a n
A d a m i s i n a e L a L eo f i n n o c e n c e .
w h i c hi s a e L a L eo f V e a c ea n d
re?ose,buL he ie aleo in a elaLe
of dread, V{haf,ie Lhe object of
A d a m ' od r e a d ?I t r i e n o L h i n ql,t i E
n o t h i n 6 . l t i e h i e o w nf r e e d o m
that Adam dreade,for Adam
dreadEpoeeibiliLy. He dreadE
L h a Lw h i c hi e n o L ,b u Lw h i c nm a v
be, le dreads whaL he may do, whal he is free lo ao.

56
 DO NOTEAT THE
FRuroFro15

WhenOod ?ro- ,tr\\\-

nounces the Vrohibi-
tion aqainsteaf,inq
f,hefruil of NheNree
of knowledqe, f,hie
Vrohibibion inducesa
ehaheof dread in
Adam"because Nhe
Vrohibihion awakene
in hirnt,heVoeoibiliNy
of freedoml'
Kierkegaard defines
dreadae freedom's
a??earancebetore
it eelf ae " pooeibilif,y,"
6uf,freedom,accord'
ingf,o Kierkeqaard, is
neveronlypoeeible.
As eoonao iI ie eus'
pecNed, if, is aclua|
Dread,Nhen,is lhe
fear of freedom.1ayo
Viqiliue, "However
deeVf,heindividual
has ounk,he may
einkeltll deeVer, and
Nhiemayie the
object,of dreadl'
 tu
'ililt

[,

-q

ownfreedom.
 V , , lm
e u e La d d l o a l l t h i e K i e r k e q a a r d 'm
e o r el e c h n i c a ld e f i n i '
lion of dread:

DREADI 5 A SVINPATHETIC
ANTIPffTHY AND AN ANTIPATH6TIC
sY/NPATHV

That io,dread ie Lhedeoirefor whaLonefeare and

the fear of what onedeeiree,OnceAdam knowehe
can dioobryGod, he deoireslo do eo,and he
dreadehie owndeeire,becauoehe knowethat ae a
free beingLhereie nothingbuLhimeelfLo eLoghim
from sinninq.

61
 Kierkeqaardtrelleue Lhar conecioueneee
of the fut'ureex?reeee;iteelf ae dread. Thisreveals another
oenoein whichthe object of dread ie nothin6,Thefuf,uredoee
noLexisLlt is noLhing.
And
yetr,unlikehheVaet,which
ie eolidandunchanqeable,
the fuhure,
rnyfutu re, mueVetill be
created,by me,in my
freedom.I create my
future lhrough my every
choiceand decieion. I
muet evencreate myeelf
in the future. Ae 1aftre
6ayo,"l await myeelfin
the fulure. Anquiohie the fear
of not findinqmyoelfthere."
Dreadie the fear of Lheaweoome
reo?oneibrlity of selt-creation.lt
is a fear of freedom.ThealNernativeof dread ie notrinno-
cence,for there wao dread evenin innocence.Thealtrernailive
ig inauthenlicif,y,Iartre's "badfaifhi
a flight from freedom,a choooinqnot
I coNDEll/VYov
To TERNAL t o be free.BuNof couree,thie ie lhe
FRFsDom onechoicewecannot
make,Ae
Kierkegaardeaye,
Not to chooseis
aleoto chooee;and
ag )arlre eayg,"We
are condemned r,o
be free."

62
a t - - t
- - / - t

/I/e've lalked aboul dreadand an6uieh.Nowwe Ynuotlookaf,

another bleakt opic-DE?YAlR. J ueNas Kierkegaard'sobseesion
wiNhdeaLh eoem,emorbidlo many of hie reader6,oo do Nhevery
tiqlee of oome of his bookeeeernloadedwith neqaNivity-booke
wiih nayneelikeFear and Tremblinq,The Conce?tof Qread,and M
gicknpqBunLoDeaNh,lt ie quiLedefinilelythe case thaL
KierkegaardconcenlraLedon lhe dark side of human experianGe,
buL he had hio reasons,oeme of which ffiay havelo do wilh ?er1on-
al pahholo1y,buVEomeof whichwere deeVlyphilooophical.

6+
Kierkeaaard's
obeeesionwith I rurs- AB5{l(}
abnormaleLaLes I
of consciouenese 1:t.
derivefrom his view ".il.
"nor- it',-r.
that, eo-called
malily" diequiEeethe .r=..
lrue eiqnificanceof t*Y,
what,if, meanef,o bE. \
and f,haLwhenone haE
beenVuehedto the very
ed4eof exieLence, one hae
a ?ere?ecLive providinqa
deeperinoiqhLinto human
rea[ity,With lhis notion in mind,
we lurn nowLo eomeof
Kierkeqaard'e ideaein hiE MAN15SPIRIT.BUTWHAT ISSPIRIT?SPIRIT
IS THE
ha Sickneesunf,oDeaf,h SEIF.BUTWHATIS THESETF?THESELFISA REU-
(1849). He beginef,he book TIONWHICH REUTES ITSETF
TOITSOWNSETF,...
AlIAN
with a tremendouely compli- ISA SYNTHESIS OFTHEINFINITEANDTHEFINITE, OF
caLedpara4raVh: THETEMPORATANDTHEETERNAI, OFPOSSIBITIW
ANDNECESStry
lN SH1RItT tSA SYI|THES|S.
A
SYNTHESIS
ISA REUTIO\IBETWEENMO FACTOP,S,
I/IAN15NOTl/ET
SOREr,ARDED, A SETF,

WaEKierke7aard jokinq here,ae

Wooay AlleneeernEt o euqqeeL
h i e c o m m e n Lo n L h i e p a e e a 4 e ?

THECONCEPTBRAUGHTTEARS
TOMYEYES. MY
WORD, I THOUGHT,
TOBETHATCLEVER!(I'IVIA
lWANWHO HASTROUBIE
WRITINOTWOIvIEAI{-
INGFUI SENTENCES
ON'MYDAY ATTHEZOO,")
TRUE,THEPASSAGEWASTOTATIY
INCOMPREHEN-
SIBIETOME,BUTWHATOFITASION6AS
KIERREfiAARD
WASHAVINq FUNT

Terhape. b uL Kierkeqaard'e
j o k e oa r e V h i l o e o V h i cl a
o lk e e
meanLt"o be Lakeneerloualy.
L e t u e p l u n g ei n L oL h i ej o k e ' e
rnurky deVths.
69
Wefind Ihat lhe eelf(or "epir-
il") ie the act of relatinqtwo
oVVoeing which
Volee,
can overeimply be
called"body"
and "ool)1,"
Thieacl is
noNone
lhaf,
Nakee
Vlace BODY
auNomaf,r
callyonce SELF=SP
and for all,
rather if' musf'
beconsLanbly
pertormedif selfhood
The
ie Nobe mainlained.
af,NemVllo eef'abliehLhe oYn-
f,heeieis likeArietotle's
af,NemVt' to achieve"Lhe golden
rnean"in moralacNion.)necan
err by beingNoomuch af'NracN-
ed NoNheidea of bodY-as-self,

z
 definifionof the
nowadde Nohis alreadycomplicahed
Kierkeqaard
self:

iTSetp To ana tnzr .

9o we seef,haf,there are t'wo rela-

lionshiVeto be sustained:one
betweenbodyand eoul,and one
belweentrheeelf and "anotherl'
Kierkegaard ie clearlybaeinqhie
thoughbeon the famoueanalyeieof
HEGEL(1760-1&31),
trheselfputfofth byO,W,F. a ?hiloooVher
whobothdeeplyinfluencedKierkeqaard him.
anddeeplyoffended
(ln facl Nhe"joke" in Kierkeqaard'sdefinibionof Nheself that we
lookedat is a jokeon Heqel,for Kierkegaardio parodyinqHeqel'e
abstruseand ?ara'
doxicallanguaqe,) ln
a chapf,erof his
?henomenoloqy of
(1807)
)oiritr \ / called LWEHM,
"Lordship and N0..
Bondaqel'Heqelhad HAff ilN
eaid,

67
 .=r- =-

")elf-conocioueneel exislo in itrselfand for

iteelf, in that, and by the fact NhaNit exiele
for anoAherself-coneciou6neoo." For Hegel,
the eelf exiels onlyby virLueof beinqrecoq-
nizedbyrhe orher,TherordexisL,e
ae lord
onlybecauoehe is seenao ouch by the
bondamanand the bondamanbecomeo
bondomanbecauoehe is seenao euchby Lhe
lord,eo they eachconetif,uteeachother'e
being,

60
ForAe7el,Nhisf act,eeboup KierkeqaardalEAseel
aLeddialeclical
a comolic the eelf ao conotiLuLed
eyetemof mutualdepen. by the Other, There iE
denceand antayonism one form of oelthood-
bebweenf,heLwo. Lhe reliqioue edf-th aN
ie conET,'itutedby a
commihmenN lo God,
and anoLherform of
eelfhood-Lhe eLhical
self-which ie conbr,i-
LuLedby a commiLmenL
to humanify,or Lo a
o p e c i f i ch u m a nb e i n q .

( F o r K i e r k e q a a r dm, a r d a p w o u l db el u e t e u c ha d e f i n i n q
relationehip t o t h e e L h i c a lH . e c o u l dh a v ec o n s e c r a L e d him-
a n e L h i c a sl e l f.
E e l fL o K e q i n a) l e e n , l h e r e b ye e t a b l i e h i n q
l n e t e a dh e c o n e e c r a L e h di m e e l L
f o God,)

69
 TheachievemenV of a Kierke7aardian eelfhoodie evenmore
complicaledf,hanit, has beendeecribedhere,involvinq ao iL
doeschooeinq oneeelfin one'ehistorical,cultural,and qeo-
graphicalcondition,with one'eowngeneLic endowmenl (wiLh-
ouf,conceiving oneeelfae a mere?roducLof lheeecondi-
Nione-LhaNie,ae a vicNim of Lhem).No eurprieetrhaVmoeV
peoVledeeVairof achievinq lrue eelfhood,TheSickneseunto
DeaNh is mainlyabouLtrhemanyformsLhaNdeepairNakeeon.
Wewill brieflyinopect,a few ol Lheseforme.

OeoVair ie the oppo-

eite of "willinq
Nobe Th" lormenf o7 /espair is precisclq
\r
lhis : nol fo 6e able fo alie,
lhal eelfwhichone
truly is,"This ie wha| he
"T,hegickneggunlo
deaf,h,"lT,ig noL tha|
deopairleadsto bodily
deaT,h,raT,herdeepair
lonqefor death,

70
ThegereonwhodaoPaira' Kierkeqaardeaye,"Lhe rnore
deoVaira of becominq trhe c o n gc i o u e n e e of , h er n o r e
self he fpof;entiallY)ie, so he i n L e n o el h e d e e P a i r .7" u L L h e
wiehesto beoomenoNhina, good neweie,Lhe (nore
He deoVairs "becauea he i n l e n e el h e d e o P a l rL, h e c l o s '
cannoNconoume himselt, e r a L h a n di e L h ee o l u l i o n ,
cannor,qeI rid of himself,
cannoLbecomenolhingi'
Therefore, he ie coneumedbY
a deaf'h'wiEh, but uauallY
lhie deailh-wieh ie uncon'
scious.Thereare de4reeeof
deapairrunninq the 6amut'
from unlonEciouE deeVairlo
the moetracule conocioue-
neoeof deepair,And,

{^u

DESPAIR
UNCON$CIOU$ DESPAIR
CONSCIOUS
71
 U n c o n e c i o udee e V a i ri e
T, LOVE/IY CAR
o n e i n w h i c hl h e i n d i v i d u a l
T HO?EIT N6YFP id enLifieeherself wiLh
LEAVES
e o m e t h i n qo u l e i d e h e r -
self, Lhereforeher deetiny
ae a eelf ie conLrolledby
a whim of fate.

T h i ef o r m o f d e o p a i r
V r o d u c e ;a n e m V t i -
n e e o ," T h e r ei e a b l i n d
door in lhe backqround
o f h i e e o u l ,b e h i n d
w h i c hL h e r ei e n o l h i n q ) '

PARTY
ATTHECOSTUME
DESPAIR
72
 C o n e c i o u sd e e p a i ri o
I

moreaaphi*tricat^
ed. 3ut a ?eroon
w h oi e c o n -
ecioueof hie
or herdeopair
may havea
faleeconce?'
tion of r,he
condiEion, The
false concevtioniE
knowing lhat one
d e e p a i r eb u l t h i n k -
inq thaL olhers do not (and deopairinqoverNhat f acI ae
welt.)TheLru&concepT,ion ie knowinqNhaLdeoVairia a huynan
condiiionand reco7nizing oneselfin T,lhalcandiLion,

ConsciouedeepairincorrecLlyconceivedie the deepairol

introvereion.ln hhis caee, behindNheblinddoor "sitE aE it
werelhe aelf and walchee ileelf employedin filling up Iime
wiih nol willinglo be iteelf."Thie form of deepair may be Lhat,
of a Hamlel, who,incaVableof acLion,hires acLore Lo pertorm
Lhe action that, he himeelfehouldpertorm.

7s
 Thieallusionbecomes
TO PEEOR NOT TO PEE,
evenmorepert,ineniwhen
THATIS THEQUESNON we realizethat, accordinq
NoKierkeqaard, T,he
biqgeoN dangerhereis
that of suicide.Herelhe
unconecioue deabh-wieh
becomeo conecioue.1ul
the Vooeibility of survival
is foundin the fact thaV
the deepairbeqineto
becomeoaesionate. and
wherethere ie paoeion,
Ihere is NhewillIo live,lf
trheindividual Vaoeeo
throughlhe suicidalcri-
eis, if he hae rejected
euicide,he haewilled
exielence, Whoeeexie'
Lence?Hieown,He willehimeelf, bul he doesnoLbelieve his
ie Voeoible,
eelf-realization eo he deepaire,

7r{6SETHtNfs/,RE
TRUE0F fflE, So THEq
nusT BE TR|EoFtotl.
' IF YouHAVEN'.T
HAI
(Themaeculine
?ronoun"he"io beinq EXPERIE NCES,THERE
ilIUST tsE SONETHIilE
ueed here becaueeNhis u)RoNGAfrH tbu
ie all clearly
Kierkeqaardian auiobi og-
raphy.He has paeoed
Nhrouqh Nheeeet'agee
of deoVair,and he qen-
eralizesfrom his case
Lo Lhat,of the whole
humanrace.)
6,M
Thisform of deepairmerqeeinf'oNhe
nert and lasl form,which
KierkegaardcalleNhedeepair
of defiance,Now rabher
than beinqreoiqnedt'o hie ,$i
deeVair, Lheindividual is
offendedbViT',Hie pae-
sionturng inNoa
demonicrage,He
becomee hielormenl
and hie fury.His eelf-
hoodVaooionatrely crye'
lallizesaroundthem,AI
lasL he hae a self t'ha| he
has willed,bu| it' io a "demonic
eelf,"ln hie raqe,he becomee lhe
fiqhTaqainel lhe offendingforces,bul Nhieie a fiqhNNhaLin
f act, he does not,wanl t o win."He raqee mosNof all aN lhe
NhoughN Nhal eNernitymiqhl qet, il inho it e head to Nakehie
mioery from himl' Thie ie a baf,Nlehe cannof,afford to win,
becausehe ie lhe batNleaqainst lhe forces of alienalion.lf he
wins hie batNle,he losee his eelf.He ie no one,
/ gut thie demonical self
in it,eraqe hae been
TAts ,s N nl.s3Ry.drivencloeeT,oNhe
YoU,DEETTER,
NoT therefore
TRYTo TAKEIT Vrecipice,
ANAI FRorrln / c l o e et o l h e p o e e i b i l i -
ty of whaL
Kierkegaardcalle"fhe
leap"-a leaVinf,o
true selfhood,To wilnese Lhe
actualizabionof thio Voeeibility,
we musf,ehudyKierkeqaard'e
conce\ion of the lhree kindeol
selfhood.
"the
oestheticol,"
U ecauseKierkegaardbelievedbhat aeebheticismcould
no| really providea lrue form of selfhood,ralher if, wae a
form of ALIENATION fronr eelfhood,he epent,a qreaL deal of
NimedeecribingiN,diagnooinqil, and preecribingmedica-
menf,efor iN,Theeeanalyoeeof rhe aeebhef,icrealm are car-
ried out, by Kierkeqaard'speeudonymouo?er6onae,moe| of
whomare Nhemselvee aeeNheNes. (Obviouolythie is an
aeVecI of Kierkeqaard'emeLhodof ironicindirect,communi-
caLion,)Some of f,heeeaeslhelee are wellaware of their own
whileolhere are only capableof qreat ineiqhl introthe
VlighT,,
weakneseof their fellowe,but blindto Lheirown failinqo.
JueLae LheaeeLhetic
realmre?reeenilg a eLeVin
a hierarchy,
il ie
iteelfhierarchical.
wifh lhe moat oophia-
ticated (henceeick-
eet) aestrheleaf, f.,he
lap of lhe scale,
Theloweotrun6e
are occuViedhy
Lhecomplelely
uncoubh-in
Eoday'oworld?er-
haVeLhe"couch-
VoIaNo"bif.,l,ingin
hia undershifi,,
with a can of
beerin /
h a n di n
rhi s speciesoF anima[ IiPe
fs surelg no* th.'fr,aif oF ,ftian's
tronl of
desire aia uofttdr|s'lust L;he atl louxr
Ehef,ele-
vision
wat,ching
his eec-
ond rch be,{n,qs
i *heq ra{h"r {o
"aqh*
Sunday
E f arnid ouf lg #tc scor.
afrernoon
lootball qanre.NeiLher
Kierke4aard's aoVhieLicat'
ed aesLheleenor
Kiekega ard himself have
anyf,hinqbuL diodainfor
Lhis fellow.
 A bft higheru? on
the ecaleare those
whoinhabitbhebusi-

"tr:;i#:"*?,i22'"'
neeeworld,(Theyare - ) C f

\C[v
qood"is NheVleaeure
\ a\
while c\
Vroduced I
enqaqingin a clever
b u e i n e s sd e a l , )D U N
Ihey hardly fare beL-
Ner in Eheeebimabion C

of the Voeudonymouo J
wrilers, one of whom (-
oaysi .')'-

OFAII RIDICUIOUSTHINGS, ITSEEIUSTOIVIE

THENlIOSTRIDICUIOUSISTOBEA BUSY IIIANOF
AFFAIRS,
PRONqPT TOIVIEATSANDPROIIIPT TO
WORK. HENCE WHEN I SEEA FTY SETTTE
DOWN
INA CRUCIAIilIOIVIENT
ONTHE NOSEOFA
BUSINESSIYIAN,ORSEE HIITBESPANERED BYA
CARRIAGEWHICH PASSESBYHIIIIIN EVEN
GREATERHASTE, ORA DRAWBRIDGE OPENS
BEFOREHIIYI,
ORA TITE FROM THEROOF FATTS
DOWN AND'THKES HIIVI
DEAD, THENI UUGH
HEARTIIY,
(Klerkeqaardhae a thing about fallinq tileol)
 F i n a l l y , l h e r ea r e L h e a r i e '
to crat ic hedonisf'owhoEe
culLiv aLionof aeaLheti-
dem seEElhem oft as
beinqhiqhabovelhe
of..herqrou?e,Dy far Nhe
qraaLeet parf'.of
Kierkegaard'e analyeio
of the aesthef,icrealm
focuaeeon lhe loP
runqeof t'hehierarchi-
cal ladder.Thereare
Several
reaoono lor Lhie.

Firgt, hie naLuralelitismprevente

himtrom rnakinqa eyrn?alhetricacruhinyof t:heuneo'
phielicaLed,

Fu rtherm o re, he correctlY

realizedthaf, NheunaoPhisLi'
cat ad werenoL hio audience.
le would nof' be read bY
Lhem,

Third, moerof
Kierkeqaard' E inoiyhts are
drawnfrom eelf-analYeie,
and he wae wellaware
Lhal hewaain imminenl
d a n q e ro f l o e i n qh i m E e l f
Lo T,helemplaT"ioneof
refinedaeetheLicism,
Aence,hin work in Lhiefield is
no7jue| deecrivlive,bul confessionaland ot
peroonally'
io Klerkeqaard
grea| urqency
WhaLall forme of aeelheliciem
havein common,from the moet, I CALL IT TH|T
booriehlo the moe|,,refined BE CAUSE THATS
NHAT IT IS
manifeeLatione, is Lhal Lheyare
qovernedby what Freudwould
laler call"f,hegleaoureprinciVlei'
Lhe Vureuilof Vleaeure and lhe
fliqhLfrom pain,

l)ence,"aeoLheNicigm" ig a form of
hedoniem.
T e o p l ew h of i n d t h e m e e l v e ei n
l h e a e e L h e l i cr e a l mh a v et h e i r
l i v e eq o v e r n e db y l h e g r i n c i V l e e
o f e e n e u o u e n e eT eh . i ei e e o
whetherone'eidea of fun ie
e L u f f i n qo n e e e l w
f i l h c h o c o l a Ndeo n u l e a n d g e L L i n qd r u n k o n
c h e a ?w i n e ,b e a l i n qa b u e i n e o oc o m p e t i L o ro u L o f a n a c c o u n l ,
o r d i e c u o e i n qa f i n e p o i n Lo f a S h a k e e p e a r e aeno n n e f ,

Thereeullof beinqquided
by Ihe Vlaacure VnnciVle,
whelherconsciouely or
unconsciou*ly and
whetrher in it"ecrudeor
refinedform, is thal one
is neverin conLrolof
one'eself.TheaeoLhele'e
life is governedby exler-
nal contingencies and
arbitrarinees.

05
 t
So WHAT,SAXON6
wtrH nY
rlod r
f./tlTtvn L .YAI JF tT
rEE'ts 6ffi0,

u
+& ffifii
-

FEm

F u r L h e r m o r ea,e e f , h e l e en e v e ra c h i e v ea t r u l y h u m a nf o r m o f
e x i s L e n c eb,e c a u e eL h e ya r e q u i d e db y L h e e a m e g r i n c i V l e e
L h a Lm o L i v a l ea m o e b a ea n d e l u q e , T l e a e u raen d q a i na r e ,
a f t , e ra l l ,f u n d a m e n f , a l lbyi o l o q i c ai ln n a t u r e ,l L i e l r u e N h a t t h e
m o r e r e f i n e di e L h e p l e a e u r et,h e m o r e" e ? i r i f u a l "i l e e e m eL o
b e c o m eb, u l f o r K i e r k e q a a r dL,h i e e g i r i L u a l i r yi e o n l ya n i l l u e i o n .
ln f acl, lhe evoluf,ion of rhe aeolheLefrom craeoneeelo
e o o h i e l i c a L i o ine b a e e do n l h e r e a l i z a L i otnh a t o l e a e u r em u e L
b e L r a n e f o r m e di n l o a f o r m o f c o n e c i o u e n e oroa l h e r L h a n
r e m a i nm e r ep h y e i c alli l i l l a t i o n . T h e e o g h i e L i c a l e a deelhef,.e
r e a l i z e eL h a l t h e p u r e u i l o f V l e a e u r ei L e e l fb e c o m e eb o r i n q ,
b u t h e ( " h " " b e c a u e eK i e r k e g a a r d a ' oe e L h e l e ea r e a l w a y e
m a l e )L r i e et o e o l v eL h i e V r o b l e mf r o m w i t h i nL h e a e e l h e L i c
e p h e r eA . e d o e e e o b y c r e a L i n qa w o r l do f e x o l i c b o h e m i a n
o e n o u a l i t yo f t h e e p i r i t .T h ea e s L h e L e d o e e n o Ly e Nr e c o g n i z e
L h a t b o r e d o mi e a c f , u a l l va m a n i f e e l a L i o n of deEoair.
Oneof Kierkegaard'sanonymousaeatheleemakesthe
foll owing oboervati on:,
"Ooredomis lhe rooLof all evil,The hielory
of thie can be Lracedfrom Lhe very beqin-
ninqof the world,The gode werebored,eo
Lheycrealed man,Adam wao bored
becausehe wa6 alone,and eo Evewae cre'
aLed,ThueboredomenLeredLhe worldand
increaeedin orooorLion Lo Lhe increaeein
Adam
eoeulation.
:- - wae boredalone;
=;Lhen
Adam

and CainandAbel
wereboredenf amille:
Lhen
of trheworld
Lhe ?o?ulaLion
andthe
increased,
tl
wereboreden
oeoolee I SN.T THERE ANYTHIUC
maeoe,To divert TO DO?
Lhemeelvee Lheycon-
ceivedlhe idea of
conelrucLinqa
Lawerhiqhenouqhro
reachLhe heaveno.
Thieidea ie iteelf
ae boringae Lhe
lowerwas hiqh
and consLiLuleE 91 ;
a LerribleVroot
{'
of howboredom
)
qainedthe uVVer
hand,"

lnra
 Kierkeqaard'o eophieNicaNed
aeeNhef,econcludes:

Thereare NheuneoVhieticahed
AtL NEN
bores ("Nhemob,Ihe crowd") AREBoRES...
who bore of,here,And lhere are
Lhe ooVhieLicaledboreo ("the
elecN,the arielocracy") who
bore themeelves,The eoVhiehi-
cated form of boredom hae
DEAIH as iVe nalural conee-
oLuencezLheee arishocralic
aeetrhelee"eiNherdie of bore-
dom (the paoeiveform) or
ehool lhemeelvee ou| of
curioeity(the active form)."

To avoid Ihe boredom Lo which

the pursuit of pleaeureueually
leads,the aeethetic aulhor of
the above ?aeeaqe Vreecribee
whal he calle "the Kohation
ltAeNhod.'Thie mebhod will allow
you Lo creaNeyour own world of
pleaeure,To do eo, you muet
avoidfriendship,love,marriage,
bueineee,commiLmenteof
any ooft, and inNeneeVlea-
eureeand Vaine.You Ver-
form ce(EainactreLhat
allowyou to creaf,eyour
GENTLEMAI{
FARMER ownunpredictred
pleaeureo.

o6
 Hoct)
uIADELEINE,
LoVE TflEE..

!6y, In ovFRHERE
!

YoubadqeraentimentalVeople, you fall in love- noLwith a

woman,but,with the ideaof a woman-IhaN way,if ehediee,
you won'Nbe affeched,(ln facl, you'llbe betler offl) "Youqo
NoeeeIhe middleof a play,you readr,hef,hird?art of a
book."Youremainoutsideof life,a epectatorand a maniVu-
laf,or.Thiswayyou will reecuefreedomfrom neceooiNy and fill
your lifewibhcunningliVtleourVrioee Nhaf,with qoodluck,
willkeeVyoufrom beingewamVed by life'oLedium,

NeverLhelese,Nhemorefrenziedie Nhepursuil of f,herola-

tion meNhod,the moredeopairing Nheaeslhetebecomee,
and the cloeerhe comeeLo suicide.ln hiejournalenf,riee
we
discovera bitrtercynicizm,a world-wearineeo;

"Thereore well-known
insects thotdie in the
oucH.l momentof fecundotion.
BoY,THAT
w N S F U N ,/ So it is with oll ioy; life's
supremeond richest
momentof pleosureis
coupledwith deoth."

07
 Herewe seeNhaNKierke7aard linkssey,ualVlaaeure, f,hemosv
exNreme and eouqht-afterpleaoure, with deaT,h.LikaFreud,
aevenly-fiveyearblaler, Kierkeqaard eeemoLo havediecovered
f,haLf,he*ecra| of the pleaaureprinciVleie a da:athwish, This
discovery coneLiLuLeE an absoluLe indictmentof aeeLheticiem,

lf one linqeroin Lhe aesLheticophereafAer

h a v i n qe e e nL h e V l e a e u r eV r i n c i V lfeo r w h a t
ie, cynicalapahhycan be yhe onlyreeulL.
Kierkegaard's 1aded hedonisl wriLee:

I do nof ure ror onqfh;na.

L 4o nol care to' ride, Yo, tfle
cxerciy is foo vioknt.' I do nol
caf fo ualk , ual king .is foo sfertuous.
z-douo, For L slvuld
tin lqin'q, anal T olo
', rshoald
orul haVe
anl I do naf cafe
^ :f. Sulnma Samnaf4rrt:
J Ao nof car rt-;Tl.

Ti/,
,/

88
;;ffiil

y"u[sfilpi
- anl fou"ii// rb11"i in"fi
uthefhcr geu t)dnq qorrsLls or ale
n

Thelast lineof thie "ecslaf,iclecture,"ae Kierkeqaard

eallE
iL,revealeanorherlayerof rneaninq behindhieekirmiehwith
LheaesNheticmentality.

8g
 {ti"*
t' \a.6 I

6.6.F.llctc'

?erhape Ihe
concluaion of
the "lecbure"io
not,Nheeum
and subelance
of all ohiloeo-
?hy,buf,for
Kierkeqaard if,
i s t h e o u ma n d
eubeLance of
allHeQelian
VhiloeoVhy. We
havealready
mentioned
thal Ihe meNa-
Vhyeiceof
GeorqeWilhelm FriedrichHeqelhad deeplyinfluenced
Kierkeqaard. Heqelhadthe uncannyknackof evokinq hoslile
af,Nacke from lhoee whomhe moeNinfluenced, Thieie Var-
Nicularly f,rueof his moeNfamoue"diecipleo," Karl Marxand
Ssren Kierkeqaard. Theverytihles of someof Kierkeqaard'e
worksare ?arodiesof Heqel,who,u?oncomVlelinq his lheo-
rieo,believed NhaNmosLall VhiloeoVhical Vrobleme had been
eolvedby whaNhe calledhie"7yof,em," He did, however,
admit NhaLtrheremighl be a few looeeendewhichneeded
Nobetied loqelher,bul he euVVoeed f,hat euchcouldbe a
accomVllehed in a shof7poelocripV to hie gyeLemthal
wouldbe wriT,Len by hie dieciVlee,
 ln reeVonse, writea his Thiloso?hiial
Kiarke4aard
which,raNherNhanbeinq
FraTmenLs^

5,h oyoLemaTicphiloeoVhyin the

'r*
th8 tnngrq,lents
thafr
exacNlyfour Nimeslonqer
Nhanthe bookto whichit is
a poetscriVL.This book,ae
we haveeeen.he tilles
Concludinq UnscienLific
?ostecript, Theimplicati on
ooshor|
concerninqLhe oyo-
temalic VoelecriVt' to
ie obvioue,
\ I fregel'o
VhiloaoVhy

S i m i l a r l yK, i e r k e q a a r d 'beo o kE i L h e r l O gr a r o d i e el e q e l ' e V h i l o e o -

? h y .l e q e l h a d c l a i m e dt o h a v ed i e c o v e r e d a n e r c o ri n l h e l r a d i -
N i o n a l o q i ct h a t h a d b e e ne e l f o r t h i n N h et h i r d c e n l u r y 3 , C ,b y
Arielolle. Accordinqto leqel, ArieLoLle'e LAW OF IDENTITY
(A=A), hie LAW0F NON-CONTRADICTION (not,both A and nor-A)
and Lhe LAV,'I 0F TllE EXCLUDE D MIDDLE(eirherA or not-A) had
a l l m i e c o n e b r u erde a l i t y ,T h e i m p l i c a t i o no f L h e e el a w e ,l e q e l e a i d ,
wae Lhat everylhinqin realily wae elatic and blackand whiLe,To
L h e c o n L r a r ya, c c o r d i n qL o h i m ,r e a l i t yw a e i n f l u x a n d c o n e i s l e d
of coneLanllychanqinqhueeof qray,lleqel wanted f,o replacelra-
d i f , i o n aAl r i e b o L e l i alno q i cw i L ha n e wd i a l e c b i c al lo g i ca c c o r d i n gN o
w h i c hL h e t r a d i t i o n a l l a w so f l o q i cw e r ee u b v e r L e dT.h e T r i n c i p l eo f
ldenLiLywao wronqbecaueeeverfihingwao alwayomoreLhan
i L e e l,fT h e T r i n c i q l eo f No n - C o n t r a d i c L i owna e w r o n qb e c a u e e
everythinqie boLhileelf and noL iteelf,The Trincipleof the
E x c l u d e d\ A i d d l ew a e a l s o w r o n q iA e g e lr e p l a c e et h e " e i l h e r l o r "
w i t h a " b o l h l a n d , "t h e r e b ya l l o w i n qa m u l L i p l i c i t oy f g o e e i b i l i f i e e
lhaL wereexcludedby ArieLolelianlogic.

9t
t/100
1esidesbeinqconcerned with the Vroblemof boredom, Ehe
ooVhioticated aeebheLe waealso concerned with Nheproblem
of freedom,The difficultyderiveefrom lhe facl t,haLt'he indv
vidualie forcedNolivein eociely,yeLNhedemandeNhat eoci-
ely Vlaceoon the individualcausea loseof freedom.FromLhe
earlieef,momentseocie$yrequireef'hat,Ihe individual slruc-
ture hieor her behaviorwilhince(bainmoreor leeeriqoroue
?arameters,f,haLhe or ehe VlayIyVicalbehaviorROLE9.
I IilANNA PLAY.

,N. VW CAN 8E A PlLoT,A THtEf,A nlEukosuR1Ed

A 6()n, A TTGHT-RoP aliltkR,I ntD &oAEER,, A Ltott
TATEN,
, OR. ?IESIDENT oF flle uNtTD stATEs

I.ttADw@
ttloel UKe NN6-ARouttb-

Thereare ?rofeesional
roleg,familialroles,char-
act er roleo,and roleg
withinroles.Theserolee
are alltypical wayeof
doinqthinqe.lvloeIof
them are oociallyueeful,
becauseIhey are aqreed-
u?onformat'sfor human
interaclionNhaIelimi-
nale mieun dersNan dinq,
violence, and socialcol-
laVoeinhoanarchY.
 However,Lhereare gome
role6lhat are sacially
dyefunctional or patho-
5o fou
anv'----- l o g i c a lA
. ny one?eroon
i n h a b i L er n a n yr o l e a
t h r o u q h o u tt h e c o u r e e
of evena day (the
oaleeVeroon, hue-
band,faLher,cheea-
Vlayer,churchdea-
con,rnember of lhe
7TA).Sometimeo
L h e s er o l e sa r e
e u| p e f l m| 2 ) ? e ao n e ut0- 0 n
I

lhe oI,her,sornelimea
Xheyoverla?al
Lhe ed6e6,aornetimeeLheyare conLradichory, Thereare
ruleo,convenLione, proceduresand formaLefor almosLanythinq
we can conceiveof ae a human
act"ion Any acLivif,yNhaLcannot,be
o o a n a l y z e da p ? e a r ei r r a l i o n a lo r
evenineane,(YeLirraLionaliLy and
i n e a n i t yL h e m e e l v ehea v ec e r L a i n
NypicaleomponenLs. Evenun?re-
dicLabrlilyie predictable)It the
behaviorieLe wereto be delighted
by Lhie diecovery,Kierkegaard
wae horrifiedby it, It seemedLo
emVLythe word "eelf" of mean-
inq,Roleoare a kindof protec-
tive armo\ but whaLdo thev
VraLect?V,'lhatif Lhereie nof,hinqineide
l h e a r r n o rp l a L i n q ?
W e w o u l dt i k eL o L h i n kr h a L t h e e e l f i E
likean arLichoke,whoEelayereof arynorprotect a "hearf|

95
 t*l

7 u t w h a t i f L h e s e l f i e m o r el i k ea n o n i o n w, hich
h a s n o h e a r L ?l s L h e s e l f ,l i k eL h eo n i o nj,u a L t h e
Lotal of iLe VroLecNive coate? The aeeLheLic
younq author of the fireL volumeof Kierkeg'aard'e
EitherlOr(1t+3) counLered Lhie ?roblemb',y
furLivelysli??in4from roleLo role in Lhe mctsl
u n ? r e d i c L a bm l ea n n e r( a s d i d y o u n qK i e r k e , 4 a a r d
himeelfL ) h e r e b yt h e a e e L h e L h e o V e dL o a c h i e v e
f r e e d o r nw, h i c hh e e q u a L e dw i t h l a c ko f p r e -
dictability.For Lhie,he wae eeverelychaeLiaedby
K i e r k e q a a r de' o? o k e s r n afno r L h e e L h i c arl e a l m ,
mh, oa c c u e e dt h e a e e L h e L oe f f l e e -
J u d g eV , ' l i l h e lw
i n qf r o m L h ev e r yf r e e d o mh e c l a i m e dL o e e e k ,
 Theaesf,hele'eeell had been
eVlinleredinto a muli.;iVlicibYof
muf,uallyexclusiverolee t'haL,
event'houqhNheYwereun?re-
diclable,werenevefrheless sNill
dictaNedW eociety.Theaee-
trhetre had deceivedhimselfinto
believinq f,hatrhe wae Vrotrectinq
and nufturinq a self behindlhoee
roleo,ln facf,,his self wao nolhinq
buf,a eerieeof qroheoque, tnvefr-
ed imaqeein a brokenmirrorheld
up Nosocialrealiry,Theaeo-
lhet e'eself wao morecomVlicat-
ed than the self of lhe averaqe?ereon,but'lhe aeglhete'g gelf
Noowas exhausf,ed in his rolee.

hteaesthefic friendz
admoniehes
JudqeWilhelm
'
Lice is a, mdsquerdde, li o4
explain,and For hou, this is incx'
hau'sfiblc ma.ttriql"pr afnuscnenfiand
so par,no one has su'ccceded
n:^^'lf,fif{lVt
grtz,fl-inq 4out

'ffiW,
laccecdYn"doir
'f"d{ft,
o ottttS' t iafc. atea,
drc bg virtuc oF trtts re lftion.
Herewe eeet'he mainVroblemof aeeuhef,iciem, trhefact, Nhat it is
eimVlya ?ervereeform of role Vlayinq,Theaeethef,e'eself ie noth-
inq buLa seriesof meaninqlese maeke,and eventhouqhNheaes-
LheLedonet'hemao Vrohesteaqainst,oociety,theyare etill the
creaNionof oocieby.

JudqeWilhelm continueei
"Do younof,knowlhat Ihere comesa midnighthourwhen
everyonehae Io T,hrow off hie mask?Doyou believe l,haVlife
willalwayeleLiLeelfbe mocked?Doyou f,hinkyou can elip
awaya litlle beforemidniqhtin orderNoavoidthis? 0r are
you nol Lercifiedby it?...
0r can you think of anyf,hinqmorefri1hNfulthan thaV il
miqht endwif,hyour naburebeinqresolvedinlo a multiplicity,
thal you reallyrniqht,becomemany,become,likelhoee
unha??ydemoniace, a leqion,and Lhueyou wouldhaveloet,
lhe inmoeV and holiestlhinq of all in a man,the unifyinq
?owerof Vereonality."
Theref,,erence to Lhe lf bhe aeetheLehae no eelf,how
d e m o n i a cie a n a l l u s i o n c a n h e g e L o n e ? K i e r k e q a a rlde l l e
Nolhe ?oeoeaaed man in him,"CA003E THYSELF!"3uL
Luke#: 32-57,whotelle h o w i e L h i el o b e d o n e ?F i r s l o f
JeeusthaL hjs nameis a l l ,L h i s a c L o f c h o o o i n qo n e e e l ifs
"Leqion," and whogedavilg V o e e i b l feo r L h e a e e t h e L eo n l y
Jeeus casf,,sinto a herdof w h e nL h e r i s i n gI i d e o f d e o q a i r
swine,whichlhen,in a mad b r i n q el h e i n d i v i d u af ,l o f h e
frenzy,plunqn headlon;q "EiNherIOr," lhal exVloeive Voint
inilaa lakeand are all w h e r eh e p a s e i o n a l e l y w i l l el o b e
drowned. h i s l r u e s e l f a n d r e c o q n i z eleh a l
e u c ha w i e he n N a i l w s i l l i n gL h e
unhapVyherd,
LikeT;haT, e x t i n c l i o no f h i e o l d , e i c k e e l f ,
Ihe aeshheNe'e peroonalitry
has beenoplintaredinLoa
disunilyingtorcelhat
allowsEheeerolee
Lo cohere.Hence,
Lhe echizoidazo' -a
f,hele has no
self,

:-"

v=
- -Ab r$t

'//'-
)l
-- 7-J)
,,--/--/ /' / -'rt'
---*_ / ltl
'/
.r"

99
 lL ie at lhie volatilemomenE of nearderanqementr EhaI
onecan make"THELEAT' Oythe sheerforce of hie pao-
oion,Iheindividual ripe himselfout,of his old form of exis-
tence (aeetheliciom), and by loeinqhio eelf,qainohie self.
Forthe fireVtrimein hie miserable lifeLheindividual
JUDGE1himselffrom 6ome
?ere?ective other lhan
Nhat,of narcieeistic 7 F,NDYOU
hedonism, Gul
rTr
AS CHARGED
(lt io for this reason
t hat, Kierkegaard makee
eVokeoman the ethical
judqe.)Ae a reeultof the
neqative judqemenL he
musL?aeeon his old
self,trhenewself beqino
Io be constituted,
 writes:
JudgeWilhelm

M,'tei*herh,rdoA not in thr-

rirSf instancedenotg)h cf,oicz,
euil;it ienoles-+lu
chooss q*d gn4-
lrn. H.r.u lhc oaesfion
?rninan*s orE lunula(
fe of e.xisfence and
Woald hirnselp IiV. .
is nof evil, 6",t ylaalra

Tn j/ood qnd Tne eVtl af

fostt?d.

Thechoicetha| Kierkeqaard's JudqeWilhelm

describeehereie not lhe eelecLion of 6ome?arl,ic-
u l a r e L h i c acl o d e ;i L i e a r n o r eb a e i cd e c i s i o n :
whebherfo hold oneselfresCIoneible Lo an eLhicat
c o d ea t a l l ,

1On
 Tlie Vrimordial
moraldecisionis trheXthat marksthe trranei-
tion fromthe aesrheiicrealmto the ethical.onceonemakee
it , onehao Vaesedinto the ethical,
and one'oselfhoodcan cryetallize
aroundthe EitherlOr.Of course,this X
firr+-fr.ib cannot remainabef,ract.ll must be
conaummated with a VarAicularcom_
mitmentr,but,deepiteKierkeqaard, e
?eroonalradicalChrietiancommit-
ment,there ie nothinqin hiecharac-
terizationlhat requireethat Lhte
decieionbeexclueively Christian
rather f,han Kantian,utilitarian,
Duddhist, socialist, anarchiot,or
humanietAny oneof theee would
bea consistenlconsequence of
the initialethicalchoiceth^t
Kierkegaardrequiresae longas itfulfills theeeT,wo
imperatives:a commitmenL to eerf-peiection,and a commitr-
mentLo other humanbeinqe, (Or
perhape to oneother human
beinq,suchae KeginaOleen.
JudgeWilhelmjuel-happeneto be
married,and in EitherlOrhe car-
rieeon a lonqdiecouree on the
virAuee of marriagethat ie so
idealizedand so boringthat it
couldin fact onlyhavebeen
written by oomeonewhowao
no! married,)
Onceone has Laken"T,heleap,"Nhatris, madeNhefundamen-
Lal choice,l,hen oneie t,heVrojecT,IhaI followefrom that
choice.Onehaetruly CHO?EN 0NEOELF. Theindividual'e
roleewillno lonqerbefragmented,ralher they willcohereby
viftue of Ihe facl thaf, one'emoralcommiNmenf, willbe
ex?reeoed in eachof Nheeerolee,0f couroe,onemust slill
livein a eociebyamon7oNherhumane,Iherefore f,o a cef1ain
exaentr one'oroleewillef,illbe sociallydiclaf'ed,buNI'he eelf
willbefreelyex?reeoed evenwiNhint,heconfinesof T.,he deter-
minief,icsocialeyetem,Aleo,any of r,heroleslhat' are
incompalible wilh one'emoralcommilmenlwillbe discarded,

CANONEBEA CHRISTHN GOOD

NEIGHBoq
CAR
ANDA USED SATESMAN?
FINEUSry

c.
0l
LeLus ref,urnT,o
J u d g eW i l h e l m
one
lasLNimeae he
exVlaine whatrie
to be qainedby anl.,whent d"r" no*
"the choice," "ho/s if
wilhers duay in consutnpfion.

The piclure IhaN emergeeie

the following:TheX that wao
lhe paeeionaLedecieiveneel
of eelf-judqementand that
wao the crit erionof f,heef,hv
cal pereonalitybecomeeLhe
focal point around whichrhe
whole?ereonali6ycryeLallizee.

Takea lookat this dia7ram:

Moreover,in a cerAainsense,everyfut'urechoicewillbe
an occasionfor oelf-judqemenL, ThaNie to oay,every
futureeiNuationwillbea moralone.There willbe no more
lf LheVarlicularelhicalsNance
moralneuilrality. t'aken
ie chrislian,lhenu?onenlerinqany
bythe individual
socialeiluationwhaf,soever lhe individualmusl aek her-
eelf,"HowehallLovebe beel eervedhere?'Theindividual
willjudqehereelfin eacheilualionandaNeachmomenl
as either"GuilNylNoN an individual
Guiltyi'Similarly, who
haechoeenrevoluEionary Communiem ae her parLicular
moralslancernuotaek,"How shallNhe Revolubion be
besNsewed?Howshalllhe humano??ression of humane
be combaf,Nedhere?" Andlhie ?er6onLoo willbe
"GuilbylNoiGuilNyi'
How sHatt LoVE
BE BE'T SERWD
HER,E?
 ) tI ) )\

6AKS
lL mighrbe objecLed
lhal the Chrietianand the Communiel

vidualto inhabitand LherebydefinedallfuLureeiLuationsae

moraleitualione,eo we miqht wellaek here,woulda true
Chrietianor a LrueCommunietr,knowing Nhat halfNheworld'e

ro6
 Terha?e L h i sh a r E h n e e e
wae 2arl of
Kierkeqa ard'e eLr,alegy
L o b r i n qh i e r e a d e :Lr o
c o n e i d e r n o r ee e r i o u e l y
L h e r e l i q i o u e g h e : r el n.
f a c L , K i e r k e qaar d n e ve r
r e a l l yi n h a b i t e dt : e e L h i -
c a l e p h e r ea e h e
d e e c r i b e si L . A e c l i dn o L
r n a r r yK e q i n al,e l a l e r
AlLhoughJud6eWilhelm Lelle e a i d L h a t ,E i L h e r l C rL, h e
hia aestheLicfriendNhaLLhe b o o ko u t l i n i n qL h e e L h i -
eLhicalinvolvea a balanceof cal, "wag wriLLenin a
the aeef,helic,the moralana monaelery,"
t,hereliqious,and deapitehie
life beinqrahhercornrnon-
placeand evenboring,
lhere ie neverXhelees a
cerLainharEhnees in
Kierkeryaard'eeLhical
realm.Theindividual ie
enqagedin a consLanl
eelf-Ecrutinyand eelf-
jud6emenLfrom which
Nhereie no reprieve,IL ie
almoeLmoreLhanone
can bear.And indeed,
Kierkeqa ard LalkEabouL
an "efhicaldeopair"LhaL
evenluallybrinqeLhe indi-
vidualto his or her kneee,

fro4
bul don'Nthink f,hat,f,he
"leaV"from Nheethical
ephereT,oNhereligioueie
an eacaVefrom harshneez,
Kierkeqaa rd'6 reliqious
realmie oftrena elark
landecaVe, /l

AtsR A}JA fl I C R N IV OT
RSTAND.'
UNDE
 ln fact, his failureLo understandAbrahambrinqeJohanneelo
ouo?ect hie own inlelleclualcaVacilies,becaueehe nolices LhaL
almosL everyoneelse oeemeLo underetandr,heoT,oryVefiectly
well.(Kierkeqaardian irony ehowinqthrouqh aqain,of couree) Let
ue brieflyreviewNheVerLinenL
asVecteof Nheet ory of Abraham
ae Lold Genesis11-12,

Abraham was a hereditary tribal leader of the

Hebrews. Late in life he married his half-sister, Sarah,
who was barren. when Abraham was seventv-five
years old, God commanded him to take his people and
begin a journey to a land that God would show him.
God made a covenant with Abraham and promised
him that Sarah would become the mother br a son who
would be the father of a great_nation.The years passed
and Sarah did not conceive.Then when Abraham was
{.nef-nine and Sarah ninety, God appeared to
Abraham again and renewed the promise.

110
Sarahconceivedand gave birth to Isaac.The
circumcision and the weaning of the child were
celebratedwith great joy by Abraham, who
loved his son. Then camethat terrible night
describedin Genesis22: "1.-2,
when Abraham
was awakenedin the
night by the voice of
God, saying:

Without hesitation
and telling no one,
Abraham took Isaac,
travelled with him
three days through
that lonely desert,
placed the boy on
the appointed altar,
lifted the sacrificial
knife and was total-
ly prepared to make , t i i ' , n . ., .: ., , , ' a
the fatal thrust
when the Angel of lnt(fuiil
fl,t/t
the Lord
stopped him, say-
irg that Abraham had
passedthe test, and
allowing him to sacrifice
in Isaac'splace a ram
that was conveniently
caught in a nearby
thicket. So Abraham
got Isaac back,
returned to his people,
and lived in blessed-
ness the rest of his
days.
First,,Abraham is incomVreh eneible
Howcan he be
becauseof hie cert'aint'y,
6urelhat, he hae correcl'lyunderstood
h i em i s e i o n ?

Hou oo I. k^bu)
t NttsN'Tmy
UNcaN6ctou'
ntND I

DoL
IT
THE
vtt?

Abrahamie incomprehenoi-
Fuichermore,
of hio power.
blebecauee Johanneoaeks:

whoaavc slrcnqlhla
Atrihlii annluho
tvtd his ri'l* hatil uP
sa lhat i+ Zia*t gall.

Johanneeie VerVlexed
Finally, by
and horcified
Abrahambecauee Abraham's ac| eeemsall
troocloseto beinqan acf'of criminalineanify,
Now,all theeefacLorEmiqhl conEtituf,ea very
qoodreaeonfor eim?lyiqnorinqlhe etory of
Abrahamand loaac,Sut Johanneo cannoldo
thie becauoeiL haealwaysbeenconsidered ae
an exemVlary caoeof faiLh(andJohannesie
veryinlereEtedin faiLhae a concepLeven
Lhoughhe himeelfis an unbeliever),and becauae
weare told LhaL"Ahrahamis the faLherof us
all,"Johanneooue?eclelhal if he couldeome-
howrevealthe Eecref,of Abraham,he would
falhom the humancondilion,30 he ie obeessed
wiLhlhe eLoryand horcifiedby it al the oame
Lime,ThaLig,he "dreads"iT,in Kierkeqaard'o
senee-h e hae for il "a syrnpabheLicanLiVaLhy
and an anLiVaLhetic eyrnVathyi'

DeoViIeLheimVenelrabrlir,yof Abraham'ecaoe,
accord-
it aL leael admiLeof a VarLialanalyoie,
inqNoJohannee, He discoversNhal Abraham'e
acl ig a "double-rnovernenll'
a "movemenL of
and a"movemenlof faith:'
infinileresiqnaLionl'
Thefirsl ie a negaLiveelemenl,in which
AbrahamqiveeuV leaac,and lhe eecondie a
VoeiLive elemen|in whichAbraharnqele leaac
back,TheVaradox for Johanneo(andthio ie lhe
Varadoxof faiLh)ie lhat eachof these ele-
menLeoccur>aL LheoameLimein Lheeame
acl,
 W h e nA b r a h a m
makesNhemove-
menNof infinile
reeiqnabion {and
lhereby becomeo
whaf,.Kierkeqaard
calls "a knight ot
Infinite
Reeiqnation")he
loees eveffihin6
He has
'orenounced
fine-
''/;7 neao,"which
2;'.'. m e a n eh e h a o
/'Lt"/ /
r l n o u n c e dt h e
t// w o r l d .H e a l e o
'.,r, eeemelo have
ft
z
2
' /
t renouncedsoci-
eLal riqhte and
o b l i q a t i o n ea, n d
f a m i l i a ld u L i e o
and love,le has renouncedhia
VoeiLiona6 a moralaqent.
vr/henhe T.,akee leaac inLothe deeerLand leaveeSarah
behind,he haE loeL lEaac,1arah, his his fuhure,and
vaeT.,,
hie very self.(He haa los| hie eelf becaueeaE thie
voinL
Abraham re?reoenEeKierkeqaard'o "eLhicaleelf"; oo oy
renouncinqmoraliLy,he renounce;hio eelf.)Furthermore,
he is infinitelyreeignedto theee loEeee.

114
Whywouldanyoneeverwant to makesucha ?ainfuland diffi-
cult move?WhaI is to be qainedby if? Kierkeqaard eayo,
"whaNI qainio myeelf. . .andonlytrhencan Nherebeany queo-
Lionof qraeVinqexieLence by vi(vueof failh." Andin a pao-
eaTeNhat,couldbetrheNouchslone of allexisNentialiem,
Kierkeqaardadds:

tnFinit. re1ignafior!-is M qhint

we rua abouf.i$ lhe olA fgb,lg,
.Th.ftryad
is spunuii"i *ears,l+'rcel"lh blqclga-with
tenr!,t+y shirt eun' qi+htgars;butfon .fog
if is ^ bettcr prolcetion 1d''ron
iron anl sleel.
-
. . . Thc vcrlf in is
'fo' )ltat evcrgorJt
Iirc v
rnustseu)it himselP
' ,/

From theee ?aosaqeeiNcan

be seenIhaN Ihe X thaV is
Ehe lransihional movement,
betweenNheeNhicaland the
reliqiousis in many reepecle
identicalto the X thaN is
NhetrraneihionbeilweenNhe
aesthetical and the eLhicaL
l n e a c h c a o e ,o n e a e o u m e e
trhe"lofLy diqnity which is
aeoiqnedNo each man,T,hal
of beinqhie own ceneor,
whichie a far VrouderLiIle
than trhal of CeneorGeneral
to Lhe whole Roman
Kepublic;'

1r5
a

Theditrerenceis trhat
the gecond"lea?"ie
rnorehorrible,for in
lhal tiret, movemenN
onefell awayfrom
one'eold eickeelf,buI
in Nheeecondmove-
mentronefalloaway
from humankind,
Abrahammuel eacri-
fice lsaacae wellae
himeelf,)sren muet,
sacrificeReqinaae
wellas himself,
No eurVrieetrhat,in hieownmind,Kierkeqa ard aeeocialee lh e
etory of Abrahamand leaacwith Lhe much-avoidedVaeoagein
the NewTeelamenl:

Accordinqto Kierkegaard,
lhe
acV of infinihereeiqnaNion
ie a Vurelyprivaf,eexie- Abraham's wholcaction
lenNial Vrojecf,and if sfands h no relafion *o
cannof,bejuelified nor the univcrsal,. . . Br.rhisoct
m a d ec o m p r e h e n o i b l e he hnt.ov,ers+lfyc/ "the
c*hicaitenfticly.
wibhina eocial conNexD,
lndeed,oneof Lhemoel disNurb-
inq aeVecteof the eLoryof
Abrahamemerqeswhen
Johannee aekehimeelf Ihis
queotion:WHAT19THERELA-
TIONOFAFRAHAM'3UNDER-
TAKINGTOETHICS, MOKALIry
A N D L A W( a l l o f w h i c h
Kierkegaardcalle "lhe uni-
vereal")?Johanneo
anewers in horcor:

117
 W ?OULNE N4DADDYI

?ES,THOII^HI NAY
HAVETo SACRtftCE
?ou

Abrahamhas annulled Nhe

et,hicalfor what,he t,akest o
bea hiqher?ur?oee.
Kierkeqaard calleLhisacb of
moralannulmenta "TELEOLOOI-
CAL9U97EN9IONOF THEETHICAL,"
and f,herecan be no moraljuotificalion
for sucha eusVeneion. "Abraham'e relat'ion
to leaac,ethicallyo?eakinq, ie quite oimVly
ex?reesed by oayinqtha| a fat'hershall
lovehie eon moredearlyIhan himeelf,"
guch a loveie incomValible wilh beinq
willing?o kill one'eeon,evenkillinghim
"OYVIRTUE 0F THEAbgURD;' which,accordinq Eo
Johannea, wagAbraham'e lf, is Nhismof'ive
mot'ivat'ion.
to Johanneo
thal ie so perplexinq de eilent'io,

to0(S LlKE r r's

-TTNE
To GO INTo

110
 GUILTY!

4 t
t
t
I
I

I]fi
He is not'onlyVerVlexed; aNtrimeshe ie Vooibively
ouf,raqed,He
oaye,"Abrahamenjoyehonorand qloryae Nhefat.herof faiNh,
whereaehe ouqhNt o be proeecuhed and convicf,edof murder."
AL
oneeNageof hieanalyeie, Johanneeeue?ecLe trhatrlhe honor
NhatrAbrahamenjoyoin trhe?o?ularmindis duef,o a common
misundersrandinq of r,heerory,Manyeay of Abraham,"TheqreaN
LhinqwaoIhaf, he lovedGod eo muchthat, he waewillinqt o sac-
rificeIo Him hie besL."

119
Johanne;imaqines
a VreacheA
whoeloquently?
wilh juet, eucha mi
inq interVretatio
Abraham.)ne
Lenersis so m
eermonEhat
h o m ea n d
eon,Thenext
)unday the
Vreacher
thunderedown
on f,heman'o
empty ?ew,"O abomina
devil?ooeeeeed thee Nowanf, The
lhe attitude thatr
of couree,ie f,ha| Nhieie Vrecioely
Voinf,,
trhepreachershouldhavehad f,owardAbraham,For
Johanneethe queelionis whetherfaitrhcan makeit "a holy
act,to be willtnqIo murderone'gsonl'

lf notr,Abrahamis doomed.lf so, weare facedwilh an irce-

solvableVaradox, and for Kierkeqaard,faif'hwaeiuoL euch
a ?aradox.LeL,'e moveawayfrom faiNh'eneqaliveforerun-
and lookat t'he"movementof
ner,"infinitereoiqnationl'
f aitrh"it self.
Accordinq to Kierkeqaard,al the oameinetanNNhaN
AbrahammadeNhemovemenl reoignation
of infiniNe -and
lost eveffihin7- he also madethe movementr of fait'h-and
reqainedeveffihinqin a newway,Abrahamtherebybecame
*THEKNIGHT FAITH."He believed God'sold promiee.He
0F
thaNGod wouldno| requireleaacof him.Thiehe
believed

aac,.o. fle
tae o6the
human
l."ng
f"
fancf ian.

121
 I I r-'.a
HI\

Vrlrt

t\,.
B U T .H
..6'S
\ \\ rilE FATHER
\ /
J
"rt'
O FA 5 A L L !
-\
\

,.'
'4

3 o , i L i e A b r a h a m ' ea b e u r dm o L i v a L i otnh a l m a k e sh i m u n i n -
t e l l i q i b l eL o J o h a n n e cT, h ea b e u r d i t yi e n o LL h a LA b r a h a m
believedLhaL l*aac wouldbe reEf'ored.(Aft,erall, A,braham
h a d G o d ' e ? r o m i e e ,T) h e a b e u r d i L yi e L h a l A b r a h a mh a d
a l r e a d yq i v e nu p l e a a c i n f i n i L e lay n d y e L a L L h e s a m eL i m e
h e b e l i e v e tdh a | h e w o u l dn o l h a v eN oq i v eu p l e a a o .
Abrahambelieved lwo muLuallyexclueiveideasaL Lhe eame
L i m ea n d a c L e do n L h e e ec o n l r a d i c t o r yb e l i e f ei n t h e o a m e
V r o j e c LA. b r a h a mi e n o l e i m g l yi n c o m p r e h e n e i bhl ee, i E m a d !
J o h a n n e ld o e e n o Lh e e i L a LL e o c a l l A b r a h a mi n a a n e .
" H ur n a n l ye p e a k i n gh, e i e c r a z ya n d c a n n o f ,m a k eh i m a e l f
i n L e l l i g i bLl eo a n y o n e .A n dy e l i L i e t h e m i l d e e te x V r e o e i o n ,
T,osay he ie crazy,"
However, lhe bare facL LhaL Abraharnie ineaneie noL whaL
a e L o n i e h eJEo h a n n e e(.M a n y? e o ? l ea r e i n e a n ea, t \ e r a l l , )
K a L h e rw , h a l i e i n c o m p r e h e n e i bi leet h a t b y v i r L u eo f h i s
i n e a n i l y ,A b r a h a mb e c a m et h e F a t h e ro f F a i l h .T h e r ei E a n
i n L a n q i b ldei m e n e i o no f A b r a h a m ' em a d n e e ew h e r e b yh e
e e L a b l i s h eaEn a b e o l u L er e l a L i o nL o G o d , a n d b e c o m e e
g r e a LL h e r e b yJ.o h a n n e zp r a i e e eA b r a h a mi n h i e l u n a c y ,
oayinq:

12g
 AdopLinqa term from 7laLo,
K i e r k e q a a rcda l l eA b r a h a m ' ec o n -
d i r , i o n"d i v i ne ma d ne e e . "
Kierkegaard, far from condemninq
A b r a h a m ' em a d n e o oa, d v o -
caNesit. Now, he doee
(t *u't umrrsrnm\ noI advocaLe iL
\ A doRD tu snYs/
b e c a u e ei t i e m a d -

(7;ps
.Vl
"-'^, hi e f e l l o wh u m a n e ,
4'2,)',
b u T , , hies n o f ,u n i n '
.:..2:.
. [ , n r t e l l i"q i b l eL o G o d ,
- - j * 3-
. ) A t_.__t
Abraham "o?eakg
..-.- ^ -
a
-W=r.',;-..-
7y'-:';' d i v i n el a n q u a q e.,. h e
'
e ?ea k e w i l h t o n q u e s ' , "

rememberinq
Somareadersof Fearand Tremblinq,
LhaNJohann66de ailentiois nat a believer,
maintain
ie noLeeriouswhenhe calls
Lhat Kierkegaard
Abraham'lcendinion"divinemadnesEl'RaLher,il is
claimed,Abrahaynonlyappearat o be madfrom Lhe
pointof viewof r,henon-reliqious,
Well,Abrahamcer'
Iainlyis unintelliqible
NoLhenon'believer,buNis iY
reallyLhecaeeLhaLAbraham'e fellowiniXiaNee
in
Lhereligiouo
realmunderslandhim?

124
Johanneede eilenLio,
af, Ieagf,,vehemently
denieeil, and lhere
is litfle reaeonlo
doubLLhaL he
e?eakefor
Kierkegaardwhen
he eayo:

Thekniqhlof failh cannoLcommunicaLe

wiLhhie fellowknighLof
faiLhbecauee onlyGod canjudqewheLher
Lheknigh|'emadneee
is divinelyinoViredand not,
demoniacal, Dehaviorally,Nhe
two different tyVee of lunacy
a??earlhe eame.Kierkegaard's
"Kniqhl of Failh" is indeedleft,
in "abgoluT,e igolaf,ion" on Nhe
deser| of Moriah,ll ie not eur-
prieing,ao one crilic oayo,lhat
Kierkeqaard'eoeveriLyhae dri-
ven more ?eo?leouL of the reli-
qiouoephereLhan into iL. DuL
KierkeqaardVrobablywould not
m i n d ,A n y o n ew h o c o u l db e d r i -
ven ouNof the reliqioueeVhere
by rheNoricalonedid no| belonq
Nherein the firsN olace.
125,
%*abouI,,KniqhIgofFaiNh,,inKiarkeqaard,g|ime,or
in our own?Whatwouldthey be like?Kierkeqaard ourVrioee ue
(and defueesoomeof f,heexploeiveneoo of hie ownradical
doct rine)by havingJohanneede eilenNio lell ue Nhal Nhey
cannol be def,ecled.Terha?eeverylhird ?eroonwe see is a
Kni4hl of Faith,for allwe know.For lhey blendriqhl in wiih
everybody eloe.Whois LheKniqhN of Faith?Terha?e, oayo
Johannee, LhepoeVman,lhe ehoVkee?er,Ihe Naxcollector,
lhe f,een-aqe qirl nexf,door.Sehaviorally,Ihey lookiuof like
everyone elee,Theditrerenceis lhaN Lhey
havealreadyloeLall worldlyf hinqeNo
infinihereeignaf,ionand qothenevery-
EhinqreshoredNoIhem bYfailh, -
Theyare in Nheworld,but not
of it. -?erhapo oneof
# --->---) \

Lhemis evena cranky, T l;

eccenlricwriLernamed <:=-: h
SsrenAabyeKierkeqaard,
who has loeVhis Nruelove,
K e q i n aO l s e n t, r o i n f i n i t e ?r/5, -.->C)
^

reeiqnalion,buNhae 4y',, (w2

abeoluNelaihh Nhar she will
be reslored to him "by
virtue of the absurd."
 l f K i er k ag a a r d b e l i e v e Ld h a t o f h i m s e l f
whenhe wroLeFearand Tremblinq, he had
abandonedNheidea by Ehetime he wrot,e
i n h i e d i a r y ," l f I h a d f a i t h , I w o u l dh a v e
r e m a i n e dw i L hR e q i n a ,l "u o l a E h i o d i r e c L
atLack on the frivoliLyand eupefiiciality
of rhe DaniEhChurchin Lhe IasLyear of
h i e l i f ee i q n a l e dt h e a b a n d o n m e not f h i e
d o c t r i n eo f i n d i r e c Lc o m m u n i c a L i oann d
of hie viewLhaLNheKni4hLof Faitrhcould
rernainundeLected in Lhe crowd,Whenhe
Vaeeedout Vam?hleLein Lhe Elreete of
C o V e n h a q eS n ,s r e n K i e r k e g a a r da, L r u e
K n i 6 h Lo f F a i t h ,h a d e a l l i e df o r L h ,a n d i n
Ioaing,he won,juaL likeLhaNohher Kni1hl-
of FaiLheomewhereon Lhe deeert of La
hI Mancha,

fi

\'lh

$
1
tq,
;:
r
Rr
/-:.+\
L ! -,
- ^'
/.-
lr

\ I ).
a
,5
\ t2-
rgul -;\) )|{r

127
Absurd,The.Kierkeqaard'e reliqiouo
hero,Abraham,acte
"by vi(f,ueof r,heabgurd"in Nhat,Lhe reagongfor hig
acf,ionscannol,be madeintelliqible. Abraham'sfaith
takeg overwhen"reaoonable" reaoongrun oul. For
Kierkeqaard, all existentialdecieioneare abeurd,becauee
Ihey are aclivationeof bolh freedom*and faith," and
theee lranecendall eyetemeof raf,ionality,lSee Fear
and Trembllng.l

Aesthetiaiem.Thelife-modeof NheVereonwhoeemoti'
or sensatrion,(Thef,ermoriqinaNeo
vationio Vleaoure in
the Greekwordfor "perceplion.")For Kierkegaardthie is
a eub-human form of existence,becauseit is ultimalelya
form. Evenits mosf,eophieticaNed
bioloqical varialione,
whichIry Noconve(V seneualism into eVirifualily,lailand
leadonlyIo boredom, and a dealh-wish,l)ee
deeVair,*
EitherlOr,l

Aeethetic 5phere,The. Thewholeworld-viewconeNit'ut'

molivation,and
inqa frameworkof reasoninq,?erQe?f,ion,
quidedW sensualisn\.l)ee EilherlOr.)
socialization

Anguioh. )ee Dread.

Anxiety. 1ee Dread.

Bad Faith. As a t echnicalphiloooVhical
t ermlhie Vhraoewaecoinedby
Kierkegaard'e
waywardLwenliebh-cenf,ury diocipleJean-?aulgarLre. lt, is a
Varadoxical af,temVtat, eelf-deception
in whichonedeniesand uneucceeeful-
ly f,rieoLo fleefrom one'ofreedom,"reoponoibilily,
and anquish.*

Behaviorism.A twentielh-cenLury peychological lheory,baeedon Ihe work

of JohnWateonand his diocipleb.F.Skinner, accordinqto whichall accounls
of humanaclivif,ycan and ehouldbe reducedt o deocriplioneof bodilymove-
mentre("behavior o"), Kierkeqaa rd's work is f ervenlly anli -behaviorisf,ic,
becaueeit maintainethe imporl,ance of an innerlife ("eujeclivitry,"*"inward-
neoo")that may not neceoearily be externalized.E.g, Lhe"kniqhLof faith"*
ie radicallydifferentfrom obhers,but f,hisdifferencecannot be detected by
observinqthe "kniqhf'e"behavior.Of course,Kierkeqaard'o enemiesare not
Watsonand )kinner,whomhe Vre-daf,ed, but G.W.F, Heqel,lowhom
Kierkeqaard altributes NheviewlhaL "Nheoulwardis the inward,and Ehe
inwardjs the ouf,ward."

Christendom. Kierkegaard'e VejoraliveIerm for lhal whichueually?aoeeo

ae Chriof'ianif'y,"
but'whichin facl io onlyiIs ouNward traVpinqo, dioguioinqa
comVlacenL and comforLable instituNionalfalsificationof true Chrietrianitry.
l)ee Attaak u?on Christendom.f

Chrietianity. Nornrallyrhouqhl of as any of a numberof variationeof the

religiouo doclrinethat' Jeeueof Nazarelhis lhe eon of Ood,and lhar, belief
in hiedivinit'y,imit'aIionof hie life,and Vracf,ice
of hie elhicalcodemay reeu|
in a divine judgement, qranting
ehernallife. However, Kierkegaard
deniesthatr Christianilyie a doc-
trine at all. ltrio for hima form of
"opirit,,"of "inwardneeg," a "cL)re"
basedon an absurd*faith* thaL, if
achieved (alwayoby individuals
aloneand neverby qrouVaction),
guaranteeoa form of VaeeionaEe
eelfhoodand authenlicitywilh an
etrernalconeciouoneaa. lSee
Trainingin Christianity .J

Deopair.Theoppoeiteof faiIh,.
A loeeof hoVethat ie a f ailurelo
willbhe eelf lhaf, one truly ie,
Kierkeqaard callsit "f,hesickness

129
 unlo deaNh,"becauseit embodiesa
desirefor self-annihilalion.
lSee
The 9icknese unto Death,)

Detnrminiem. TheviewthaV there

is no freedom,*ralher thaV all ie
neceeeify.A viewincorVorahed in
D,F.9kinne?'6 behaviorism* and
implicaNed in Karl Maa'e dialecti-
cal* maNerialism (accordinq to
whichthere are lawsof hiotoryand
economice Nhal qovernour liveo)
and in 9iqmundFreud'eVeycho-
analyeio(accordin7No whichmuch
of our behavioris determinedby
unconacious moNives that are not
in our conNrol.)2eterminismie Ihoroughlyrejecledby Kierkegaard,who
makesfreedomhis basiccateqory.

Dread(or Anguiohor Anxiely,deVendinq on Nhetranolation), A comVlex

peychical catreqory for Kierkegaard
that is foundalionalof bolh conecioue-
neeoand selfhood,ll is bhefear of one'sownfreedom,*a fear of "nothinql'
(becaueeone'efreedomis capableof makinqrealthal whichie nownon-exis-
NenN).ltr is also a "oympaNheticantipathy and an antiVathelicoympath.y"-
a desirefor whal onefears and a fear of whaVonedesires. Namely,it, is ein
(eoVecially in the caseof Adamand Eve). lgeefuConae?t of Dread.)

Dialeclic,The (or Dialeatical). A term borrowedby Kierkegaardfrom O.W.F.

Heqelaccordinqtrowhichall individual ideae,objecNo, evenl,e
?ereon6, and
hiet'oricalperiodeare definedW trheirrelalionehip of opVoeition-and-de?en-
dencyNotheir own"olhernese,"Thecontradictoryfeatruresof lhese rela-
tionohiVeare resolvedby acto of "medialion"wherelhe opVoeitionsare 6yn-
theeizedinto a coheeiveunity, Kierkeqaard has a lovelhaNe
relalionohipwith
Heqel'o "dialecf,ic"
(i,e,,a dialeclicalrelationehip).He useethe notionconlin-
uouolybut rejecf,sthe ideaof "mediabionl'OVpoeitions alwayl remainand in
fact, are ?reouVVoeed by the ideaof freedom"and choice("Eitherlot''),Only
commitmenN and faith* ("byviftue of Nheabsuri"*)can overcome oVpooition.

DivineMadneas, A VhraoeKierkeqaard borcowedfrom ?lato, who in

?haedruehae )ocrahes oay,"Nhegreateot,of blessinqzcometo us lhrouqh
madneee,whenil ie eent,as a qifr of the Godsl' Kierkeqaard usedlhe idea
of "divinemadness"in hisjournaloand in at,leasl six of his booke.lts mosl

190
develoVed whereit deoiqnaleethe
Vreoentationie in Fearand Tremblinq.
"madneoo"of Lhe ?atriarchAbraham,whichis a form of fair'h"and io con'
traeted witrhif,s oppooile,demoniacalmadnese,

EthiaalSphere,The. A wholeworld-view a frameworkof reaeon-

consNituf,inq
f'o "lhe
motivalion,and eocializalionquidedby a devot'ion
ing,percepilion,
lhaN io,a paesionaNe
eNhicall' decieionlo judgeoneeelfin t'ermsof a univer-
salizable"moralruleinvolving queel for eelf-pertection
lhe and an absolut'e
commitrment NoaNleaef,oneother fellowhumanbeinq.(Oneof Kierkegaard'o
Voeudonymo oayo, "Throuqhher lReqina?)| feel oymVathyfor everyman|')
l)ee EitherlOnJ

Exietentialiem,A lerm coinedby Jean-?aul1aftre to namehie philoooVhy

of the mid-194Oo, who ie nowoft'en
inoViredby the wribingoof Kierkegaard,
called"trheFatrherof Exief,entialism,"
A VhiloooVhyemVhaeizinq radicalfree'
dom,reoVonoibility, individualism,
self-creation, and commit-
oubjectivif,y,
menf^ FollowingKierkeqaard's methodof "indirecf,
communicalion"* and
"irony,""manyof existenlialigm'oVractioner;havealso beennovelisNs
(1art,re,1imone de geauvoir,AlberLCamue,Miquelde Unamuno), Vlaywrighlo
(1artre, Unamuno, OabrielMarcel),or at leaet haveprioritrized
poeticdio-
couroeoverVhiloooVhy and ecience(Martin Heideqger,Unamuno).)ome
greaVnovelietshavealso beencalledexielenNialiste (FyoderDoeNoyevoky,
Franz Kafka).

Faith. 1ee Knight,of Faith, The.

Freedom.A keycaleqoryin Kierkeqaard'o VhiloeoVhy. Sut,f,hereare com'

Velingideasof freedom.Thereie freedomao Lheavailabilify of genuine
alternativee("eiNherlor"), whichin lurn ?reou??oees lhe ideaof freedomae
poeeibiliNy. Here,freedomie oppoeedIo acNualiNy (that whichis rhe caee)
and lo neceoeitry (that whichmueNbethe caee), 7uNthere ie also freedom
ae ?aoeionatecommitment,toa Vrinciple that, onechoooeoao one'o?eroon-
al law-lhal is lo eay,acf,ingon f,he"eilherlor."Theaesf,hele's"ercoris in
oeekingfreedomexclueively in infiniteVoeoibtlity,
whichVrecludes freedomae
commilment.3y leavinqall Voosibilities infinitelyo?en,he abolisheehis own
"eilher/ or," leee EitherlOr,l

GoldenMean,The. Arietolle'eidealin hie eearchfor vifi,uousact,ion,The

"goldenmean"io a VaIh of viftue found half-waybef,ween exceol and deficit,
E.9.,in the caseof the correcl aVtitudein lhe ?reoence of an enemy,Nhe
deficil ie cowardiceand Nheexceoeis fool-hardinees, Theqoldenmeanin
lhis case ie courage,7ut,lhie Vath of vifi,ueis an exVerimenlalone. lt can-

t5t
noLbe eet'abliohed with a maT,hemalical formula. Kierkegaard'o
queel for
aubhenlic e elfhood ie similarlv experimenhal.

Hedonism.The philoeoVhy w"thich

claimsthat, Vleaeureie the hiqheeNvalue.
Hiet'orically
aooociatedwith EVicuruein Greecein the third cenlury9.C,and
wit'hThomaeHobbesin the sevenleenlhcenlury. Kierkeqaard'o aeethele* ie
a hedonist,.f)ee EitherlOr.)

lndireatCommunioation.The onlymodeof communicatinq"oubjective

I'rulho,"*accordinqIo Kierke4aard,
involvinq
f,heuse of philoeophical
irony"
and Veeudonymoue auLhorehiV,
whoee
qoal io Lo creaf,ea rhetorical
environmenf, in whichlhe read-
er'o normal aggumpt,ionoare
pulverized,creaf,inqa clearinq in
w h i c hh e o r s h e c a n f i n d h i s o r
her owneubjectivef,ruth,
l)ee Conaluding
Uns aientifio ?osls crivt.l

lrony. ln Kierkeqaard, clooely

relatredto indirecf,communica-
Lion." A form of discoursein
whichNheexpression of the
meoeaqe ie inconqruouo
wilh Nhecont enl of
Lhe mesoaqe,
1omef,imes the lit eral
meaninqis the direcl
oVpoeireof the intended
meaninq.Theuaeof
Voeiry, oxymoron,parody,
earcaem,undersNaNe-
menf,,oversf,aNemenl, and evenfalsehoodto communicatea me66aqelhat,
must,be inlerpretedby invert,inq the a??arentmeaninq.All of Kierkeqaard's
Voeudonymou; workeare ironicand must,be interVreNed (whichio whylhere
are Vlaueiblereadingoof Kierkegaard lhal are verydifferentrfrom f,heone in
thie book).
lSee The Conae?t qllrony,f
Knight of Failh, The. Kierkeqaard's Nermfor the individualwho hae losNt'he
finile world in an act, of "infinite reoiqnation*"and has recoveredit, in a
eimultaneou1act of f ailh, an acf, IhaI ie carried out' by vi(Dueof t'he
absurd,*and trhereby the individual has placedhimor herselfdirecNly in the
reliqioueophere."lgee Fearand Trembling.)

Knight of lnfinite Reeignation,The. Kierkeqaard'sI'erm for Ihe individual

whohas givenup the finite worldae a philoooVhical act' of self-recovery.3y
qivingup worldlineeethe individualwhomakeslhe moveof infinitereoignabion
deel,royof,heworld'eVoweroverthe individual and placeshim- or hereelfin a
a Kniqht'ol Failh". l)ee
Vooitionof self-definiilion.A Vreludeto becominq
FearUdTrembling.)

Law(or ?rinaiple)of ldentillly,The,Oneof lhe three foundatrional 7rinciVleo

founderof the ecienceof logic. "X (whereX
of logio,accordinytro Aristrotrle,
can sf,andfor anylhinq)ie idenlicalNoif'self,""X=X."E,9,, "'lf ie rainingin
A1hens' equale'll ie rainingin Alhene'."lt hhelhree foundalionalVrinciVlee
are false,nouhingeleecan belrue, accordin7loArietrof'le. Yel'Hegelwant's
NoabolishLhem,NhinksKierkeqaard, and reVlace lhem wit'ha newdialectical*
loqic.

Law(or ?rinaiple)of lhe ExcludedMiddle,The. Oneof t'he I'hreefoundalion-

al principles of loqicaccordinqIo Arietotle, ()ee aleo
The Lawof ldentlty" and The Lawof Non-ConiradicDion"). Accordingt'o the
-Xl' "X v -X."
lawof f,heexcludedmiddle,"ll, ie lhe caeeIhat eilher X or nof,
E.q, oncewe'veaqreedon the meaninqof "At'hen;"and of "rainl' t'hen
"Eitheritris rainingin Ailhene,or it ie noNraininqin Alhens." No third Voooi-
bility exist'e.

Law (or ?rinaiple)of Non-Cont'radiation,

The, Oneof lhe lhree loundalionalVrinci'
pleeof logicaccordinqNoArieholle,(W
also The Law of ldenlii,,y"and The Law of
the ExaludedMlddle"). Accordingto Nhe
law of non-cont'radict'ion,"ll' i9 noI trhe
caoethat Y ie Nrueof X and aNtrhe
eametimeY ig not lrue of X." "-(X.
-X)." E,q.,"ll' is notrNhecase thaT"it
ie raininqin Atrhens' and'il is not'
rainingin Athene'aNNhesame
momenf.^"
Lea7,The.Themomentof VaoeionwhenonernoveefromoneeVhereof existence
(e,q,the ethical.)T,oanother(".q,the religioue*)by euddenlypurfiingbehind
oneselfone'oold self. Thioleapio pertormed"by virt,ueof the absurd,*" becauoe
all the old criteriaof ralionalityhavelhemeelveebeenlefl behind,Kierkegaard
quof,eoan unidenNified GermanpoeL:"EineeliaerSorunqindie Ewiakeif'- 2
blessedleaVinto eternity.

Luthemniom. TheTroteetanl reliqiouomovementbasedon the 'r,eachinqo of

MaibinLuther(1483-1546),a monkwhobrokewith lhe CalholicChurchwhenhe
nailedhieninetry-five
theseslo the doorof the churchalWitNenburq, demandinq
reformof the church,includingabandonmenN of the oyotemof indulqenceo,elimi-
nationof eccleoiaslical
corcuptrion,
and Vuniehmenl for abueeeof church?ower.
Ullimahely,Lutherdeniedthe validilyof the ideaof the TaVacy(denouncinq the
currenl ?o?eas the Devil),aboliehedthe hierarchyof prieef,e, marrieda nun,and
Vut,vernaculartranolationsof lhe biblein lhe handsof the peaoanto,
Luhheraniem wasthe officialChurchof Denmarkin Kierkegaard'o day,buN
Kierkegaard camef,oIhe conclueion that, it, had otrayedfar from the true
ChriotianiNy,*
l5ee f$,taak u?on Chriewndom..)

Monasticism. Themedieval eolulionto NheVroblemof lhe temfiatione of the

world.lndividuals, becoming monkoor nune,wouldrenounce the worldand remove
themselvee from il,,remaininqbehindlhe hiqhwalloof monaeteriesof convenf,s,
oft,enin remotnlocations,adherinqtn a stricf, orderof diociVlineand devof,ion.
Thieie noi Kierkeqaard'esolutiont o the Vroblemof worldli-
neeo,and he crif,icizesit, His soluf,ion(al leasNat, one
poinf,in hie life)ie lhe "doublemovemenf)'
lnfinitereeiqnalionl The"Knighf,
of Faithand
of Fait,h"*liveeamong ';
ff!rr;
other humana Abrahamrelurneto hievillaqe,
Kierkeqaard
CoVenhaqen,
livesin an exVenoive
aparlment in _'x#?
r/V

NewTeatament,The.A comVilaf,ion of wrif,in4o

addedto the JewishDible(viz,,lothe ")ld
Teelamenl")W lhe earlyChrislian*
church,comVrioinqlhe four
"Ooopelo"(Malthew, Mark,Luke,
and John),the "Acf,sof lhe
Apoef,leo"(a deocriVf,ionof the evenle
trhat befellTerenJohn,?teVhen and Taul
Nhe"EVietrlee"
after the crucifixion), (lett'ereof 3t.
Taulto varioueChristiancommunitries in NheMediterranean

l94
 baoin),and Nhe"Revelatione of 9N.John
the Divine"(VroVhecies
of lhe endof
time). ThaNewTesf,amenf, is believedby
Chrisliansto demonetralelhal Jesus
of Nazare\his lhe Chriet,,i.e.,thaf, He ie
the VeeoiahVroVhesied in lhe )ld
TeehamenN.

ObjectiveTruth. Truth for whichthere

are Vublicf,eef,sor critnria f,hal can be
apVliedidentically by morelhan one?er-
eon. E,q,Nhetruths of maf,hemal,ics,
ecience, or hiotnry, Allhouqhobjeclive
Nrutheare nol comVlrtelyobjertivefor
Kierkeqaard (becaueeallknowledge con-
laine an elemenlof belief),iuhey differ
from "oubjecf,ivelruAho"* in lhal lhe
emphaeioof objecNive trulh ie on lhe brut,hof the contenl of trheasseftion
rat'herlhan on lhe trulh of the peroonalree?onee rn ft,. Kierkeqaard accefio
t'hat,Nhereare objertiverrut'ho (i.e.,thar maNh,ecience, and hietnryare ?osor
ble)but,insieleNhat,Iheyare "eeeenNially indifferent)'
rn humanexislence,ln an
exieNenNialeense,Nheydo nol mattnr. l)ee ConaludingUnsaientrfra
?osteafivt.1
- - J

?ieliom. A fundamentalisf,ic form of Lulheraniem" NhatetreseedVeroonal

?iey and an acute awareneoe of sin overdoctrrine
and ritrual.Kierkeqaard's
falher, Michael,was raieedin Nhietradilion,

?.eligioueSphere,The.A whole-world viewconelitulinq a frameworkof reaoon-

inq,Vercefiion,motivatrion, and socialization 7uidedW a devotionto the divine.
ln Concludinq UnscienlificToetscri?t.Kierkeqaard further dividesthie ephere
into "religiousneesN' (thooefeatureoof religiouslifethat allreliqionohavein
common)and"reliqioueneao Dl' a reliqionof Varadoxthat,io recoqnizableto the
readeras Kierke7aard'e ideaof Irue Chriotianity,*Keliqioueneoo "D" Vreeu??oe-
eo "N', but not vice-versa.lgee ConcludingUnecientrfta?oetsad?t and Fear
and Trcmblina.l
- - J

5urd. Originallyfrom the Latin wordsurdusmeaninq"deafl'deoiqnateoan inex-

7reooablequalit'yor an ircaNional
residue.That whichis still left overwhenall
analyoieio comVlrte.Togerherwithlhe prefixab meaning"from"or "awayfrom"
7roducing"ab-ourdl'*roughly,out of thaV whichcannol bevoicedor heard.
Exisf,enceis for Kierkeqaarda "o.)rd,"

r95
 5ubiectiveTruth. A privalelrulh, a Lruf,hfor whichonecan liveor die. Theeeare
not I'rubhsabout'facls, but abouNvaluee,or about the foundationalcale7oriee
Nhatqroundbolh facle and valueefor an individual.Here,unlikelhe caeeof
"obieclivetrrulhl'"there are no
Vubliccrileria Nowhichonecan aVVea|and oubjec-
live trut'he cannot'be communicated exceptindirectly(oeealoo lndircat
Communication*), becaueeeachindividual must learniheeetruths individually
fr om him-or herself. l3 ee ConaludingUnsaientifta ?ostean?t]

Synofiia Goapels,The.Thefirot three bookeof the NewTeehament* ("Matthew,

Mark,and Luke,)whereweare qivenfirebhand,eye-wilneolaccoL)nlo, oneoliqhtly
differinqfrom the otrherin detailand emphaeio, of the leachinqand aclivityof
Jesueof Nazarrthduringthe lasNfour or fiveyeareof hie life, Theyare quotred
moreby Kierkeqaard ihan are other parte of the Oible,lhouqhhelakee someof
from the "EViolle6"of 3N.Tauland from bheOldTesfament.
hie ineViraf,ion

Teleologiaal5uopensionof the Elhiaal,The.Theannulmenlof lhe univereal "

demandeof eNhice in lhe nameof a purVoee Nhalie hiqherlhan lhese demands.
Kierkeqaard aekswhethereucha 6u6?eneion of moralduf,ycouldeverbejuelified
(eincejuot,sucha treleoloqicaloue?enoion of the ethicalaVVarent,lywaorequired
by God of the bibllcalTatriarch,Abraham,lheFabherof ue all), Kierkeqaard'e
Varadoxical anewer,or lackf.,hereof,
ie a maintoVic in whatrhetook lo be his best
book. l1ee Fear andfiembling.)

Unlvereal,The. Thereare at, leaet lwo differenf,wayeKierkeqaardueesf,,hist erm.

(A) In hietheoryof lanquaqe,"the univereal" deeignaf,ee generalconcepteembod-
ied in lanquage that, are neceeearily abstractedouf,of (andthereforeawayfrom)
exVerience. E.q.,everyindividual leaf is differenf,from everyobherindividual leaf,
buf,in orderIo beableNocommunicalewe must havenoun6,verbe,adjectriveo,
adverbe,etc. NhaNou??re6eallindividual differencea and find oomeabstract,qual-
ibyNhaIall leaveeare meant,trohavein common,Thereeulf,ie thaL lanquage and
lhought,beinqunivereal, alwayealienaf,e ue from acf,ualexVerience, whichie par-
Iicular. lSeeJohannesde Climacue. Or De omnibusdubitandum,l (9) ln hio
moraltheory,derivedfrom Kant,and Hegel,"lheuniversal" deoignaf'es lhoee
actionsthat, can be universalized, i.e.,generalized wilhouf,conf,radiction, (E.q.,
honeotry can be univeralized, but lying cannol. lt, io loqicallyimposoible No conceive
of everyone alwayelying. lf everyone alwayeliee,there are no liee.)Thieie lhe
Kantianside. ForHegel, achieving "fhe universal" is Lhemoralgoalof Nheindivid-
ual,buNachievinq Nhaf,goalrequiree the eu??reoeion of one'oownindividualily for
Ihe hiqherqoodof family,community,otratreand humanity,WhenKierkeqaard
aekewhef,her lhere can bea "f,eleoloqical ouepenoion he io aekinq
of lhe etrhicall'*
whether trhereie any juetification for eueVendinq "T,heunivereal" in Nhe nameof a
Vurely individual(henceunintelliqible) VurVooe. lgee FearandTrcmbling.J

196
 Bibliography
L Kierkegaardbmain works in Englieh
Tnnelation
(Daniehpublication daNeein brackets,
Asheriskoindicale poeudonyrneunder
which Kierkeqaard publiehed,)

TheConae?A of lrony.Trane.LeeV1.CaVel,
3loomington,|ndiana: Indiana Univeroity
7reee,196B.11841,)

* EitherlOnVols,| & ll. Trans.DavidF.

)weneonand LillianMarvin9wen6on,
GardenCity,N.Y:DoubledayAnchor1ooke,
1959. 11843,edited byVictor Eremita",
Vol.I wrif,LenW "A: * Vol.ll written W "A:
a.k,a.JudqeWilhe,lmIl
at 50
EitherlOr. Trans.HowardV.Honqand Edna
H. Honq,7rincrton,N.J.:Trince|,on
Univereity7rese,1987,

FearandTrcmbllng(with The giakneas

unto Deafh). Trane,WalterLowrie,Garden
N.Y:DoubledayAnchorbooks,1954.
CiT,y,
11843,Johanneo de oilentio*l
atoo
Fearand Trcmbling(with Repitition).
Trans.HowardV. Honqand EdnaH. Hon6,
Trincetron,
N.J.: ?rincehonUniveroily7ress,
19b3.
also
Fearand Trembling,Trane,Alaetair
Hannay,NawYork:Tenquin gooks,1985, ,*
i'q
!i

:i,
;t
Repitition (with Fearand Trcmbling). I r

I,l
Trans.HowardV. Hongand EdnaH. Honq, .*
Trinceton,N.J.:?rincetonUniveroity7res6, it
1983. 11843,ConeNanlin Conetantriue.*)
Johannee Climacue,or De OmnibueDubitandumEst. Trans.T.H.Croxall,
London:Adam& Charlee7lack,195B.11b42-1543, poethumouely,
Vubliehed
JohanneeClimacu6.*)

?hiloeophiaalFragments. Trans,DavidSwensonand HowardV,Honq,

Trincef,on,
N.J.:TrincelonUnivereity7reoe,1967.l1BM, Johannes
ClimacuoJJ

The Conaeptof Dread. Trans,Waller Lowrie,Trinceton,N.J.:Trincelon

UnivereilyZrees,1957. 11 844, VigiliueHaufnieneio.*)
aleo
TheConaeptof Anxiety,Trane.ReidarThomteand Albefr,g. Anderson,
Trinceton, N.J.: TrinceIonUniversity7reoe,1980.

?tageo on Life'sWay.Trans.WalNerLowrie,N.Y.:thocken Aooks,1967.

\1brc, Afham,*
Williarn Judqe FraterTaciburnus,*
Wilhelnr,* Quidanl,*ediNed
by Hilariue Oookbinder.*)

The ?reeentAge, Trane.AlexanderDru,NewYork: HarperTorchbooks,1962.

11846)

ConcludingUnoaientifia ?ootocript,. Trans.DavidF. 1wensonand WalNer

7reoo,1960. 11b46,Johannes
N.J.: Trincef'onUniversit'y
Lowrie,Trincef,on,
Climacuo.*)

Works of Love. lrane. HowardV.

Hongand EdnaH. Honq,New
York: HarVerTorchbooke, 1964.
11o44
Purity of Heart ls to Will One
Thing. Trans.DouglaeV.Sleere,
NawYork: HarVerTorchbooke,
1e56.UB4n

The ?oint of Viewfor My Work

as an Author. Trans.Waltrer
Lowrie,ed. benjaminNelson,
NewYorkzHarperTorchbooke,
1962. l1b4b, publiohed poerhu-
mouoly.)

194
 The giakneoounto Dealh (with
Fearand Trembling). Trans.
WalterLowrie,OardenCity,N.Y:

M
DoubledayAnchorb ooke.
O49, Anli-Climacuo,*J
11
also
The 9icknee,6unto Death.
Trans.HowardV,Hongand
EdnaH, Hong,Trinceton,N.J.:
Trinceton Universily?reee,
1900, c (t

-Training in Chrielianity. Trans,

WalterLowrie,Trincelon,N.J.:
Trinceton University Treee,
1944, l1B5O,Anti-Climacuo,*f I

also
\r
o?ncllce in Christianity. Trans.
flowardV, Hongand EdnaH,
Hong,Trincef,on, y 7ress,1991.
N.J.: Trinceton Univereit

* Attaak upon Chriotendom.Trane.WalNerLowrie,Soston,Deacon?rees,

1e59, 11854-1b55,)

The Journals of Klerkegaard,l6S4-1O54,Trane.and ad, AlexanderDru,

London:FontanaBooke,1969.

The LastYearez Journale105g-1855. Trans.and ed, KonaldGreqor7mibh,

London:Fontana Library,1968.

ll. Kierkegaard'e?hiloeophyAnth ologized.

A. KierkegaardAnthology. Ed. Kobeft Dretall, Trincefon,N.J.: Trincelon
Univereity7reee,1973,

lll. Reaommended
5eaondary5ourcee,

anclDeaIhsof gdren Kierkeqaard.

Aqacinoki,1ylviane.AparAe: Conce?tions
Trane.KevinMewmark,Tallahaaeee:Florida)tate Univeroity7ress,1988,

Collins,Jamee. The Mind of Kierkegaard.Trinceton,N.J.: Trincelon

Univereif,y7rees,19b3,

199
 Gardiner,Tatrick.
Kierkegaard.
t*\.lis q,rb.lfur Ut-l Oxford: Oxford
rr i drorg
gfto'Ett'd UniveroiNy?reee,
198b.
1:.t1.51n**
eer.hvir {ctte
hrrns lq" l'6k,
rlrgc Hannay,Alastair,
\rF \tt{dd ft til Kierkegaard.
s"o ilrlJr(" \t
London;Koutledqe
and Kegan?aul,
19b2,

Lowrie,Walter. A Short Life of Kierkegaard,GardenCity, N.Y: Doubleday

Anchor,1961,

Mackey,Louis. Kierkegaard:A Kind of ?oet. 7it'f'oburqh: Univeroif'yof

ania ?reee,1971.
?ennoylv

Greqor. Kierkegaard'sThought. Trincelon,N.J.: Trinceton

Malantrechuk,
7reee,1989.
Univeroit'y

VcDonald,William.Kierkegaard and ?oet -Modernism. TallahaseeezFlorida

glat e Univereit'y?reee,19b9.

Mooney,EdwardF.,Knights of Failh and ReoignationzReading

Fear andTrembling.Albany,N.Y: Slate lJnivereityof NewYork
Kierkegaard's
?reee,1991.

?erkine,Kobeft. Kierkegaard'sFearand Tremblingz Critioal Appraioale.

birminqham:Univereilyof Alabama?rese,19b1.

Taylor,Mark C. Kierkegaard'e?eeudonymouoAuthorehipz A )t'udy in Time

7reee,1975.
andthe 9lelf. ?rinceton,N.J.: ?rincelonUnivereitry

Thompoon,Josiah. rhe Lonely Labyrinthz Kierkegaard's?seudonymoue

gouthernttlinoietJniveroiNy
Worke. Carbondale,ll.: 7rese,1967'

ThomVeon,Joeiah,ed. Kierkegaard:A Collectionof Cril'licalEeoaye.

OardenCity,N.Y: Anchorbooke,1972,

140
\uc= Attock upon christendom.
Trons.wofter Lowrie,Boston:
BeoconPress,1g1g.

'oD= fhs conceptof Dreqd.

Trons.wofrer Lowrie,princeton,
PrincetonUniversitypress, N.J.:
1gS7

ol= Theconceptof rrony.

Trons.LeeM. copef, Broomington,
fndionoUniversity
prers,196g. Indiono:

'rP=concluding unsci3nrif5.poshcript.
Trons.Dovid F.swenson
wolter lowrie' princefon, ond
N.J.: princetonUniversifypress,
1960.
Either/or, vol. r. Trons.
Dovid F.swensonqnd
LirfionMorvin
swenson,
Gorden
ciry,N.y.: o.rui"J"yilh;r;;ksr'1959
I= Feqrond Trembling..
Trons.Woltertowrie,Gorden
)oubfedoyAnchorBooks,1g54. City,N.y.:

'Johqnnesclimocus,
or DeomnibusDubitqndum
,roxoff,
London:Adom& ch;d";'r[.t, Est. Trons.T.H.
195g.
= TheJournqfs
of Kierkegoord,
f 834-lgs4. Trons.qnded.
lexonder
Dru,London:F;il;; ;;;,
1969.
Eifier/or, vor' ff. Trons.
Dovid F.swensonond Liffion
r'enson,Gorden City, Morvin
N.y.: DoubledoyAnchor
Books, Ig*g.
'The Pointof view
for My work qs on Aurhor.
vrie' ed' BenjominNefson, Trons.wofrer
N"*i;;' HorperTorchbooks, rg62.
Thesicknessunto.Deorh.
(; Doubledoy Trons.
-t wqfter Lowrie,Gorden
Anchor Books, iSA'.- city,
Theleft columndeeiqnatee?aqenumberefrom Kierkeqaard For DeTinners,
Theriqhl columndeoiqnaNeo ?aqenumbere from Kierkeqaard'e workskeyed
on ?. 141.First,and last wordsfrom eachquotationare listed.

7 "Whois it?,bad Nohim?: Tic 176

7 "Ao a child,,,crazy uVbringingi' ?oV 76
10 "Ood had vetoedlhe marriaqe," JoK 73
11 "lf I had...wiNhRegina." JoK Bo
16 "Abracadabra's ecref,of 'Chrie|,endom"' AuC 212
16 "OnecannoNlive..offof itl' AuC l9z
16 "Thishae f,o.,Goda6 a fool," AuC 59
23 "a??roached each..away emVtyhanded." Col 199
26 "ln ihe'relalion f,o lhem." Cu? 551
34 "Trubhio oubjectrivit yi' Cu7 169
37 " Alldecieiv enese,..inoubjectivity." Cu? 2O7
37 "Onlyin,,trobe in errorl' Cu? 214
39 " no|,hingneooth aN pervadeo bein9." Cu7 75
42 "lhe VoeoibiliIy,at,any moment)' CUY 76
43 "Youcan counN..cannot comel' Cu? bB
44 "whowokeuV...he was dead," Cu? 149
46 "deceivinq lhe truthI'
hio...inIo ?oV 39
46 "lhrow lhis bookdown." 0 172
52 "cannol congcioueneoo,,,? roduces,duplicit'y!' JC 148-9
59 "However deeV..,objecf of dread." CoD 1O1
60 "Onemay..,b ecomedizzy," CoD 55
61 " Dread io..,anlipalhet'ic eympahhy." CoD 3B
65 "Man ie opirit...no|yeVa oelf," 1uD 146
67 ")uch a derived...ilself Noanof,her." 7uD 146-7
70 "willinqtro be...one lruly ie." 1uD 153
70 "TheTormentr...able lo die," )uD 15O
71 " becauoe he,,.cannot, become n ot'hinqi' )uD 151
71 "f,hemoreconsciousness..,Nhe deoVairi' 7uD 175
72 "Thuowhenthe'rid of himself." juD 151-2
72 "a blinddoor'.isnot'hing." 7uD 1Bg
73 "oiNoag itr were...l'obe it'gelfl' 1uD 196
75 "He raqee.,nioery from him," 1uD 2Oo
BO "ThieeVeciee..by lhe ocore." E 284
01 "0f all ridiculoue,.llauqhheaftilyi' E24
B5 "goredomis t'he...uVVer handl' E 282
b6 "eil,herdie of boredom...(t'he actriveform)." E 2b5
B7 "Yougo to eee..paftof a bookl' E 295

142
 B7 "Thereare,,soupledwiilhdealh." E25
BB "l do not care...care at all." E 19-20
Bg "lf you marry.,all E37
Vhilooo?hy."
97 "Lifeis a masquerade.,.this relal,ion," 063
9B "Do you nol know,,ofperoonali6y|' E 164
99 "chooeelhyeelfi' o 226
1OO "Ihe leaV" CUP 94
1O1 "My eilherlor,,evilare o 173
Vooited,"
1O4 "Thechoiceiteelf,.inconeum\ion," o 167
1OB "elhicaldeopair" Cu7 234
1OB "waowriT..tren in a monaltery," ?oV 1B
112 "who7aveotrenqlh,,becomee blind." F&T 36
115 "what I gain ie,,,virlueof faiNh," F&T 57,59
115 "lnfiniNereeignalion...for himeelf." F&T 56
117 "Abraham'ewholeaclion.,snNirely," F&T 69,70
118 "t eleoloqical ouopension of lhe ethical', F&T 64
11b "by vift.,ueof lhe abeurd," F&T 46
ll9 "Abraham'erelahion,fthanhimeelf." F&T 67
119 "Abrahamenjoyo.,ofmurder! F&T 65
12O "a holyact,..,murder one'ogon." F&T 41
121 "believedby viftue,.seaeedlo funclion." F&T 46-7
122 "HumanlyeVeakinq,,he io crazy." F&T 06
123 "Abrahamwae qreater,,,hatredof oneeelf.,, F&T 31
124 "epeakoa divine,,wiIhf,onguee," F&T 123
125 "Faitrhis this.'is unilhinkable." F&T B1-2

DREADIS A SV/N?ATHETIC
ANTIPATHY AND AN AilN PATHETIC
SVNPATHY

14It
Index
109-25
and lsaacetory,5, 10-11,
Abraham
absurd,the%128
acluality, S2-53
Adam,SB-61,B5
aegf,hef,icism,66, 12b
aee6helic eelf, 76-77, 7b-92,
96-100, 102,104,108
Alcibiadee (?lato),23
alienation, T9
Allen,Woody,6S
anguieh.5ee dread
anxief,y,)ee dread
arisNoarals,b2
Arietolle, 66, 91
aut hentricily / inau6henf icitry, 62
auIhorshiV, 59

bad faith, 53, 55, 62, 129

behaviorism,l29
belief,S+55
berqman,ln6mar,45
 Tl" tormenf?F /espair is. preciselg
fhis : to hol die, be able fo

body,66
boredom,B4-Bg
S u k u n i nM, i c h a e l , l O
b u e i n e s s m e9n1,

Camue,AlberL,44
Chrietendom,l29
C h r i e L i a n i l y1, 2 9
a e c h o i c e 1, O 2 ,1 O O
K i e r k e gaar d 'e c r i t i c i e m o f, 1 5 - 1 7
c o m m u n i c a L i oe n .e e i n d i r e c tc o m r n u n i c a l i o n
Communiem,10S-6
C o n c e Wo f D r e a d .T h e ( K i e r k e g a a r d )2,8 , 5 8 - 5 9 , 6 4
Conce?Lof lrony.The (Kierkeqaard),23
ConcludinQ U n s c i e n L i f iTc o e t e c r i p tt o t h e T h i l o e o ? h i c aFl r a q m e n l o
( K i e r k e q a a r d )3,2 , 9 1
conSctoueneee:
cerLainLyof,49-52
reliqioueeDalee of, 54-56
u n c e r l a i n L yo f , 5 2 - 5 5
Corsair. The (newepap er), 12-1+
Danish LulheranChurch,Kierkegaard's crit icismof, 15-17
death,42-46, b6-BB
dealh-wish,71,74
defiance,TS
DeOmnibusDubilandum EsN
(Kierkeqaard),
T HoPEIVE
51-53
Deecar\es,Ren6,4B-52,55, 66
6oTnY flE
deepair, 6+65, 7O-75, 129 ON ITR,AI'HT
delerminism,lSO
dialectic,91,13O
"Diaryof a )educer"
(Kierkeqaard), 9
divinemadnese, 124,13O
douW,5+55
dread,5B-62, 113,13O
duck/ rabbit (Wilt qenetrein),
3B

ecslalic leclure,B9-9O
EiIherlOr (Kierkeqaard), 46, 91-92,
96,102,108
"Eilher/ Or" Voinf,,99, 1O2
elihes,B2
Engele, Friedrich,lO
ethicalself,69,75,100-106, 1OB,114
ethicaloVhere,131
exigf,ence:
conceVlof, 33-34, 39, 43
t.hreeophereoof, 76-77
existenlialism,1,32, 131
in liNeratureand film,4+46
existentialtrruLh,21

facls,39
f airh, 113,120-25, 126-27, 131
Fall,lhe,5B-59,61
Fearand Tremblinq (Kierkeqaard),
10-11, 64,109,124
Feuerbach, Ludwiq,lO
freedom,59-60, 62, 94, 131

146
Freud,1iqmund,56,03, bB
qloooary of Kierkeq qy, 12b-36
aard'o Nerminolo
qoldenmean,131
Gold echmidl,, Mer, 12-14
Goopelo,24

Hamlet,73
hedonism,03,132
Heqel,OeorqeWilhelmFriedrich,10, 67-69, 90-92
SS
Heraclitus,
Hume,David,36

indirectcommunication,
21-22,2+27, 46,79, 132
innocence,62

inf,rovergion,73
irony,22-25,132

Jesus,2+25,99

Kafka,Franz,56
Kierkegaard,AnneLund,4
Kierkegaard,MichaelTederoen,
3-6, 12
death of, B
 Kierkegaard, 7ren:
death and funeral,17,20
life otory,1-17
profeeeionao wriler, 20
Veeudonymoue writrinq
sT,ance, 26-27, 46
quotraf,ions of,141-43
religiooiNy of,5
\or' reliqiouo traininq,T
romanLicf,aclics and
engaqementof, 9-11
ochooling,6-7
kniqhN of faiNh,12+25, 133
knighlof infiniNe reoiqnat,ion,
133
knowledge,26,27

Leap,Nhe,75, 1OO-1O3, 116,134

l o q i c , l a wosf , 1 3 3
Lutheranism,134

madneee,124 the
marriage,69,1O2 FINITE
Marx, Karl,90 *hc (
malerialism,66 TEMPORAL\(
mind/bodyVroblem,66 thc lhe
monasticiam, 66,134 NECESSARY POSS
I8LE

neqativef,houqhN,39 BODY SOUL

SELF=SPRIT=TREEDO
NewTeehamenN,114
non-knowledge, 27
normality,65
nothinqneso, 59, 42, 45, 46
objective Ih o uqhI, 32-34 OTHER
objeclivef,ruf,h,35, 4B-51, 55, 135
)leen, Reqina, 9-12, 69, 1O2,126-27
originalein,5b-61
of,her,Nhe,67-70

"?aperefrom OneSurviving"
(Kierkeqaard),
B
parableo,24

14^
ThenomenoloTy of 3?irit (legel),67-69
7
- hiloeophic al F raamenle ( Kierkeaaard\.
91
philoeophy, 90-91
pietism,l35
7 1 a N o , 2 2 , 3132, 4
e r i n c i p lB
p l e a e u rV e ,Z
poooibility,52-53, 59-60
Toelocriol
-_.-r-_

(Kierkegaard),
+2-43
UilONG
So WH|-T,S
reliqioue
self,69, u tTH nV
SAY,I F I T
77,108-25 fioTtvnfl0N?
FEELS 6@b,
rI ev lti tr ut iJn tt v v tJa cr Y
; nt h et rvct v r
DO ff/
135
r e l i q i o u ee l a N e o
of conscioue-
ne6o,54-56
r o l e e / r o l eV l a y i n g ,
aA-q4 1n7
v I v v t t v v

KotaLion Method,
B6-b7
"ffi,
Sarlre, Jean-?aul,
27-29,53-54,
56,60,62
S c h e l l i n gF, r i e d r i c hv o n ,1 0
S c h l e q e lF, r i l z , 9 , 1 1
eelf, 65-71
s e l f- c o n sc io ue nes s , 6 B
e elf- realizalio n, 7 O-7 5
a P n t6r vP n c r rv v cY n l iv t \g n , 4 9 - 5 0
Jvt
Yvt

o e n o u a l i e m6,6
Seventh3eal.The(tilm,Sergman), 45
zexualVleaeure,
BB
SickneeeunT,oDeaLh.The(Kierkegaard), 64, 65, 70
Socrales,22-23, 25
eophietic
ated aeeLhetee,B2
eoul,66
StranaenThe(Camue). 44
eubjective
thouqht,32, 34, 39, +3, 136

149
oubjeclivet ruth, 21,27-2b, 32, 35-36, 4246
suicide,74,B6-b7
surd,135
)ynoptic GooVelo,136

lel eological ouopeneionof Nhe elhical, 11

b, 1Zo
truth. )ee objeclivetrubh oubjectiveNruhh

Universal,136
unoophietric
atredaesNh
eles, BO

valuee,36-39

Wiltgenolein,Ludwiq,3 B

160
IFYt|UIII(ED
KIERI(EGAARDIII
...f,hen
il/r,6{u,l(ul+-O
wouldliketo intrroduce
you Notwo other books
by aulhorI illuetrator
DonaldTalmerz
SARTRE For 6eginners ie an
acceeeibleyeL ooVhioticated
i n f , r o d u c L i o nt o t h e l i f e a n d
work of the famoue French
e x i o f , en f , a
i l i s t V h i lo s o V he r
Jean Taul )arf,re. Sartre, Lhe
b e e l - k n o w ng h i l o e o p h e ro f t h e
z o i l c e n L u r y ,w a o a m e m b e r
of Lhe French underqround
durinq Wodd War ll, a noveliel,
a glaywriqhl, and a major
influence in French political
a n d i n l e l l e c t u a ll i f e .
Paper,$11.00($15.95Cdn.),
lsBN 0-86316-177-4

STRUCTURALI9M For begin-

ner6 ie an illueLrated tour
f,hrough the myef,erioueland-
oca?eof slrucLuraliemand poet.-
elructuralism. The journey'e
sLarLin4 poinl ie the linguieLic
theory of Ferdinandde Saueeure,
Ihen,jumpinqoverLhe Lwo world
wars, iL vieiLe Lhe key ideae of
oome of f,he biqqeel nameo in
French Nhouqht, between 1950
and 19BO: Claude Lbvi-Otrauee;
Koland Oa rth es; Louie Althueeer;
Jacqueo Lacan: and Jacquee
Derrida,

Structuralism For geginnera

triee lo make oenee of lan-
quaqe ae well ae Nhe radical
claim of the dioappearanceof
Lheindividual. Paper,$11.00($15.95Cdn.),
tsBN0-86316-193-6
 Great ideasand great thinkers can be
thrilling. They can also be intimidating
and complicated.
ThaI;ewhere
Writnrsand Readers
ForEeginnere"booke
comein. Wfitnreand
Readersbrouqht' you
lhe veryfiretrFor
Eeginnerd"bookover
lwentyyearoaqo.
)incef,hen, amideta
qrowinq number of imi-
t alors,we've Vubliehed
eome70 tirlee(ranqinq
fromArchikclureln
kn andfromEineteint'o Elvie)int'heint,ernationally
acclaimed ForAeginnerd'seriee,EverybookinNheeeriee
6ewe6one?ur?oee'.I'o UNin|inidaNeandUNcomplicaf'e
f,heworkeof greaNlhinkers. Knowledqe is f,ooim7orI'anL
t o t'heexpefi'o,
t o beconfined
Ptato For Foucault For
Beginners

byfob Cavalierc by LydiaAlixFillingham byW.Tetrenmctrel

' byAtbettfidl
nbsfiabd
ry Erblrrb
illusfialed byMoshe
illuslrated Susser

fllustrationsby Joe Lee, from Clowns For Beginners

 And knowledqe,ae you will diecover in our
"DocumenLary Comicbooke]'ie funl,Eachbook
researched,humorouelywrit'
io painoLaklngly Chomsky For
Beginners
Len and illuelraled in whalever obyle beet
by DavidCogswell;
suiilslhe oubjec|al hand. by
illustrated
PaulGordon

Race For
Beginners

byS E Anderson
byThe
lllustrated
Cro-Mat Collective

McLuhan For
Beginners

byW.Tenence
Gordon;
by
illustrated
SusanWiilmadh :,::.:.:.
;i:{:,qt

ai@w

l-Ching For
Beginners

byBrandon
Toropov;
illustrated
by
JohnKane

*
ThaI' s Wrltnrs and Readers, where For Beg inner st
booksbegan!Kemember, if it' doesn'f'oay...

ilha{anl
...if's noLan oriqinalFor Eeginnero'"bookl
Eastern
Europe For
Beginners

byBeck,Mastand
Tapper
Foucault forBeginners PlatoforBeginnerc Nietzsche forBeginners Brecht forBiginners
rsBN0-86316-160-X rsBN0-86316-039-5 r s B N0 - 8 6 3 1 6 - 1 1 8 - 9 tsBN0-86316-100-6
Lydia AlixFillingham RobertCavaliere MarcSautet Michael Thoss
lllus.byMoshe Susser lllusbyEricLurio lllusbyPatrick Boussignac lllus.byPatrick
Boussignac

ZenforBeginners Judaism lor Beginners TheHistory of Glowns TheArabs& lsrael

lSBN 0-86316-116-2 l s B N0 - 8 6 3 1 6 - 1 0 1 - 4 forBeginners lor Beginnerc
JudithBlackstone
& Written & lllus.by rsBN0-86316-199-5 t s B N0 - 8 6 3 1 6 - 1 6 1 - 8
ZoranJosipovic Charles Szlackmann Written
& lllustrated
byJoeLee RonDavid
lllus.byNaomi
Rosenblatt lllus.bySusan David

GlassicalMusiclor Beginners TheJewishHolocaust Addiclion& Recovery Sexlor Beginners

rsBN0-86316-162-6 lor Beginners lor Beginners lsBN0-86316-011-5
Stacy CombsLynch tsBN0-86316-182-0 rsBN0-86316-198-7 ErrolSelkirk
lllus.byMichael
Lynch Stewart Justman David A.Brizer,
M.D. lllus.byNaomiRosenblatt
lllus.byRebecca
Shope lllus.byRicardo M.D.
Castafreda,

Babies forBeginners HeideggertorBeginners Healthcarelor Beginners UNICEFforBeginnerc

rsBN0-86316-169-3 lsBN0-86316-172-3 tsBN0-86316-170-7 |SBN0-86316-197-9
David A.Brizer,
M.D. EricLemay & Jennifer
Pitts David A.Brizer,
M.D. & lllusby
Written
lllus.byRicardo M.D.
Castafreda, lllus.byPaulGordon lllus.byRicardo M.D.
Castafreda, Clark
Christian

JazzlorBeginners TheU.N.ForBeginnerc forBeginnerc

Sartre forBeginners
BlackPantherc
rsBN0-86316-165-0 lsBN0-86316-185-5 ISBN0-86316-177-4 tsBN0-86316-196-0
RonDavid lanWilliams Written
& lflus.by HerbBoyd
lllus.byVanessa
Holley DonaldPalmer
E4|.ndtdEW!.:AidifBookco'26.2EEdgnGl@,London,En!|and,N78EF,phone(071)607.5792'fq(071}6o7-67l4.frln|h:TomrBooh'phone61.2.938.5155''d1
Eook are availableand di9ttibutedthtouOhwt the UniN Sla/h6,Cand4 Austnlia, Enqland,EuoN aN Connonwulth
 oren Kierkegoordwos one of
; of the nineteenth
cenfury-
;motic men who ever wolked

Phifosophicolfy,Kierkegoordwos the ,,bridge,,thot led

from Hegelto Existentiolism.
KierkegoordobhorredHegel'sobstroct,know-it-oll
ideolismthqt tried to copturereolityin q few words.
Kierkegoord's ottockon sociol
ond religiouscomplocency ond I
his single-honded ossoulton tro-
ditionolWesternphilosophygeneroted
o crisisthot producedo rodicollynew
woy of phifosophizing
ond modehim the founi"l. of rheschoolthoi would
loterbe colledExistentiolism.
To Kierkegoord, reolitywos personof,
subiective-itbegonond endedwith td individuol-ond philosophy
wosnotsomething
onemerelytolkedobout,it wosthewqy you iir"d.
Forsucho brilliontthinker,the
woy Kierkegoordlivedwos...somewhot too interesting
His "obstroct"loveoffoir?His obsession with deoth?
His "Leopof Foith,"his cynicism,his morvellous sense
of humor-how do you put oll thot into one mon?
For storters,you reqd Kierkqaard For Bqinners.
It exploins,ploinlyond simply,the greotDonish
thinker'sobsession with the porticullriryof humonexis-
tenceos well os his demonstrotion of how the creotion
of on outhenticnew k;ndof individuolis possible.

A lfudKtut-,
BEGINNERS lsBN0-96316-192-g
DOCUlT,IENTARY
coMtcBooK
PHILOSOPHY
SERIES
us $11.00
uK t6.gg
cAN$15.95