Advertisement

Continental Philosophy Review

, Volume 42, Issue 2, pp 221–248 | Cite as

Kierkegaard’s case for the irrelevance of philosophy

  • Antony Aumann
Article

Abstract

This paper provides an account of Kierkegaard’s central criticism of the Danish Hegelians. Contrary to recent scholarship, it is argued that this criticism has a substantive theoretical basis and is not merely personal or ad hominem in nature. In particular, Kierkegaard is seen as criticizing the Hegelians for endorsing an unacceptable form of intellectual elitism, one that gives them pride of place in the realm of religion by dint of their philosophical knowledge. A problem arises, however, because this criticism threatens to apply to Kierkegaard himself. It is shown that Kierkegaard manages to escape this problem by virtue of the humorous aspect of his work.

Keywords

Kierkegaard Hegel Hegelianism Faith Reason Equality 

References

  1. Adams, Robert M. 2005. Kierkegaard’s arguments against objective reasoning in religion. In Ten essential texts in the philosophy of religion, ed. S.M. Kahn, 321–335. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Allison, Henry E. 1967. Christianity and nonsense. Review of Metaphysics 20 (3): 432–460.Google Scholar
  3. Baur, F.C. 1835. Die christliche Gnosis oder die christliche Religionsphilosophie in ihrer geschichtlichen Entwicklung. Tübingen: Dsiander.Google Scholar
  4. Beiser, Frederick C. 1987. The fate of reason: German philosophy from Kant to Fichte. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Beiser, Frederick C. 2005. Hegel. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. Bornemann, J.A. 1839. Af Martensen: de autonomia conscientiae. Tidsskrift for Litteratur og Kritik 1: 1–40.Google Scholar
  7. Conant, James. 1993. Kierkegaard, Wittgenstein, and nonsense. In Pursuits of reason: Essays in honor of Stanley Cavell, ed. T. Cohen, P. Guyer, and H. Putnam, 195–224. Lubbock: Texas Tech University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Conant, James. 1995. Putting two and two together: Kierkegaard, Wittgenstein and the point of view for their works as authors. In Philosophy and the grammar of religious belief, ed. T. Tessin and M. von der Ruhr, 248–331. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
  9. Evans, C. Stephen. 1983. Kierkegaard’s “fragments” and “postscript”: The religious philosophy of Johannes Climacus. Amherst, NY: Humanity Books.Google Scholar
  10. Evans, C. Stephen. 1992. Passionate reason: Making sense of Kierkegaard’s “philosophical fragments”. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Evans, C. Stephen. 2004. Kierkegaard’s ethic of love: Divine commands and moral obligations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Fackre, Gabriel, Ronald H. Nash, and John Sanders (eds.). 1995. What about those who have never heard? Three views on the destiny of the unevangelized. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.Google Scholar
  13. Ferreira, M. Jamie. 1994. The point outside the world: Kierkegaard and Wittgenstein on nonsense, paradox, and religion. Religious Studies 30: 29–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Forster, Michael N. 1998. Hegel’s idea of a phenomenology of spirit. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  15. Geivett, R. Douglas, and W. Gary Phillips. 1996. A particularist view: An evidentialist approach. In Four views on salvation in a pluralistic world, ed. John Hick, et al., 211–245. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.Google Scholar
  16. Gouwens, David J. 2007. Kierkegaard on the universally religious and the specifically Christian as resources for interreligious conversation. In Kierkegaard and religious pluralism: Papers of the AAR Kierkegaard, Religion, and Culture Group, and the Søren Kierkegaard Society, ed. Andrew J. Burgess, 83–104. Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock Publishers.Google Scholar
  17. Hegel, G.W.F. 1977. Phenomenology of spirit (trans: Miller, A.V.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Hick, John, Dennis L. Okholm, and Timothy R. Phillips (eds.). 1996. Four views on salvation in a pluralistic world. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.Google Scholar
  19. Jegstrup, Elsebet. 2004. Introduction to The new Kierkegaard. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Kierkegaard, Søren. 1967–1978. Søren Kierkegaard’s journals and papers (ed. and trans: Hong, E.H., H.V. Hong, and G. Malantschuk), 7 vols. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Kierkegaard, Søren. 1985. Philosophical fragments and Johannes Climacus (ed. and trans: Hong, E.H. and H.V. Hong). Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Kierkegaard, Søren. 1990. Judge for yourself! In For self-examination and judge for yourself! (ed. and trans: Hong, E.H. and H.V. Hong). Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Kierkegaard, Søren. 1991. Practice in Christianity (ed. and trans: Hong, E.H. and H.V. Hong). Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Kierkegaard, Søren. 1992. Concluding unscientific postscript to “philosophical fragments” (ed. and trans: Hong, E.H. and H.V. Hong). Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Kierkegaard, Søren. 1993a. Three discourses on imagined occasions (ed. and trans: Hong, E.H. and H.V. Hong). Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Kierkegaard, Søren. 1993b. Upbuilding discourses in various spirits (ed. and trans: Hong, E.H. and H.V. Hong). Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Kierkegaard, Søren. 1997a. Christian discourses and the crisis and a crisis in the life of an actress (ed. and trans: Hong, E.H. and H.V. Hong). Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Kierkegaard, Søren. 1997b. Without authority (ed. and trans: Hong, E.H. and H.V. Hong). Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Kierkegaard, Søren. 1998. The moment (No. 1–10). In The moment and late writings (ed. and trans: Hong, E.H. and H.V. Hong). Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  30. King, Karen L. 2003. What is gnosticism? Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Koch, Carl Henrik. 2004. Den Danske Idealisme. Copenhagen: Gyldendal.Google Scholar
  32. Lippitt, John. 1997. A funny thing happened to me on the way to salvation: Climacus as humorist in Kierkegaard’s concluding unscientific postscript. Religious Studies 33: 181–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lippitt, John. 2000a. Humour and irony in Kierkegaard’s thought. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
  34. Lippitt, John. 2000b. On authority and revocation: Climacus as humorist. In Anthropology and authority: Essays on Søren Kierkegaard, ed. Houe, P., G.D. Marino, and S.H. Rossel, 107–117. Internationale Forschungen zur Allgemeinen und Vergleichenden Literaturwissenschaft. Atlanta: Rodopi.Google Scholar
  35. Lippitt, John, and Daniel Hutto. 1998. Making sense of nonsense: Kierkegaard and Wittgenstein. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 98: 263–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Martensen, Hans L. 1997. The autonomy of human self-consciousness in modern dogmatic theology. In Between Hegel and Kierkegaard: Hans L. Martensen’s philosophy of religion (ed. and trans: Thompson C.L. and D.J. Kangas). Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press.Google Scholar
  37. Martensen, Hans L. 2004. Rationalism, supernaturalism and the Principium Exclusi Medii. In Kierkegaard studies yearbook, ed. N.J. Cappelørn, H. Deuser, and J. Stewart (trans: Stewart, J.), 587–598. New York: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  38. Muench, Paul. 2003. The Socratic method of Kierkegaard’s pseudonym Johannes Climacus: Indirect communication and the art of “taking away”. In Søren Kierkegaard and the word(s): Essays on hermeneutics and communication, ed. P. Houe and G.D. Marino, 139–150. Copenhagen: C.A. Reitzel.Google Scholar
  39. Muench, Paul. 2007. Understanding Kierkegaard’s Johannes Climacus in the postscript: Mirror of the reader’s faults or Socratic exemplar? In Kierkegaard studies yearbook, ed. N.J. Cappelørn, H. Deuser, and J. Stewart, 424–440. New York: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  40. Mynster, J.P. [1839] 2004. Rationalism, supernaturalism. In Kierkegaard studies yearbook, ed. N.J. Cappelørn, H. Deuser, and J. Stewart (trans: Stewart, J.), 570–582. New York: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  41. O’Regan, Cyril. 2001. Gnostic return in modernity. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  42. Outka, Gene. 1982. Equality and individuality: Thoughts on two themes in Kierkegaard. The Journal of Religious Ethics 10 (2): 171–203.Google Scholar
  43. Outka, Gene. 1987. Equality and the fate of theism in modern culture. The Journal of Religion 67 (3): 275–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Plutarch. 1967–1984. Moralia (ed. and trans: Babbitt, F.C.), 15 vols. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Possen, David D. 2007. F.C. Baur: On the similarity and dissimilarity between Jesus and Socrates. In Kierkegaard and his German contemporaries, ed. J. Stewart, 22–38. Kierkegaard research: Sources, reception and resources, vol. 6, tome 2. Aldershot, England: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  46. Roberts, Robert C. 1980. Thinking subjectively. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 11 (2): 71–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Rudd, Anthony J. 2000. On straight and crooked readings: Why the postscript does not self-destruct. In Anthropology and authority: Essays on Søren Kierkegaard, ed. P. Houe, G.D. Marino, and S.H. Rossel, 119–126. Internationale Forschungen zur Allgemeinen und Vergleichenden Literaturwissenschaft. Atlanta: Rodopi.Google Scholar
  48. Schiørring, J.H. 1982. Martensen. In Kierkegaard’s teachers, ed. N. Thulstrup and M.M. Thulstrup. Bibliotheca Kierkegaardiana, vol. 12. Copenhagen: C.A. Reitzel.Google Scholar
  49. Stewart, Jon. 2003. Kierkegaard’s relations to Hegel reconsidered. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Stewart, Jon. 2004a. The paradox and the criticism of Hegelian mediation in philosophical fragments. In Kierkegaard studies yearbook, ed. N.J. Cappelørn, H. Deuser, and J. Stewart, 184–207. New York: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  51. Stewart, Jon. 2004b. Introduction to Mynster’s “rationalism, supernaturalism”. In Kierkegaard studies yearbook, ed. N.J. Cappelørn, H. Deuser, and J. Stewart, 565–569. New York: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  52. Stewart, Jon. 2004c. Introduction to Martensen’s “rationalism, supernaturalism, and the Principium Exclusi Medii”. In Kierkegaard studies yearbook, ed. N.J. Cappelørn, H. Deuser, and J. Stewart, 583–587. New York: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  53. Thulstrup, Niels. 1980. Kierkegaard’s relation to Hegel (trans: Stengren, G.L.). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  54. Tiessen, Terrance. 2007. Gnosticism as Heresy: The response of Irenaeus. Didaskalia 18 (1): 31–48.Google Scholar
  55. Waaler, Arild, and Christian Fink Tolstrup. 2004. Philosophical fragments—in response to the debate between Mynster and Martensen. In Kierkegaard studies yearbook, ed. N.J. Cappelørn, H. Deuser, and J. Stewart, 208–234. New York: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  56. Weston, Michael. 1999. Evading the issue: The strategy of Kierkegaard’s postscript. Philosophical Investigations 22 (1): 35–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyThe Ohio State UniversityColumbusUSA

Personalised recommendations