NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
Kierkegaard? s Notions Of Risk, Faith, Passion, & Kierkegaard? s Notions Of Risk, Faith, Passion, & Truth? ? ? ? Soren Kierkegaard puts forth a unique form of existentialism.
He chooses to use the questions of subjectivity, objectivity, and the search for truth, in existentialist thought as a means for the justification of his faith. Through this he comes up with one of the purest definitions of what faith really is. The question is then; can he through his discussion of? the paradox of truth? be susceptible to Nietzschian relativism, given this conception?
The conclusion is that it is not; Kierkegaard? s definition requires a passionate belief in something. One cannot believe that everything is relative, in true Nietzschian style, and hold a passionate belief in a specific something at the same time. ? ? ? ? ? The Paradox of Truth? is one of the base conceptions in Kierkegaard? s theoretical framework and is core to his conceptions of faith and risk. ?
A paradox results from the relationship between the eternal (the essential truth) and the existing individual. ? [ 1 ] This is expanded to? The Ultimate paradox is: That the eternal truth has come into being in time, (the infinite has become finite). To believe this paradox (the Absurd) is to be in the highest state of truth. Christianity has declared itself to be the eternal essential truth which has come onto being in time; it has proclaimed itself as the paradox, and it has required of the individual the inwardness of faith with respect to the absurd. ? [ 2 ] To further understand what Kierkegaard is saying when it comes to his? paradox of truth? one must understand Kierkegaard?
s beliefs, when it comes to the notion of truth. Kierkegaard seems to believe at the base of things that Truth equals Passion, or that truth requires passion. For if you are to believe that something is the truth, you must have passion in that belief to truly believe it. Otherwise you do not truly believe, you simply believe because the choice has already been made for you and you believe because you should. Which is not true belief. True belief comes about when you have made a decision for yourself, and believe out of your own violation, choosing to have faith even in the face of uncertainty. ?
Passionate inwardness is the mark of truth even if, or rather when, the truth is objectively uncertain. ? [ 3 ] Kierkegaard believes that subjectivity, inwardness, and faith are synonymous and that their definitions are an expression for truth. ? the objective uncertainty, held fast in an appropriation process of the most passionate inwardness is the truth. ? [ 4 ]? ? ? ? The type of uncertainty that Kierkegaard talks about my be less obvious when considering, day to day truths, but we must remember that Kierkegaard is most concerned with his definitions of truth and faith as they relate to him and his relationship with God. Kierkegaard asserts that we should most concern our selves and our hunt for truth with questions that are close to us, and so he is concerned with the nature and basis of his faith. This preoccupation with his faith must be taken into account as the main paradox when one reads the following passage about the eternal truth.
When the eternal truth is related to an existing individual, truth becomes a paradox. The paradox repels the individual because of the objective uncertainty and ignorance towards inwardness. But since this paradox in itself is not paradoxical, it does not push the spirit far enough. For without risk there is no faith, and the greater the risk the greater the faith, and the more objective reliability, the less inwardness (for inwardness is precisely subjectivity).
Indeed, the less objective reliability, the deeper becomes the possible inwardness. When the paradox is in itself paradoxical, it repels the individual by the power of the absurd, and the corresponding passion, which is produced in the process, is faith. [ 5 ]? ? ? ? It is through this understanding of the paradoxical and its effect on the individual that we come to understand Kierkegaard? s conception of faith. For Kierkegaard one of the base truths of faith is that it requires risk. If there is no risk that what you believe is untrue, that is that it has been proven to you objectively, through objective evidence then you have no need of faith for you know it is true. ?
By its very nature, faith involves risk, the risk that what you are believing is not objectively true. In fact, it is only after one recognizes the death of God, the intellectual recognition that God does not exist, that on is free to become genuinely ethical and existentially self aware. ? [ 6 ] That is that when we have admitted to ourselves that based on purely intellectual grounds there is no objective evidence to say that God exists, only once we have come fully to the belief that there is absolutely no reason for us to have faith in God, it is then when we take the risk of having faith in spite of all the reasons to the contrary that we truly become self aware. For it is when we look inward and through our inwardness choose to believe and have faith in god in spite of the risks that we truly achieve passionate truth. ? Faith is precisely the contradiction between the infinite passion of inwardness and objective uncertainty. If I can grasp God objectively, I do not believe, but because I cannot know God objectively, I must have faith, and if I will preserve myself in faith, I must constantly hold fast to the objective uncertainty, so as to remain out upon the ocean? s deep?
and still believe. ? [ 7 ] Thus faith by its very nature requires a lack of objective security. To bring his concept of faith to even clearer, let? s consider the movie analogy of faith presented in Indiana Jones. When Indiana is moving through all the tests of a true believer on his way to find the Holy Grail he reaches a seemingly uncross able chasm and is simply given the instruction that with faith he will be able to step out and cross the gap. A leap of faith is required. Now if Indiana objectively knew when he first got to the chasm that there was a bridge there which blended in with the chasm walls, that he could easily step across on, then no faith would be required.
He does not however find out the objective reason for his faith, until he has taken the risk and exercised it. Faith only exists when there is no objective evidence. The greatest uncertainty produces the greatest faith. Thus Kierkegaard states that the Christian faith is the purest faith, for there is no way to ever prove it objectively and thus it gives?
rise to the greatest degree of inwardness because it is based upon the greatest degree of uncertainty. ? [ 8 ]? ? ? ? From here we must now face the question as to whether or not Kierkegaard? s notions give rise to Nietzschian relativism, given this conception of truth? Nietzsche states that? we should be open to all views, not just our own. ? [ 9 ] So Nietzsche leaves room for Kierkegaard? s theory and allows for him to hold it, so the two views are not exclusive from Nietzsche?
s point of view. The decision to have faith is relative to ones own choice and free will, something that Nietzsche tells us to exercise at every opportunity. For according to Nietzsche? the moral earth too, is round? [ 10 ] Does Kierkegaard? s view however, prevent relativism? The conception would be yes.
Kierkegaard? s views by their very basis in faith and passion require one to pick a view and then have faith in it, in this case specifically, the view that God exists, as truth. Nietzsche? s views require that one come to the conception that there is no fixed truth, where as Kierkegaard? s beliefs in the paradox of truth and the conceptions of faith, require that we pick something to passionately believe in, even if it is not the true faith in God, but the pagan wisdom that Socrates held.
One way or another the framework requires that one hold passionate belief and make decisions? ultimately based on passion and not on reason. ? [ 11 ]? If Nietzschian relativism is to become a problem, then one does not have a passionate belief, and thus has not subscribed to the notions of faith, risk, and truth as Kierkegaard has outlined them. For when you are a relativist, then you no longer have passionate faith, and if you no longer have passionate faith then you no longer have truth, for? passionate inwardness is the mark of truth. ? [ 12 ]? ? ? ?
Kierkegaard? s philosophy has a quality to it that makes it very appealing to a believer, whether one is a believer in God or something else, it allows someone to justify their faith in whatever it is they choose to have faith in, be it God, Allah, or pagan systems of faith. For according to Kierkegaard one only has to truly and passionately believe in something. An ability to believe, given by few if any other existentialist theoretical frameworks.
Kierkegaard? s theory thus, gives power to the human mind and the potential for finding truth of some kind, in a universe that most of his colleges were offering no truth for, and nothing to believe in. It is this latent understanding of the power of passion, and the given ability to allow one to believe in something, or someone as a means for finding truth, which prevents Kierkegaard from falling into the trap of Nietzschian relativism given his conception of truth. References Oaklander, Nathan. ? Existentialist Philosophy? 2 nd Ed. Prentice Hall Inc, NJ, USA. 1996.
Wilks, Anna. Handout # 4 Kierkegaard, ? Either/Or. ? Wilks, Anna. Handout # 9 Kierkegaard, ?
Concluding Unscientific Postscript. ? Wilks, Anna. Handout # 7 Nietzsche, ? Selections. ? [ 1 ]Kierkegaard Handout, ? Concluding unscientific postscript? [ 2 ] Ibid. [ 3 ] Oaklander P. 17. [ 4 ] Oaklander P. 18. [ 5 ] Ibid. P 20. [ 6 ] Oaklander P. 18. [ 7 ] Oaklander.
P 18. [ 8 ] Ibid. P. 19. [ 9 ] Handout, # 1 on Nietzsche. [ 10 ] Ibid. [ 11 ] Oaklander. P 19. [ 12 ] Oaklander. P. 17.
Free research essays on topics related to: nietzsche , beliefs, theory, eternal truth, faith in god
Research essay sample on Faith In God Nietzsche
