Kierkegaard? s Notions Of Risk, Faith, Passion, & A ; Truth Essay, Research Paper

? ? ? ? Soren

Kierkegaard puts Forth a alone signifier of existential philosophy. He chooses to utilize the

inquiries of subjectiveness, objectiveness, and the hunt for truth, in

existential philosopher thought as a agency for the justification of his religion. Through

this he comes up with one of the purest definitions of what religion truly is.

The inquiry is so ; can he through his treatment of? the paradox of truth?

be susceptible to Nietzschian relativism, given this construct? The decision

is that it is non ; Kierkegaard? s definition requires a passionate belief in

something. One can non believe that everything is comparative, in true Nietzschian

manner, and keep a passionate belief in a specific something at the same clip. ? ? ? ? ? The

Paradox of Truth? is one of the base constructs in Kierkegaard? s theoretical

model and is nucleus to his constructs of religion and hazard. ? A paradox consequences

from the relationship between the eternal ( the indispensable truth ) and the

bing individual. ? [ 1 ]

This is expanded to? The Ultimate paradox is: That the ageless truth has come

into being in clip, ( the space has become finite ) . To believe this paradox

( the Absurd ) is to be in the highest province of truth. Christianity has declared

itself to be the ageless indispensable truth which has come onto being in clip ; it

has proclaimed itself as the paradox, and it has required of the person the

kernel of religion with regard to the absurd. ? [ 2 ] To foster

understand what Kierkegaard is stating when it comes to his? paradox of truth?

one must understand Kierkegaard? s beliefs, when it comes to the impression of

truth. Kierkegaard seems to believe at the base of things that Truth peers

Passion, or that truth requires passion. For if you are to believe that

something is the truth, you must hold passion in that belief to truly believe

it. Otherwise you do non genuinely believe, you merely believe because the pick

has already been made for you and you believe because you should. Which is non

true belief. True belief comes about when you have made a determination for

yourself, and believe out of your ain misdemeanor, taking to hold faith even in

the face of uncertainness. ? Passionate kernel is the grade of truth even if,

or instead when, the truth is objectively uncertain. ? [ 3 ]

Kierkegaard believes that subjectiveness, kernel, and religions are synonymous

and that their definitions are an look for truth. ? the aim

uncertainness, held fast in an appropriation procedure of the most passionate

kernel is the truth. ? [ 4 ] ? ? ? ? The

type of uncertainness that Kierkegaard talks about my be less obvious when

sing, twenty-four hours to twenty-four hours truths, but we must retrieve that Kierkegaard is most

concerned with his definitions of truth and religion as they relate to him and his

relationship with God. Kierkegaard asserts that we should most concern our

egos and our Hunt for truth with inquiries that are close to us, and so he is

concerned with the nature and footing of his religion. This preoccupation with his

religion must be taken into history as the chief paradox when one reads the

following transition about the ageless truth. When the eternal

truth is related to an bing person, truth becomes a paradox. The

paradox repels the single because of the nonsubjective uncertainness and

ignorance towards kernel. But since this paradox in itself is non

self-contradictory, it does non force the spirit far plenty. For without hazard there is

no religion, and the greater the hazard the greater the religion, and the more

nonsubjective dependability, the less inwardness ( for kernel is exactly

subjectiveness ) . Indeed, the less nonsubjective dependability, the deeper becomes the

possible kernel. When the paradox is in itself self-contradictory, it repels the

single by the power of the absurd, and the corresponding passion, which is

produced in the procedure, is faith. [ 5 ] ? ? ? ? It

is through this apprehension of the self-contradictory and its consequence on the

single that we come to understand Kierkegaard? s construct of religion. For

Kierkegaard one of the basal truths of religion is that it requires hazard. If there

is no hazard that what you believe is untrue, that is that it has been proven to

you objectively, through nonsubjective grounds so you have no demand of religion for

you know it is true. ? By its really nature, religion involves hazard, the hazard that

what you are believing is non objectively true. In fact, it is merely after one

recognizes the decease of God, the rational acknowledgment that God does non

exist, that on is free to go truly ethical and existentially self

aware. ? [ 6 ]

That is that when we have admitted to ourselves that based on strictly

rational evidences there is no nonsubjective grounds to state that God exists,

merely one time we have come to the full to the belief that there is perfectly no ground

for us to hold faith in God, it is so when we take the hazard of holding religion

in malice of all

the grounds to the contrary that we truly become ego cognizant.

For it is when we look inward and through our kernel choose to believe and

hold faith in God in malice of the hazards that we truly achieve passionate truth.

? Faith is exactly the contradiction between the infinite passion of

kernel and nonsubjective uncertainness. If I can hold on God objectively, I do non

believe, but because I can non cognize God objectively, I must hold religion, and if I

will continue myself in religion, I must invariably keep fast to the aim

uncertainness, so as to stay out upon the ocean? s deep? and still believe. ? [ 7 ]

Therefore faith by its really nature requires a deficiency of nonsubjective security. To convey

his construct of religion to even clearer, allow? s see the film analogy of religion

presented in Indiana Jones. When Indiana is traveling through all the trials of a

true truster on his manner to happen the Holy Grail he reaches a apparently uncross

able chasm and is merely given the direction that with religion he will be able

to step out and traverse the spread. A spring of religion is required. Now if Indiana

objectively knew when he foremost got to the chasm that there was a span at that place

which blended in with the chasm walls, that he could easy step across on,

so no religion would be required. He does non nevertheless happen out the aim

ground for his religion, until he has taken the hazard and exercised it. Faith merely

exists when there is no nonsubjective grounds. The greatest uncertainness green goodss

the greatest religion. Therefore Kierkegaard states that the Christian religion is the

purest religion, for there is no manner to of all time turn out it objectively and therefore it

gives? rise to the greatest grade of kernel because it is based upon the greatest

grade of uncertainty. ? [ 8 ] ? ? ? ? From

here we must now confront the inquiry as to whether or non Kierkegaard? s impressions

give rise to Nietzschian relativism, given this construct of truth? Nietzsche

provinces that? we should be unfastened to all positions, non merely our own. ? [ 9 ]

So Nietzsche leaves room for Kierkegaard? s theory and allows for him to keep

it, so the two positions are non sole from Nietzsche? s point of position. The

determination to hold religion is comparative to 1s ain pick and free will, something

that Nietzsche tells us to exert at every chance. For harmonizing to

Nietzsche? the moral Earth excessively, is round? [ 10 ]

Does Kierkegaard? s position nevertheless, prevent relativism? The construct would be

yes. Kierkegaard? s positions by their very footing in religion and passion require one

to pick a position and so hold faith in it, in this instance specifically, the position

that God exists, as truth. Nietzsche? s positions require that one semen to the

construct that there is no fixed truth, where as Kierkegaard? s beliefs in the

paradox of truth and the constructs of religion, require that we pick something

to passionately believe in, even if it is non the true religion in God, but the

heathen wisdom that Socrates held. One manner or another the model requires that

one clasp passionate belief and do determinations? finally based on passion and

non on reason. ? [ 11 ] ? If Nietzschian relativism is to go a

job, so one does non hold a passionate belief, and therefore has non

subscribed to the impressions of religion, hazard, and truth as Kierkegaard has outlined

them. For when you are a relativist, so you no longer hold passionate religion,

and if you no longer hold passionate religion so you no longer have truth, for

? passionate kernel is the grade of truth. ? [ 12 ] ? ? ? ? Kierkegaard? s

doctrine has a quality to it that makes it really appealing to a truster,

whether one is a truster in God or something else, it allows person to

warrant their religion in whatever it is they choose to hold faith in, be it God,

Allah, or heathen systems of religion. For harmonizing to Kierkegaard one merely has to

genuinely and passionately believe in something. An ability to believe, given by

few if any other existentialist theoretical models. Kierkegaard? s theory

therefore, gives power to the human head and the potency for happening truth of some

sort, in a existence that most of his colleges were offering no truth for, and

nil to believe in. It is this latent apprehension of the power of passion,

and the given ability to let one to believe in something, or person as a

agencies for happening truth, which prevents Kierkegaard from falling into the trap

of Nietzschian relativism given his construct of truth. Mentions Oaklander, Nathan. ? Existentialist

Doctrine? 2nd Ed. Prentice Hall Inc, NJ, USA. 1996. Wilks, Anna. Handout # 4 Kierkegaard,

? Either/Or. ? Wilks, Anna. Handout # 9 Kierkegaard,

? Reasoning Unscientific Postscript. ? Wilks, Anna. Handout # 7 Nietzsche,

? Selections. ? [ 1 ] Kierkegaard Handout, ? Reasoning

unscientific PS? [ 2 ] Ibid. [ 3 ] Oaklander

P.17. [ 4 ] Oaklander

P.18. [ 5 ] Ibid. P20. [ 6 ] Oaklander

P.18. [ 7 ] Oaklander. Phosphorus

18. [ 8 ] Ibid. P.19. [ 9 ] Handout, # 1

on Nietzche. [ 10 ] Ibid. [ 11 ] Oaklander.

P 19. [ 12 ] Oaklander.

P.17.