(Originally Written October 22, 2009 in The Journal)
OK Ashley, you've heard my sob stories about loneliness and depression and this new unrequited love. You've heard of the destruction of my body, the breaking of my heart and the crushing of my soul. But now let's witness my glory - my mind. How about some philosophy.
Dreadful Freedom
Marjorie Grene
Chapter 1 - Why existentialism
Existentialists insist on their essential optimism that man makes himself.
Existentialism in a sense is a reaction against the speculative idealism of Hegel.
Existentialism comes from Kierkegaard's phrase "existential dialectic".
In existentialism, existence is prior to essence. This means that the consciousness of one's own soul comes before anything else becomes clear.
Existentialism revolts against system building and focuses on more pressing human concerns.
The relation of cause to effect is measured by the efficacy of an act.
The relation of cause and effect is indistinguishable from means and end.
Sartre and Dewey (pragmatists) criticize philosophies of the past for stabilizing the norms that kept ruling parties in power.
Pragmatism and existentialism are similar in aim at first glance.
Sartre resets values from past to future. The past value is an emphasis on the bourgeois privilege whereas if values are set with the future in mind it leads to revolution.
Pragmatism fails though because fact cannot produce value. Science cannot distinguish between good and evil.
Value for Sartre lies between the way things are and the way things ought to be. The success of man (and failure) lies between the thing as it is and the thing as it should be.
The perception between the way things are and the way they should be is the fundamental insight of existential philosophy.
Values are created solely by the acts of man. What they take as good or bad, beautiful or ugly in their quest to give meaning to a meaningless world.
Positivistic ethics aims at being descriptive not normative.
As in Kantian ethics, existentialists claim there is no good or evil apart from will and there is no will without freedom.
Existentialism does not derive values from mere facts.
Some existentialists demand a return to faith in the Christian God as a necessary way out of our present moral chaos (Marcel & Kierkegaard).
Atheistic existentialists however claim that the return to the Christian God is removing the freedom of man and basing values once again on facts, though these facts are not sense-data but cosmic in origin.
Chapter 2: Soren Kierkegaard: The self against the system
The aim of Kierkegaard, his one problem was: to find out where the misunderstanding lies between speculation and Christianity.
Kierkegaard believed that the misunderstanding had its roots in the nature of personal existence.
Kierkegaard's work has a slight anti-scientific tone but it is really a revolt against Hegelian speculation.
Camus had a very strong anti-scientific tone.
Kierkegaard worries that by focusing on physiology and explaining the whole man in its scope will cause man to lose sight of the important field of ethics.
Kierkegaard argues that the system in never capable of explaining existence until it is complete and thus becoming timeless. Existence as it is happening is never complete and thus, the system is incapable of explaining existence.
Kierkegaard criticizes the systematizers by claiming that they build a palace to live next door in the barn.
The system builders acquire far flung knowledge and ignore the simple understanding of one's self, which is the only important understand.
The system, in its grandeur is deceiving. It uses wordy logical fallacies to appear logical.
Kierkegaard does not propound an orthodox form of Christianity. He denies any "objective truth of Christianity", instead stating the whole problem for every serious Christian is their own path to faith.
Kierkegaard focuses on the inwardness of the subjective journey of the one real entity (the individual) to the infinite being, known by faith.
Kierkegaard turns from the impersonal and trivial truths (though consistent) to the passionate truth realized only subjectively and meaningful. This truth is meaningful because it is contradictory.
By embracing total subjectivity, Kierkegaard renounced all abstraction and left only contradiction and paradox. Since abstraction is gone one cannot transfer through words one's experience to another. paradox is the only way and this is indirect communication.
Philosophy for Kierkegaard, like Kant is focused on the question, what is man? It deals with human problems, not the essence of cosmic reality.
Kierkegaard relies heavily on Plato, not Neo-Platonism, but the Dialogues themselves.
Kierkegaard states we live, or ought to live, in the awareness that here and now may be our last moment.
Existentialism focuses on the contingency of life.
Existentialism pays close attention to the meaninglessness that continually underlies the significance in human life.
Showing posts with label Dewey. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Dewey. Show all posts
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Monday, January 7, 2008
Notes on "Art as Experience"
(Originally Written January 7, 2008 in the Journal)
"Art as Experience"
By: John Dewey
"Experience occurs continuously".
An experience occurs when it has run its course. Experience always happens, but an experience has a beginning and a consummation.
When we have an experience we experience a continual flow of parts. Each part blends to make a whole, yet each is distinct in spite of a continuous whole.
An experience has unity.
It has a movement, a beginning, anticipation, and conclusion. Each are fluid parts of the whole.
An experience has its own aesthetic quality.
"Art as Experience"
By: John Dewey
"Experience occurs continuously".
An experience occurs when it has run its course. Experience always happens, but an experience has a beginning and a consummation.
When we have an experience we experience a continual flow of parts. Each part blends to make a whole, yet each is distinct in spite of a continuous whole.
An experience has unity.
It has a movement, a beginning, anticipation, and conclusion. Each are fluid parts of the whole.
An experience has its own aesthetic quality.
Tuesday, December 25, 2007
Aesthetics - What is Beauty? What is Art?
(Originally Written on December 25, 2007 in the Journal)
Aesthetics - What is Beauty? What is Art?
Part I: What is Beauty?
Questions for consideration:
1) Is beauty subjective, objective, or a combination thereof?
2) What is taste?
Part II: Explore different mediums, define art (as a language?)
Research Topics
Immanuel Kant
David Hume
Ludwig Wittgenstein
John Dewey
Leo Tolstoy
Plato
Nelson Goodman
Arthur C. Danto
Martin Heidegger
Jerrold Levinson
Terry Eagleton
Michel Foucault
Friedrich Nietzsche
Aristotle
Edmund Burke
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel
Topics: mediums, perception of art, why create?
"Of the Standard of Taste"
By: David Hume
It is useful for us to seek a "standard of taste".
A standard of taste is "a rule by which the various sentiments of men may be reconciled".
Aesthetics - What is Beauty? What is Art?
Part I: What is Beauty?
Questions for consideration:
1) Is beauty subjective, objective, or a combination thereof?
2) What is taste?
Part II: Explore different mediums, define art (as a language?)
Research Topics
Immanuel Kant
David Hume
Ludwig Wittgenstein
John Dewey
Leo Tolstoy
Plato
Nelson Goodman
Arthur C. Danto
Martin Heidegger
Jerrold Levinson
Terry Eagleton
Michel Foucault
Friedrich Nietzsche
Aristotle
Edmund Burke
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel
Topics: mediums, perception of art, why create?
"Of the Standard of Taste"
By: David Hume
It is useful for us to seek a "standard of taste".
A standard of taste is "a rule by which the various sentiments of men may be reconciled".
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
Class notes on Hegelian Aesthetics
(Originally written February 27, 2007 in Book 16)
Hegel (1770-1832)
Last of the German Idealists
In order to do philosophy one must have a coherent framework.
Philosophy is an aspect of God's self-conscious.
Spirit is the ultimate reality.
"Rational is the real and the real is the rational".
Art is one of the three modes of expressing the Absolute Spirit:
1. Art
2. Religion
3. Philosophy
To understand Absolute Spirit one must first understand:
1) Subjective Spirit - known introspectively
2) Objective Spirit - the concrete world is spirit objectified
Dialectical Method
Thesis
Antithesis
Synthesis
The Dialectical method is how Hegel understood all phenomena.
Art precedes from Spirit. Art is part of the absolute's self-manifestation of thought.
Inspiration is a subjective thing in art, but the expression of that inspiration through the work of art is an objectification of a subjective inspiration.
Art is aiming at unifying the subjective and objective
Three types of Art:
Symbolic - sensors element dominates
Romantic - ideas dominate the sensuous part
Classical - a harmony of idea and sensuous part
Architecture is the paradigm of symbolic art.
Sculpture is the paradigm of classical art.
Romantic art is the quintessential art of Christendom, the true Religion.
Art is wasting its time if it is solely imitating nature.
The purpose of art is transcendent. Art is a way spirit is getting to know itself.
Hegelianism continues on through:
1. Marxism
2. Process Theory
3. John Dewey
Dewey held each art form has its own language.
Dewey states that since art always challenges conventions art is essentially liberal and is about producing something new and different.
Hegel (1770-1832)
Last of the German Idealists
In order to do philosophy one must have a coherent framework.
Philosophy is an aspect of God's self-conscious.
Spirit is the ultimate reality.
"Rational is the real and the real is the rational".
Art is one of the three modes of expressing the Absolute Spirit:
1. Art
2. Religion
3. Philosophy
To understand Absolute Spirit one must first understand:
1) Subjective Spirit - known introspectively
2) Objective Spirit - the concrete world is spirit objectified
Dialectical Method
Thesis
Antithesis
Synthesis
The Dialectical method is how Hegel understood all phenomena.
Art precedes from Spirit. Art is part of the absolute's self-manifestation of thought.
Inspiration is a subjective thing in art, but the expression of that inspiration through the work of art is an objectification of a subjective inspiration.
Art is aiming at unifying the subjective and objective
Three types of Art:
Symbolic - sensors element dominates
Romantic - ideas dominate the sensuous part
Classical - a harmony of idea and sensuous part
Architecture is the paradigm of symbolic art.
Sculpture is the paradigm of classical art.
Romantic art is the quintessential art of Christendom, the true Religion.
Art is wasting its time if it is solely imitating nature.
The purpose of art is transcendent. Art is a way spirit is getting to know itself.
Hegelianism continues on through:
1. Marxism
2. Process Theory
3. John Dewey
Dewey held each art form has its own language.
Dewey states that since art always challenges conventions art is essentially liberal and is about producing something new and different.
Sunday, December 3, 2006
Intellectual Virtues - Zagzebski
(Originally written December 3, 2006 in Book 12)
Virtues of the Mind
Linda Zagzebski
4: The two components of intellectual virtues
Each virtue is definable only in terms of its corresponding motivation.
4.1 The motivation for knowledge and reliable success
A distinction between moral and intellectual virtues can be made on their motivational basis.
Intellectual virtues are motivated by motivation for knowledge.
4.1.1 The motivation for knowledge
Hobbes and Spinoza connected the intellectual virtues with the passions and connected them all with a single motivation: self-preservation or power.
The motivation for knowledge is not a basic motive, it is a form of the motivation for power (Hobbes).
Hobbes states that cognitive virtues/vices arise from differences in motivation.
Deficiency in the desire for truth leads to cognitive vices like dogmatism (Ralph Waldo Emerson).
Hobbes implies that excess in desire for truth also leads to cognitive vices.
John Dewey believes that we ought to cultivate attitudes to foster better motivation to think more effectively.
Hilary Kornblith and Laurence BonJour introduced a motivational element into the notion of epistemic responsibility. Kornbluth stated, "An epistemically responsible agent desires to have true beliefs, and thus desires to have his beliefs produced by processes which lead to true beliefs, his actions are guided by these desires" (Zagzebski, 174).
James Montmarquet connected a large set of intellectual virtues with the desire for truth.
Montmarquet calls the desire for truth "epistemic conscientiousness" and claims that some intellectual virtues are out of this desire.
4.1.2 The success component of the intellectual virtues.
Ok, it's 2:30 am. I have a 1500-2000 word essay due at 9:00 am on pgs. 232-282. I'm on page 176. I'm screwed. I had such an emotional drain. I lost my wedding ring and then we spent hours looking for it. Thank God somebody found it.
Contemporary epistemology has focused extensively on the concept of a truth conducive belief-forming process.
There is a weak connection between motive and success. John Dewey made notice of it.
Intellectual virtues arise from and serve the motivation to know the truth and are crucial in activities like the arts, crafts and games.
The distinction between intellectual and moral virtues and the distinction between intellectual and practical virtues are both artificial.
Amelie Rarty pointed out that the utility and success of intellectual virtues depend on their becoming habits, but habits can become pathological and idiotic.
The motivation for intellectual virtue involves a desire for possessing true beliefs and avoiding false beliefs.
The reliabilist theory of truth-conduciveness focuses on it as a function of the number of true beliefs and on the proportion of true to false beliefs.
Zagzebski points out that processes that put forth a high percentage of false beliefs can still be truth-conducive if that process leads to a new way of discovering truth.
Self-correction is essential in Zagzebski's truth-conduciveness theory.
C.S. Pierce claims that the Scientific Method operates under a truth-conducive theory similar to Zagzebski's model.
4.1.3 Montmarquet on the virtues and truth conduciveness
Are intellectual virtues knowledge conducive?
"The motivation to know leads to the motivation to act in intellectually virtuous ways" (Zagzebski, 185).
Montmarquet objects to [the motion that intellectual virtues are truth conducive and intellectual vices are not] because:
1) Some intellectual virtues may not be truth conducive even though they would be desired by persons who love the truth
2) Some intellectual virtues not only seem to fail to lead to truth but aren't associated with the desire for truth
3) The history of ideas does not fit with this
4) some vices may arise out of desire for knowledge
5) Some intellectual vices appear to be truth conducive
I'm going to skip to what I need right now. Pg. 187-231 need to be read still.
pg 232 - This is a quick, not through reading
6. The definition of Deontic Concepts
Acts and beliefs arise from moral and intellectual traits
An act is right because it is the sort of act a virtuous person might do according to pure virtue-theory.
6.1 Right acts, justified beliefs
"A right act is what a person who is virtuously motivated, and who has the understanding of the particular situation that a virtuous person would have, might do in like circumstances. A wrong act is what a person who is virtuously motivated, and who has the understanding of the particular situation that a virtuous person would have, would not do in like circumstances. A moral duty is what a person who is virtuously motivated and who has the understanding of the particular situation that a virtuous person would have, would do in like circumstances. That is to say, some thing is a duty if and only if it is wrong not to do it" (Zagzebski, 235)
Virtues of the Mind
Linda Zagzebski
4: The two components of intellectual virtues
Each virtue is definable only in terms of its corresponding motivation.
4.1 The motivation for knowledge and reliable success
A distinction between moral and intellectual virtues can be made on their motivational basis.
Intellectual virtues are motivated by motivation for knowledge.
4.1.1 The motivation for knowledge
Hobbes and Spinoza connected the intellectual virtues with the passions and connected them all with a single motivation: self-preservation or power.
The motivation for knowledge is not a basic motive, it is a form of the motivation for power (Hobbes).
Hobbes states that cognitive virtues/vices arise from differences in motivation.
Deficiency in the desire for truth leads to cognitive vices like dogmatism (Ralph Waldo Emerson).
Hobbes implies that excess in desire for truth also leads to cognitive vices.
John Dewey believes that we ought to cultivate attitudes to foster better motivation to think more effectively.
Hilary Kornblith and Laurence BonJour introduced a motivational element into the notion of epistemic responsibility. Kornbluth stated, "An epistemically responsible agent desires to have true beliefs, and thus desires to have his beliefs produced by processes which lead to true beliefs, his actions are guided by these desires" (Zagzebski, 174).
James Montmarquet connected a large set of intellectual virtues with the desire for truth.
Montmarquet calls the desire for truth "epistemic conscientiousness" and claims that some intellectual virtues are out of this desire.
4.1.2 The success component of the intellectual virtues.
Ok, it's 2:30 am. I have a 1500-2000 word essay due at 9:00 am on pgs. 232-282. I'm on page 176. I'm screwed. I had such an emotional drain. I lost my wedding ring and then we spent hours looking for it. Thank God somebody found it.
Contemporary epistemology has focused extensively on the concept of a truth conducive belief-forming process.
There is a weak connection between motive and success. John Dewey made notice of it.
Intellectual virtues arise from and serve the motivation to know the truth and are crucial in activities like the arts, crafts and games.
The distinction between intellectual and moral virtues and the distinction between intellectual and practical virtues are both artificial.
Amelie Rarty pointed out that the utility and success of intellectual virtues depend on their becoming habits, but habits can become pathological and idiotic.
The motivation for intellectual virtue involves a desire for possessing true beliefs and avoiding false beliefs.
The reliabilist theory of truth-conduciveness focuses on it as a function of the number of true beliefs and on the proportion of true to false beliefs.
Zagzebski points out that processes that put forth a high percentage of false beliefs can still be truth-conducive if that process leads to a new way of discovering truth.
Self-correction is essential in Zagzebski's truth-conduciveness theory.
C.S. Pierce claims that the Scientific Method operates under a truth-conducive theory similar to Zagzebski's model.
4.1.3 Montmarquet on the virtues and truth conduciveness
Are intellectual virtues knowledge conducive?
"The motivation to know leads to the motivation to act in intellectually virtuous ways" (Zagzebski, 185).
Montmarquet objects to [the motion that intellectual virtues are truth conducive and intellectual vices are not] because:
1) Some intellectual virtues may not be truth conducive even though they would be desired by persons who love the truth
2) Some intellectual virtues not only seem to fail to lead to truth but aren't associated with the desire for truth
3) The history of ideas does not fit with this
4) some vices may arise out of desire for knowledge
5) Some intellectual vices appear to be truth conducive
I'm going to skip to what I need right now. Pg. 187-231 need to be read still.
pg 232 - This is a quick, not through reading
6. The definition of Deontic Concepts
Acts and beliefs arise from moral and intellectual traits
An act is right because it is the sort of act a virtuous person might do according to pure virtue-theory.
6.1 Right acts, justified beliefs
"A right act is what a person who is virtuously motivated, and who has the understanding of the particular situation that a virtuous person would have, might do in like circumstances. A wrong act is what a person who is virtuously motivated, and who has the understanding of the particular situation that a virtuous person would have, would not do in like circumstances. A moral duty is what a person who is virtuously motivated and who has the understanding of the particular situation that a virtuous person would have, would do in like circumstances. That is to say, some thing is a duty if and only if it is wrong not to do it" (Zagzebski, 235)
Monday, April 24, 2006
Class Notes on Hegel
(Originally Written April 24, 2006 in 3 Subject Book)
History of Philosophy II
Hegel
-agrees with Plato that knowledge is acquired through a dialectical method
-Yet, Plato's and Hegel's dialectical methodologies vastly differ
Existence (apparent & publicly manifest)
Essence (the hidden and internal)
The in between of existence and essence is actuality
example: The in between of Being and Non-Being is becoming
Master-Slave Dialectic
-Slave (labor, objectification)
-Master (desire, consumption)
-There is conflict and domination between the two
-The product of the slave's labor and the master's desire leads to the object being created
Political Philosophy:
Three moments of the Ethical
1) Family
2) Civil Society
3) The State
History is teleological: it has a goal, which for Hegel, is freedom
The Hegelian & Christian God
Being itself, the totality (Hegel) v. Infinite being that is still distinct from the world (Christian)
Self-thinking thought (Hegel) v. Spirit with thoughts distinct from itself (Christian)
Immanence without transcendence (Hegel) v. Immanence with transcendence (Christian)
God of process of becoming (Hegel) v. Primordial being, which is immutable (Christian)
Criticisms of Hegel
-Too abstract
-Too esoteric
-Not grounded enough in experience
-Hegel's theology is not Biblically backed
-Dialectical method can justify things that are problematic (Dewey & Marx)
History of Philosophy II
Hegel
-agrees with Plato that knowledge is acquired through a dialectical method
-Yet, Plato's and Hegel's dialectical methodologies vastly differ
Existence (apparent & publicly manifest)
Essence (the hidden and internal)
The in between of existence and essence is actuality
example: The in between of Being and Non-Being is becoming
Master-Slave Dialectic
-Slave (labor, objectification)
-Master (desire, consumption)
-There is conflict and domination between the two
-The product of the slave's labor and the master's desire leads to the object being created
Political Philosophy:
Three moments of the Ethical
1) Family
2) Civil Society
3) The State
History is teleological: it has a goal, which for Hegel, is freedom
The Hegelian & Christian God
Being itself, the totality (Hegel) v. Infinite being that is still distinct from the world (Christian)
Self-thinking thought (Hegel) v. Spirit with thoughts distinct from itself (Christian)
Immanence without transcendence (Hegel) v. Immanence with transcendence (Christian)
God of process of becoming (Hegel) v. Primordial being, which is immutable (Christian)
Criticisms of Hegel
-Too abstract
-Too esoteric
-Not grounded enough in experience
-Hegel's theology is not Biblically backed
-Dialectical method can justify things that are problematic (Dewey & Marx)
Tuesday, December 20, 2005
Dreadful Freedom - Marjorie Grene
(Originally written December 20, 2005 in Book 1)
Dreadful Freedom
Marjorie Grene
1948
Chapter 1 - Why Existentialism?
Existentialism is (in some sense) a reaction against Hegel.
Existentialism's first principle is that existence is prior to essence.
Existentialism can come off as a more complex version of pragmatism. Both attempt to shift value from the past to the future. Dewey and Sartre have similar shifts of the definition of value. However, Sartre proposes a philosophy that supports a constant state of revolution, whereas Dewey would replace the old dogma with an emphasis on maintaining a progressive society (this is still dogmatic, just less precise).
Both systems state existence before essence, but pragmatism moves philosophy from speculation to practical outputs; whereas existentialism focuses in on a stream of consciousness. Pragmatism uses science; existentialism uses sense-data to promote scientific research.
"It is a different kind of existence whose priority to essence is proclaimed by the two philosophies" (Green, 9).
Pragmatism fails to recognize that pure facts and pure science cannot produce values. It can only add or detract from them.
Some existentialists believe that a return to faith in the Christian God is "a possible and even necessary way out of our present moral chaos" (Green, 13). The atheistic existentialist however contends that values must be founded on objective facts.
Both a return to God and a value system based on facts "seek to escape our ultimate, inexplicable and terrible responsibility for the values that we live by, by giving them a cosmic rather than a human... source" (Green, 13).
Chapter 2 - Soren Kierkegaard: the self against the system
Kierkegaard's problem was to find out what the misunderstanding was between speculation and Christianity. He contends that the problem is rooted in individual existence. (He uses the term 'speculation' as understood in Hegelian speculation).
He condemns empirical science: natural science is dangerous, especially physiology's attempt to take over ethics. He states that it is bad to treat ethics like a natural science, to make it an illusion of statistical averages.
He asks, "Do I need to know how the movement in the nervous system works in order to believe in God and love men?" (Green, 16).
Kierkegaard is afraid that by embracing natural science we will lose ourselves to it and forget that which is important, God.
Kierkegaard contends that the only important thing worth understanding is one's self.
Kierkegaard is limited by the Christian paradox: man's experience is nothingness before God, but it still fulfills his existence.
He contends there is no objective truth of Christianity.
He states that the problem for the sincere Christian is subjective. It is not to build a theological system, but to find the way to heaven for themselves. The Christian is only aware of his own personal existence and the existence of God.
Kierkegaard focuses philosophy into the question: "what is man?"
What is man?
-What can I know?
-What ought I do?
-What may I hope?
Kierkegaard attempted to fuse Plato & Christianity.
Kierkegaard and modern existentialism both held to the awareness that here and now may be the last moment as a central idea.
"Pragmatism is afraid to face evil" (Green, 27). It is also afraid of facing the ultimate puzzle of individual humanity.
Kierkegaard drowns himself in paradoxes and word plays. Some of his most profound passages are difficult to decide whether their profoundness lies in an amazingly brilliant insight or such incredibly word trickery.
Dreadful Freedom
Marjorie Grene
1948
Chapter 1 - Why Existentialism?
Existentialism is (in some sense) a reaction against Hegel.
Existentialism's first principle is that existence is prior to essence.
Existentialism can come off as a more complex version of pragmatism. Both attempt to shift value from the past to the future. Dewey and Sartre have similar shifts of the definition of value. However, Sartre proposes a philosophy that supports a constant state of revolution, whereas Dewey would replace the old dogma with an emphasis on maintaining a progressive society (this is still dogmatic, just less precise).
Both systems state existence before essence, but pragmatism moves philosophy from speculation to practical outputs; whereas existentialism focuses in on a stream of consciousness. Pragmatism uses science; existentialism uses sense-data to promote scientific research.
"It is a different kind of existence whose priority to essence is proclaimed by the two philosophies" (Green, 9).
Pragmatism fails to recognize that pure facts and pure science cannot produce values. It can only add or detract from them.
Some existentialists believe that a return to faith in the Christian God is "a possible and even necessary way out of our present moral chaos" (Green, 13). The atheistic existentialist however contends that values must be founded on objective facts.
Both a return to God and a value system based on facts "seek to escape our ultimate, inexplicable and terrible responsibility for the values that we live by, by giving them a cosmic rather than a human... source" (Green, 13).
Chapter 2 - Soren Kierkegaard: the self against the system
Kierkegaard's problem was to find out what the misunderstanding was between speculation and Christianity. He contends that the problem is rooted in individual existence. (He uses the term 'speculation' as understood in Hegelian speculation).
He condemns empirical science: natural science is dangerous, especially physiology's attempt to take over ethics. He states that it is bad to treat ethics like a natural science, to make it an illusion of statistical averages.
He asks, "Do I need to know how the movement in the nervous system works in order to believe in God and love men?" (Green, 16).
Kierkegaard is afraid that by embracing natural science we will lose ourselves to it and forget that which is important, God.
Kierkegaard contends that the only important thing worth understanding is one's self.
Kierkegaard is limited by the Christian paradox: man's experience is nothingness before God, but it still fulfills his existence.
He contends there is no objective truth of Christianity.
He states that the problem for the sincere Christian is subjective. It is not to build a theological system, but to find the way to heaven for themselves. The Christian is only aware of his own personal existence and the existence of God.
Kierkegaard focuses philosophy into the question: "what is man?"
What is man?
-What can I know?
-What ought I do?
-What may I hope?
Kierkegaard attempted to fuse Plato & Christianity.
Kierkegaard and modern existentialism both held to the awareness that here and now may be the last moment as a central idea.
"Pragmatism is afraid to face evil" (Green, 27). It is also afraid of facing the ultimate puzzle of individual humanity.
Kierkegaard drowns himself in paradoxes and word plays. Some of his most profound passages are difficult to decide whether their profoundness lies in an amazingly brilliant insight or such incredibly word trickery.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)