Either/Or (Danish: Enten - Eller ) is the first work published by Danish philosopher SÃÆ'¸ren Kierkegaard. Appearing in two volumes in 1843 under the pseudonymous editorship of Victor Eremita (Latin for "the victorious hermit"), this describes the theory of human existence, characterized by the distinction between styles aesthetic life that is hedonistic and essential and ethical life, which is based on commitment.
Either/Or describes two views of life. Each view of life is written and represented by a fictitious fictitious writer, with the prose of works reflecting and depending on the view of life being discussed. For example, the aesthetic life view is written in short essay form, with poetic and satirical images, discussing aesthetic topics such as music, seduction, drama, and beauty. The ethical life view is written as two long letters, with a more argumentative and controlled prose, discussing moral responsibility, critical reflection, and marriage. Book views are neither neatly summarized, but are expressed as life experiences embodied by pseudonymous writers. The main concern of this book is the primal question Aristotle asks, "How should we live?" His book is certainly informed by Epictetus; "Consider first, human, what is the problem, and what is your own nature.If you are going to be a wrestler, consider your shoulders, your back, your thighs, for different people made for different things.Do you think that you can act like you do and become a philosopher, that you can eat, drink, angry, dissatisfied, like you now? you must watch, you have to work, you have to get better of certain tastes, have to get out of you acquaintances, by your maids, laughed at by the people you meet, comes worse than others in everything - at the office, in honor, before the court.When you have fully considered all these things, approach, if you please-- that is, if, by parting from them, you have a mind to buy peace, freedom, and tranquility. If not, do not come here, no, like children, now become a philosopher, then a tax collector, then an orator, and then one of the Caesar's officers. These things are inconsistent. You have to be one person, good or bad. You must cult vate either your own or another external reason; apply yourself to things inside or outside you - that is, to be a philosopher or one of the masses. "His motto is from Plutarch," The deceived is wiser than the one who is not deceived. "
Aesthetics is the personal, subjective nature of existence, in which an individual lives and extracts pleasure from life only for himself. In this world, one has the highest and lowest possible. Ethics, on the other hand, is the realm of civilian life, where one's values ​​and identity are judged and sometimes replaced by an objective world. In simple terms, one can choose to remain unaware of everything that happens in the world, or to engage. More specifically, the ethical realm begins with a conscious effort to choose one's life, with the option of choosing. After all, however, an individual can go too far in this realm and forget his true self. Only faith can save individuals from these two opposite worlds. Either/Or concludes with a short sermon that suggests the nature of the religious environment, which Kierkegaard spends most of his publishing career in detail. Ultimately, Kierkegaard's challenge is that the reader "finds the second face hidden behind you see" in himself first, and then on others.
Video Either/Or
Konteks historis
After writing and defending his dissertation In the Concept of Irony with Continuous Reference for Socrates (1841), Kierkegaard left Copenhagen in October 1841 to spend the winter in Berlin. The main purpose of this visit was to attend a lecture by the German philosopher Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schelling, who was a prominent figure at the time. The lecture became a disappointment for many Schelling audience, including Mikhail Bakunin and Friedrich Engels, and Kierkegaard described it as "unbearable bullshit". During his stay, Kierkegaard worked on manuscripts for Either/Or , taking daily lessons to perfect the opera and game of Germany and which was attended, especially by Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart and Johann Wolfgang von Goethe. He returned to Copenhagen in March 1842 with a draft manuscript, completed in late 1842 and published in February 1843.
According to journal entries from 1846, Either/Or written "lock, stock, and barrel in eleven months" (" Rub og Stub, i 11 Maaneder "), from the "Diapsalmata" section in volume 'A' was written before that time.
The title Either/or is an affirmation of Aristotle's logic, especially modified by Johann Gottlieb Fichte and Immanuel Kant. What is the question, "Who am I?" a scientific question or one for a single individual to answer for himself or herself?
Fichte wrote in The Science of Knowledge The question has been asked, What is before I become self-conscious? The answer is, I am not at all, because I am not I. Ego only so far as it is self-conscious.... A proposition instead of A is not A will be recognized by everyone as something definite, and it can hardly be expected that everyone will ask for proof. our system is inferred from the proposition A = A. But such evidence is not possible. "
- Identity law (A = A; something identical to itself)
- Excluded middle law (whether A or not-A; something is something or not it, no third option)
- Noncontradictory law. (not both A and not-A; something can not be both true and not true at the same time)
In the work of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, The Science of Logic (1812), Hegel criticized Aristotle's classical logical laws for being static rather than dynamic and becoming and replacing them with his own dialectical logic. Hegel formulated an addendum for Aristotle's law:
- The law of identity is inaccurate because something is always more than itself
- Excluded laws are inaccurate because something can be itself and many others
- The non-contradictory law is inaccurate because everything exists itself and not itself
Kierkegaard spoke of Hegel's Logic metaphorically in 1844:
So when an author gives the last part of Logic "Actuality," he thus gets the advantage of making it appear that in logic, the highest has been achieved, or if one likes, the lowest. Meanwhile, the loss is clear, both logic and actuality are presented by placing an actuality in Logic. Actuality is not served as such, because contingency, which is an important part of the truth, is unacceptable in the field of logic.... If anyone is struggling to collect and collect all the weird, goblin-like goblins who are busy employees bringing the movement in Hegelian logic, the ages may be surprised to see that what is considered a witticisms discarded once played an important role. a role in logic, not as clever explanations and comments, but as the rulers of the movement, which make Hegel's logic into something magical and gives the logical leg of thought to move, without anyone being able to observe them. Concept of Anxiety , SÃÆ'¸ren Kierkegaard, Nichol's translation, p. 9-10, note 12
Kierkegaard argues that Hegel's philosophy does not humanize life by denying freedom and personal choice through neutralization 'either/or'. The dialectic structure makes existence too easy, in Hegel's theory, because the conflict is ultimately mediated and disappears automatically through a natural process that requires no individual choice other than the submission at the will of Idea or Geist. Kierkegaard sees this as the rejection of true selfhood rather than advocating the importance of personal responsibility and decision making.
Maps Either/Or
Structure
This book is Kierkegaard's first work written in a disguise, a practice he used during the first half of his career. In this case, four aliases are used:
- "Victor Eremita" - a fictitious composer and editor of texts, which he claims to have found in antique escritoire.
- "A" - the moniker given to the fictitious author of the first text ("Either") by Victor Eremita, whose real name he claims is unknown.
- B "Judge Vilhelm" - the fictitious author of the second text ("Or").
- "Johannes" - the fiction writer from the 'Either' section titled "The Diary of a Seducer" and Cordelia her lover.
I have half a mind to write a counter-piece for "The Seducer Diary." That would be a feminine figure: "The Courtesan's Diary." It would be a problem to describe such a character. Kierkegaard Journal and Paper , 4A 128
Kierkegaard published the second edition of either May 14, 1849, on the same day he published The Lily of the Field and Bird of the Air. Three devotional discourses. He published three books on the same day of October 16, 1843.
Either
The first volume, "Either", describes the phase of "aesthetic" existence. It contains a collection of papers, discovered by 'Victor Eremita' and written by 'A', "esthete."
The esthete, according to Kierkegaard's model, will eventually find itself in "despair", a psychological state (explored further in Kierkegaard's The Concept of Anxiety and The Sickness To To Death ) which results from the recognition of the limits of the aesthetic approach to life. Kierkegaard's "despair" is a rather analogous prejudice to existential anxiety. The natural reaction is to make the final "leap" into the second phase, "ethical", characterized as a phase in which rational choice and commitment replace the intermittent and inconsistent longing of aesthetic mode. In the end, for Kierkegaard, aesthetics and ethics are both replaced by the final phase which he calls "religious" mode. This is introduced later in Fear and Trembling .
Diapsalmata
The first part of Either is a collection of many pearl words, epigrams, anecdotes and reflections on the aesthetic mode of life. The word 'diapsalmata' is related to 'psalm', and means "restraint". It contains some of the most famous and poetic Kierkegaard lines, such as "What is a poet?", "Freedom of Speech" vs. "Freedom of Thinking", "chess that can not move", a tragic clown, and the laughter of the gods.
If someone reads this as written, they will show a constant movement from the outer poetic experience to the experience of humor inside. The movement from the outside to the inner is the theme in Kierkegaard's works.
Immediate Stages of Erotic, or Erotic Music
Essays that discuss the idea that music expresses the spirit of sensuality. 'A' evaluates Mozart The Marriage of Figaro , The Magic Flute and Don Giovanni , and Goethe's Faust . 'A' has taken on itself the task of proving, through Mozart's works, that "music is higher art, or more spiritual, than language". During this process he developed three erotic musical stages.
Here he made a difference between teasers like Don Juan, who belonged to the aesthetic category, and Faust, which belonged to the ethical category. "Don Juan's musicals enjoy the satisfaction of desire; Reflective Don Juan enjoys fraud, enjoying the ingenuity." Don Juan is divided between aesthetics and ethics. She lost in the diversity of the "1,003 women she had to go for". Faust just flirted with one woman. This section addresses theological questions. He asks if God tempts 1.003 people at a time or if he tempts one person at once to make believers. He also wrote about the appellant in this way:
Achim v. Arnim tells of a very different style, a teaser that belongs to the ethical category. About him, he uses his true expression, courage, and brevity almost the same as Mozart's stroke. She says she can talk to a woman that, if the devil catches her, she can lure herself out of it if she has a chance to talk to the devil's grandmother. This is a true teaser; Aesthetic interests here are also different, namely: how, methods. Obviously there is something very profound here, which may have escaped the attention of most people, in the Faust, which reproduces Don Juan, only tempts one girl, while Don Juan seduces hundreds; but this same girl too, in an intensive sense, is tempted and devastated very differently from all that Don Juan is deceived, simply because Faust, as a reproduction, belongs to the intellectual category. The power of such a teaser is speech, which is a lie.
A few days ago I heard a soldier talking to another about a third who betrayed a girl; he gave no lengthy explanation, but his expression was very pithy: "He escapes with such things with lies and things like that." This kind of seducer is very different from Don Juan, basically different from him, as can be seen from the fact that he and his activities are very immoral, and from an aesthetic point of view fall into an interesting category. The object of his desire is appropriate, when one considers it aesthetically, something more than just sensual. But what is this power, then Don Juan seduces? It is the desire, the energy of sensual desire. He desires every woman, all feminine, and therein lies the sensual imagining power by which he immediately decorates and overcomes its prey. The reaction beautifies and develops what is desired, which is flushed in beauty enhanced by its reflection. Because the angler fire with splendid splendor shines on even those who stand in the usual relationship with him, then Don Juan changes his feelings deeper into every girl, because his relationship with him is important. Therefore all the finite differences faded before him compared to the main thing: being a woman. He rejuvenates an older woman into a beautiful middle-aged woman; he matures the child instantly; everything that woman is her prey (pur che` porti la gonella, voi sapete quel che` fa).
Either/Or Part 1 , SÃÆ'¸ren Kierkegaard, 1843, Swenson, 1970 [1944], p. 98-99
Kierkegaard believes that the spiritual element is lost in Don Juan's work and in Faust's view of life. He wrote the following in 1845.
Assume that a woman as beautiful as the Queen's concubine and as smart as Sheba is willing to squander summa summarum the amount of hidden charms and manifestations of unworthy intelligence; assuming that on the same night one of my friends invited me to drink wine with her and clinked glass and smoked tobacco in the way of college students and enjoyed the old classics together - I would not think too long. How excited they are, they shout. Prudery? I do not think so. In my opinion, all this beauty and intelligence, together with love and eternity, have infinite value, but without that the relationship between men and women, which basically want to express this, is not comparable to a tobacco pipe. In my opinion, when falling in love is separated from this-please note, the eternal of falling in love-one can properly speak only of what is left, which will be the same as speaking like a midwife, who does not defeat about the bush, or like the dead and go which, "hunted spirit," does not feel the stimulus. The comics that action in vaudeville range in four numbers and eight shillings, and it's the same here as well. When falling in love - that is, eternal in falling in love - nothing, then erotic, despite all possible intelligence, revolves around what becomes bruised because of the spirit of qua wants to have an ambiguous engagement with me t. The comic that a man who suffered a mental disorder took a piece of granite and took it around him because he thought it was money, and in the same way it was a comic that Don Juan had 1003 mistresses, because the numbers just show that they have no value. Therefore, one must remain in his ability to use the word "love." When there is a need, one should not avoid using the descriptive terms used by both the Bible and Holberg, but none should be so superclever that people believe that intelligence is a composing factor, because it is something but an erotic relationship. SÃÆ'¸ren Kierkegaard, Stages of Life , Hong, p. 292-293
Essay read before Symparanekromenoi
The next three sections are lectures from 'A' to 'Symparanekromenoi', club or fellowship of the dead who practice the art of posthumous paper.
The first essay, which deals with ancient and modern tragedies, is called the "Tragic Ancient Motif as Reflected in Modern". Again he writes about aspects in and out of tragedy. Regret can be displayed on stage? What about sadness and pain? Which is easier to describe? He also discussed guilt, sin, fear, compassion, and responsibility in what could be considered the shadow of Fear and Dread and Repetition . He then wrote a modern interpretation of Antigone that leads to The Concept of Anxiety .
Come closer to me, Symparanekromenoi's dear brothers; near me when I send my tragic hero into the world, when I give the daughter the sadness of the dowry in pain as a wedding present. He is my creation, but the outline is still vague, the shape is so vague, so each of you is free to imagine it as you wish, and each of you can love it in your own way. He is my creation, his mind is my mind, but as if I have rested with him on the night of love, as if he entrusted me with his deep secret, breathed him and his soul out in my arms, and as if at the same time he changing in front of me, vanishing, so that his actuality can only be traced in the remaining mood, rather than the true opposite, that my mood leads him out to a greater and greater actuality. I put the words in his mouth, but as if I was abusing his confidence; to me, as if he stood in reproach behind me, but it was the opposite, in his mystery he became increasingly visible. He is mine, my rightful possession, but sometimes as if I have cunningly insinuated myself into his belief, as if I must constantly look back to find him, but, on the contrary, he always lies down in front of me, he constantly appearing only when I bring it out. He is called Antigone. This name I defend from the ancient tragedy, which I will mostly follow, though, from another point of view, everything will be modern. Either/Or Part I , Swenson, p. 151
What in the Greek sense contains tragic interest is that Oedipus' bad luck echoes the unhappy death of his brother, in his sister's collision with a simple human prohibition; that, to say, the after-effects, Oedipus's tragic fate, branched off in every branch of his family. This is the totality that makes the audience sadness so deep. It is not a descending individual, it is a small world, it is an objective grief, which, released, now progresses in its terrible consistency, like the forces of nature, and the unhappy Antigone fate, echoes of its fathers, is increasing sadness. When, therefore, Antigone who opposes the king's ban decides to bury his brother, we do not see in this so many free acts on his part as a decisive need, which visits the sins of fathers over children. There is enough freedom of action in this regard to make us love Antigone for the love of her younger brothers, but in the need for fate also exists, more than that, a higher repetition that not only envelopes the life of Oedipus, but also the whole family. Either/Or Part I , Swenson, p. 154
Kierkegaard may have responded to what Hegel wrote about "the divine command and the State and the state and the community and Freedom and Reason".
Subjective Desire Passion is what keeps men in activity, where the "practical" effect is realized. Ideas are springs in action; The state is a moral life that really exists and realizes. Because it is the Unity of the Universal and Essential Will, with the will of the individual; and this is "Morality." Individuals who live in this union have a moral "life", which has the value contained in this strength alone. The admiration in his Antigone says, "Divine commands are not from yesterday, or from day to day; no, they have unlimited existence, and no one can say where they came from." The law of morality is not accidental, but Basically Rational. It is a very important object of the State that what is important in the practical activities of man, and in their disposition, should be duly recognized, that he must have a real existence, and retain his position.It is the absolute interest of the Reason that this Whole morality must exist, and herein lies the justification and reward of established heroes declaring, no matter how rough these things In World history, only those who can be under our notice form a state. the realization of Freedom, ie the ultimate goal of absolute, and that it exists for its own sake. Furthermore it must be understood that all values ​​possessed by man have all spiritual realities, he possesses only through the State. Since his spiritual reality consists in this, that his own essence is objectively present to him, that he has an immediate objective existence for him. So only he is fully conscious; thus only he who partakes of the morality of social and political life is just and moral. Because Truth is a universal and subjective Will of Unity; and Universal must be found in the State, in its laws, its universal and rational arrangements. The State is a Divine Idea like the one on Earth. We have in it, therefore, the object of History in a more definite form than before; that where Freedom gains objectivity, and lives in the enjoyment of this objectivity. Law is the objectivity of the Spirit; willingness in its original form. Only those who obey the law are free; because it obeys itself; it is independent and very free. When our country or country is a community of existence; when the subjective will of man is subject to the law, the contradiction between Liberty and Necessity vanishes. The Rational has the necessary existence, as the reality and substance of things, and we are free to recognize it as law, and follow it as the substance of our own being. Subjective objectives and desires are then reconciled, and present an identical homogeneous union.
- Historical History Lecture Vol 1 p. 40-41 John Sibree Translation (1857), 1914
The second essay, titled "Shadowgraphs: A Psychological Pastime", discusses modern female characters, including Mozart's Elvira and Goethe's Gretchen (Margaret). He studies how desire can come to grief in an individual. He asks if love can be deceived.
This is the reflective sadness I now propose to be brought before you and, as far as possible, visible through some images. I call it the Shadowgraphs sketch, partly by the designation to remind you all at once that they are coming from the dark side of life, partly because like other shadowgraphs they are not immediately visible. When I take shadowgraph in my hand, it does not make an impression on me, and gives me an unclear conception. Only when I hold it in front of the wall, and now do not see it directly, but on what appears on the wall, I can see it. So also with the image I want to show here, the inner picture that does not become clear until I see it through the external. This external may be quite unobtrusive but not until I see it, I find the inner picture that I want to show you, the delicate inner picture drawn to look outwardly, woven because it is the gentlest mood. If I look at a piece of paper, it seems nothing remarkable about it, but when I hold it with light and see it, I find a delicate, too subtle, inner inscription, as it were, to be felt directly. Change your attention, dear Symparanekromenoi, to this inner picture; do not let yourself be distracted by outward appearances, or rather, let not you call the external before you, for it will be my constant duty to pull it aside, to give you a better view of the inner picture. Either/Or Part I , Swenson, p. 171
Historically he asked whether one person can bring the inner life of a historical figure into view. Psychologically he asks if psychologists can really give an accurate picture of the inner world. He religiously asks if one can accurately understand the inner world of another's spirituality. He did some thought experiments to see if he could do it.
The third essay, called "The Unhappiest One", addresses the hypothetical question: "who is worthy to distinguish unhappy from others?" Kierkegaard has grown from the highest search to the lowest search. Now he wants to find an unhappy person by looking once more into the past. Is it Niobe, or Job, or the father of the prodigal son, or is it Periander, Abraham, or Christ? This is of course about the science of new anthropology, which explores everyone and tells the world if people are happy or sad.
First Love
In this volume Kierkegaard examines the concept of 'First Love' as the apex for aesthetics, using his idiosyncratic concept of 'proximity' ( indesluttethed in Danish) and 'demon' ( demoniske ) with referring to Eugène Scribe. Scribe wants to create a template for all playwrights to follow. He insisted that people go play to escape from reality and not for instruction. Kierkegaard opposed any templates in the field of literature or Christianity. He opposed any systematization in the literature because the system caused the artist to stop and he only stayed in the system.
He writes about muse as an opportunity for inspiration. How many muse calls depends on the muse, how many on a single individual, and how much will or will? Can we know how inspiration happens? Later on Post Postscript Not Certified write it; "Inspiration is indeed an object of belief, qualitatively dialectical, can not be achieved by means of quantification."
George Brandes describes this leasing system in his book Main Flow in Nineteenth Century Literature Vol 1 1906 English translation:
Schlegel's remarkable translation of many Shakespeare and several Calderon dramas shows what progress has been made in understanding foreign poetry since Schiller, in his translation of Macbeth, cut the drama to fit classical fantasies. that day, and thus cut off all his courage and realism. The flaw, which is a school-wide flaw (and in Denmark is not passed by school, but must be observed in later periods too), lies in the conception of poetry, which is marked by one side of Germany, highly transedental sweeping so as to fairly close historical interpretations. One model, unquestioned, absolute, follow the others. The French have found their models in Greece and Aristotle; now, let's say, the Shakespeare alone is really worthy of being imitated in poetry, Mozart (as Kierkegaard maintained in Enten-Eller ) which is a perfect model in music. The historical, credible, and historical view of the matter, which does not recognize a perfect model, is completely ignored. The masterpiece is a model for a new style, itself a legal code. For our Heiberg, for example, St. Hansaften-Spil is "the perfect realization of the proper drama in lyrical form." Instead of studying poetry with respect to history, with all life, humans evolved a system in which poetry schools and poetic works grew from each other like branches in trees. They believe, for example, that English tragedy is revealed in the direct line of the Greek tragedy, not feeling that the tragedy of one nation is not the offspring of another nation, but the production of the environment, civilization, intellectual life in the midst of being.
Kierkegaard has written against reading about love instead of finding love. Scribe's work is 16 pages long and Kierkegaard writes 50 pages of the book's review. He writes against reading reviews rather than actual books.
In his review he went to the drama himself and saw his lover in the drama titled First Love ; for him it is a sign, like a leaf clover, that he must be one. But the confusion happened to the poor girl because of her misplaced identity. He can not make decisions about love and says, "First love is true love, and one love only once." But Kierkegaard says this is sofism "because the first category, at the same time is a qualitative and numerical category." His first impression of love, when he was eight years old, has been the determinant of his whole life. Now he can only love to some degree because he compares every new experience with past experience. Kierkegaard discussed this again in 1845.
pity me a little. I myself feel the sadness of the figure I cut off recently when even the girls die with passionate love when Falstaff vigorously falls in battle with Percy-and then gets up again, full of passion and enough nubil to drink for the sake of love fresh. Bravo! And with this kind of conversation, or rather, by a justifying life speaking in this way, I would think-provided that one person can benefit others altogether-I would think that I have benefited my honorable people more than with write a paragraph in the system. What is its mainstay is the determination of the pathological elements of life in an absolute, clear, legible, and powerful way, so life does not become a system, a secondhand store where there is little of everything, so someone does everything to a certain extent, so one does not tell a lie but ashamed of himself, not lying and then, erotic speaking, romantically dying of love and being a hero, but not stopping there or just lying there but getting up again and going further and becoming the hero of the novel of everyday life, and go further and become reckless, intelligent, heroes in the Scribe. Imagine immortality in such confusion; imagine a man like that on the Day of Judgment; imagine hearing the voice of God, "Have you believed?" Imagine hearing the answer, "Faith is immediate: one should not stop immediately as they did in the Middle Ages, but because Hegel one goes further, but one admits that it is immediate and that it soon exists but anticipates the new.. " SÃÆ'¸ren Kierkegaard, Stages of Life , 1845, Hong, p. 291-292
Crop Rotation: Trial on Social Prudence Theory
For Kierkegaard's aesthetic, boredom is the root of all evil, so we must go to the ends of the Earth to avoid it. In this section, 'A' explains that, just as a farmer turns a plant to keep the soil fertile, it must be a man forever to change himself to keep it interesting. 'A' speaks against anything that can prevent this rotation and locks a person into boredom, including friends, family, and most importantly for the second half of the book, marriage.
Boredom rests on what is there; dizziness is infinite, as it comes from looking into an unfounded abyss. Soren Kierkegaard, Either/Or Part 1 Plant Rotation 1843 Hong p. 291
Diary of a Seducer
Written by 'Johannes the Seducer', this book illustrates how aesthetics hold "interesting" as the highest value and how, to satisfy his voyeuristic reflection, he manipulates the girl he calls the Cordelia from boring to be interesting - he puts him in love with him, but then scheme to ask him to question the idea of ​​engagement. Finally, Johannes managed to make Cordelia decide on her own engagement. He will use irony, intelligence, behavior, imagination and arbitrariness to engineer poetic possibilities; he is not particularly interested in the act of appeal because it deliberately creates interesting possibilities.
The Seducer is reminiscent of Goethe's Faust Part 1, Scene VII (A Street). Faust said to Mephistopheles, "Look, you gotta get that girl for me!" Mephistopheles says he is an "innocent" girl, but Faust says he is "older than 14". Mephistopheles says he "talks like some Don Juan". Faust then summoned the demon of a Master Moraliser.
But Goethe may respond to Christopher Marlowe The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus (1616) who has the characters of German Valdes, Cornelius, Faustus, Mephistopheles, Lucifer, good and evil angels, and a host of other demons. Faustus asked Mephistopheles to answer some questions. He asks how "lots of heaven and balls are there". Mephistopheles says there are nine. Faustus asked, "Who made the world?" Mephistopheles refused to answer.
Goethe and Marlowe have demons and angels as the third person or person among them and his love, but Kierkegaard has a different third person involved in discussions between Johannes the Seducer and Cordelia. He has a strange power called opportunity. Teasers know the value of opportunity and want to use the opportunity to be "possibly seemingly impossible possibilities." He says,
Cursed opportunity! I never cursed you because you have appeared; I cursed you because you did not show up at all. Or is this perhaps your new discovery, an unexpected creature, a barren mother, the remnants of the past, when the need for freedom, when freedom is again tempted back into her mother's womb? Cursed opportunity! You, I am just confident, the only creature that I consider to be my ally and enemy, always the same as forever being different, always incomprehensible, always a puzzle! You who I love with all my soul, in whose image I formed myself, why do not you show yourself?
I am not begging you, I do not humbly ask you to show yourself in this way or that; such worship would be idolatry, unacceptable to you. I challenge you to fight, why do not you show up? Or have the pendulum of the world system stalled, is your puzzle solved, so you have also been thrown into the sea of ​​immortality? A bad thought, for thus the world stops from boredom! Cursed opportunity! I am waiting for you. I will not overcome you by principles not with what fools call characters; no, i will remain your poet! I will not be a poet to others; show yourself! I will be your poet. I consume my own verse, and it will support me. Or do you think I'm not worth it? As Bayadere danced in honor of his gods, so I have devoted myself to serving you. Lively, skinny, lively, unarmed, I leave everything for you. I do not have anything. I do not want to have anything, I do not love anything, I will not lose anything, but because of that I am not more precious than you, you long must have tired of snatching people from what they love, tired with the sign of coward and their cowards. petition.
To my surprise, I'm ready. No stakes, let's fight for honor. Show me, show me a seemingly impossible possibility; show him in the shadow of the underworld, I will pick him up; let him hate me, hate me, be indifferent to me, love the others, I'm not afraid; just let the water disturbed, the silence broken. To starve me in this way is trivial from you, you are imagining that you are stronger than me. Either/Or Vol I Diary of the Seducer 5 days p. 322-323, Swenson's translation
Kierkegaard has this teaser speaking again in the Stages of Life where he explores several possibilities and then once again where he tries to explain the misunderstanding that could be the root of tragic and comic unity. "Anyone who, when he is twenty, does not understand that there is a categorical imperative - Enjoy - is a fool, and whoever does not begin to do it is a Christian.... Our younger friends will always remain outside." a fanatic, Constantin has paid too much for his intellect, Fashion Designer is a madman Four of you after the same girl will turn into a row! Have enough fanaticism to idealize, enough appetite to join in joyful hospitality, sufficient understanding to decide in exactly the same way as death is cut off, angry enough to want to enjoy it again - then one is a favorite of gods and girls. "
Kierkegaard has a category of choice and aesthetics as well as ethics. Both can choose to love each other but "how" love is what Kierkegaard wants.
The tragic thing is that the two lovers do not understand each other; The comic is that the two who do not understand each other love each other. That such a thing can happen is not unimaginable, because erotic love itself has dialectics, and even if it's unprecedented, construction, of course, has an absolute power to build imaginatively. When heterogens are defended the way I defend them, then both parties are right in saying that they love. Love itself has aesthetic ethics and elements. He states that he loves and has aesthetic elements and understands them aesthetically; he says that he loves and understands it ethically. Therefore they love and love each other, but that is a misunderstanding. Stages of How to Live , Hong (Letters to Readers) p. 421
Or
The second volume represents the ethical stage. Victor Eremita discovers a group of letters from a retired Judge Vilhelm or William, another pseudonymous author, to 'A', trying to convince 'A' the value of the ethical stage of life by stating that ethical people can still enjoy aesthetic value.. The difference is that the pursuit of fun is seduced with ethical values ​​and responsibilities.
- "The Aesthetic Validity of Marriage": The first letter is about the aesthetic value of marriage and defending marriage as a way of life.
- "Equilibrium between Aesthetics and Ethics in Personality Development": The second letter concerns a more explicit ethical subject in choosing good, or self, and the value of making a binding choice of life.
- "Ultimatum": The volume ends in the discourse in Upbuilding in Thought that: against our God is always wrong. His spiritual advice for "A" and "B" is that they are at peace with each other. Here Kierkegaard quotes from the Gospel of Luke chapter 19 verse 42 to the end for this sermon.
And as he approached and saw the city, he wept over him, saying: Is that even today you know the things that make peace! But now they are hiding from your eyes. Because the days will happen to you when your enemies will spread a bank about you and surround you and crush you on each side, and then it will dart to the ground and your children inside you will not leave one stone to the rock else in you, because you do not know the time of your visit. And he went into the temple and began to drive out those who were selling, saying not them: It is written, "My house is a house of prayer," but you have made it a den of robbers. And he teaches every day in the temple. But the chief priests and the scribes and the chief men of the people sought to destroy it, but they did not find what they should do, for all men embraced him and listened to him. Either/Or Part 2, Hong, p. 341 (Luke 19: 41-48)
It is human nature to see external forces when faced with our own inadequacies but ethicists oppose this. Comparison is an aesthetic exercise and has nothing to do with ethics and religion. He said, "Let everyone learn what he can: we can both learn that one's unhappiness never lies in the lack of control over external circumstances, because this will only make him really unhappy." He also asked if someone "really fell in love can tell if he is more or less in love than the other." He finishes this thinking later in the Closure of Uncertified Text and extends inward looking at the Exercise in Christianity .
Ethical and ethical-religion has nothing to do with comparison.... All the comparisons delay, and that is why the ordinary likes it very much and, if possible, entraps everyone in it with a disgraceful friendship among ordinary people. Someone who blames others, that they have ruined it, talks nonsense and just tells himself. Uncertified Notice Closing p. 549-550
Comparison is the most dangerous association that love enters; comparison is the most dangerous love acquaintance that can be made; comparison is the worst of all seduction. SÃÆ'¸ren Kierkegaard, Works of Love (1847), Hong, p. 186
Lord Jesus Christ, our stupid mind is weak; they are more than willing to be drawn - and there are so many who want to pull us into themselves. There is fun with its tantalizing power, diversity with its confusing interruptions, the moment with its astounding excitement and arrogant bustle of bustle and waste of reckless times of light and gloomy thoughts of mind-weight - all this will pull us away from ourselves we ourselves to deceive us. But you, who are the truth, only you, the Savior and the Redeemer, who can truly attract a person to yourself, which you promised to do - that you would pull it all for yourself. So may God grant that by repentance we can come to ourselves, so that, according to your Word, can attract us to oneself - from above, but through humility and humiliation. SÃÆ'¸ren Kierkegaard, Practices in Christianity , 1850 h.157 Hong
Introducing the ethical stage it is also unclear whether Kierkegaard acknowledged the ethical stages without religion. Freedom seems to indicate the freedom to choose the will to do right and denounce the wrong in secular style, almost Kantian. However, regret ( angeren ) appears to be a religious category that is specifically related to the Christian concept of liberation. In addition, Kierkegaard is constant in his perspective that every individual can become conscious of the higher self than the externally visible human self and embrace the spiritual self in the "eternal understanding".
In a spiritual sense, by which a person gives birth is an attempt to form a will and it is within one's own strength. What are you afraid of? After all, you should not give birth to another human being; You should give birth only to yourself. But I am fully aware that there is a sincerity about it that shakes the whole soul; to be conscious in one's eternal validity is a more important moment than any other in the world. It is as if you are captivated and trapped and never able to escape, either in time or in eternity; as if you lost yourself, as if you were no longer; as if you will regret it the next time and yet it can not be undone. It is a truly momentous and important moment when one connects himself with eternal power to eternity, when he accepts himself as the one whose time of zikr will never disappear, when in an eternal and unreasonable sense he becomes aware of himself as the one he I s. Judge Vilhelm, Either/Or II p. 206 Hong 1987
Self whose purpose is not only personal but also social, civil self. He then has himself as a task in an activity in which he is involved in the affairs of life as this particular personality. Here his duty is not to shape himself but to act, but he molds himself at the same time, for, as I mentioned above, the ethical individual lives in such a way that he continues to transfer himself from one stage to another. SÃÆ'¸ren Kierkegaard, Either/Or II p. 262-263
A Savior watches everyone who wanders throughout life. This gave him two guides. The one who called him forward. Others call him back. They, however, did not contradict each other, these two guides, nor did they leave the nomads standing there in doubt, bewildered by the double vocation. Instead they understand each other. For those who call forward to the Good, others call men back from evil.... The two guides called a man early and late, and when he listened to their call, then he found his way, then he could know where he was, on the way. Because these two calls point to places and show the way. Of the two, the call of regret is probably the best. For passionate travelers who travel lightly along the roads do not, in this way, learn to know him as well as a heavily loaded traveler. People who just try to keep learning do not know the way and also the people who regret. Excited travelers rushed forward to the new, to the novel, and, indeed, away from the experience. But the regretful person, who came back, laboriously accumulated experience. SÃÆ'¸ren Kierkegaard, The Purity of the Heart is Will One Thing, of the Ceremonies in Various Spirits (1846), Steere's 1938 p translation. 39-40
Discourse and sequel
Along with this work, Kierkegaard was published, under his own name, The Two Upbuilding Discourse on May 16, 1843, which was intended to supplement Either/Or , "The Expectancy of Faith" and " Every Perfect Gift is Good and Every is from Above ". Kierkegaard also published another discourse during the printing of the second edition of Either/Or in 1849.
Kierkegaard's discourse relates to the difference between hope and desire in the development of certain expectations. "As the mind becomes increasingly absorbed in the future, it loses its way in its unsettled effort to impose or withdraw the explanation of the puzzle." Hope always looks to the future and can hope, but regret, which Goethe does in his book The Sorrows of Young Werther, closes the door of hope and love becomes unhappy. Kierkegaard points to the hope of "faith as the highest" because faith is something that everyone has, or can have. He says: "The one who wants him for others wants him for himself, the person who wants him for himself wants it for every other human being, because with which the other person has faith is not that he is different from him but because he is like him, he has it not because he is different from the others, but that is why he is like everything. "
The characters in Either/Or believe everyone is the same in everyone has talent or everyone has a condition that will allow them to live an ethical life. Goethe wants to love and complain that he can not be loved, but everyone can be loved. But he hopes, he has no hope of working his desire to love. Kierkegaard responded to him in this way:
You know that you should not expect and then he goes further. When his soul becomes restless, he calls out to him and says: When you are anxious, it's because you're hoping; anxiety is a form of hope, and you know you can not hope-then it goes a step further. When he was almost desperate, when he said: I can not; others can-I just can not help it. Oh, that I have never heard those words, that with my sorrow I was allowed to go in an undisturbed way â € "and with my wishes. Then he summoned his soul and said: Now you are cunning, because you say that you hope and pretend that it is a question of something external that can be expected, whereas you know that it is something internal that can only be; You cheat yourself, because you say: Everyone can-just I can not. But you know that what others can do is that they are just like you-so if it's true that you can not, then no one else. So you betray not only your own cause but, as far as it lies in you, the cause of everyone; and humbly you shut themselves out of their numbers, you cunningly destroy their power. Then he went further. After slowly and for a long time being raised under discipline in this way, he may arrive by faith. SÃÆ'¸ren Kierkegaard, Two Upbuilding Discourses , 1843 p. 9-12
The "Ultimatium" at the end of the second volume of Either/Or hints at future discussion of the religious stage in The Two Upbuilding Discourses , "Ask yourself and keep asking until you find the answer , because a person may have known something over and over again, confessing it, someone may have concocted something over and over, tried it-but only a deep inner motion, only indescribable emotion of the heart, only that will convince you that what has You admit it is yours, that no power can take it from you - only truth that builds the truth for you. "This discussion is included in the Stages of Living (1845). The first two sections review and refine the aesthetic and ethical stages described in Either/Or , while the third part, Guilty/Not Guilty is about the religious stage and refers specifically to the Book Goethe others, The Autobiography of Goethe: Truth and Poetry, from My Own Life vol 1, 2
In addition to the discourse, one week after Either/Or is published, Kierkegaard publishes a newspaper article in FÃÆ'Â|drelandet , titled "Who's Good Author/Or?", Tries to create authorial distance from work, emphasizing the content of the work and the embodiment of a particular way of life in each of the pseudonyms. Kierkegaard, using the pseudonym 'AF', writes, "most people, including the authors of this article, think it is not worth the issue to be concerned about who the authors are.They are happy not to know their identity, because then they only have books to handle, or disturbed by his personality. "
Themes
The various essays in Either/Or help explain various forms of aesthetics and ethical existence. Both A and Judge Vilhelm seek to focus primarily on the best that their fashion of existence can offer.
The fundamental characteristic of aesthetics is closeness . At Either/Or , there are several levels of proximity explored, ranging from unrefined to enhanced ones. Uncertain freshness is characterized by a direct desire for desire and satisfaction through pleasure that requires no personal effort or cultivation (eg alcohol, drugs, free sex, laziness, etc.) Fine freshness is characterized by planning how best to live aesthetically. The social "cautious theories" given in Crop Rotation are examples of subtle freshness. Instead of hedonistic tendencies without thinking, enjoyment is contemplated and "cultivated" for maximum pleasure. However, neither purified nor purified aesthetics still accept the basic underlying conditions of their lives, and do not accept the responsibility to change them. If anything is wrong, aesthetics simply blame existence, not self, assuming some of the tragic consequences of human existence that are inevitable and thus claiming life is meaningless. Kierkegaard speaks of immediacy in this way in its sequel to Either/Or , Stages in How to Live ,
"The scope of aesthetics is the scope of proximity, the ethical scope of need (and this requirement so infinite that the individual is always bankrupt), religious as the realm of fulfillment, but, please note, not the fulfillment as when one fills the box of alms or sacks with gold, specifically creates boundless space, and as a consequence a religious contradiction: simultaneously to come out in the 70,000 fountains of water and not yet pleasant.Such as the ethical sphere is the passage-which never passes once and forever, as repentance is its expression, so repentance is the most dialectical.No wonder, then, the one who is afraid, because if someone gives it one finger it takes the whole hand, because Jehovah in the Old Testament visits the fathers' iniquities over the children to the last generation, then repentance backwards, constantly presupposes the object of his inquiry a push of e motion, and therefore everything reversed. This impulse signifies exactly the difference between aesthetics and religion as the difference between external and internal. "SÃÆ'¸ren Kierkegaard, Stages of Living, Hong Translation, pp. 476-477
Commitment is an important characteristic of the ethicist. Commitment is made by being an active participant in society, not a separate observer or outsider. The ethicist has a strong sense of responsibility, duty, honor, and respect for his friendship, family, and career. Judge Vilhelm used the example of marriage as an example of an ethical institution that requires strong commitment and responsibility. Whereas esthetics will be bored with the repetitive nature of marriage (eg marrying only one person), ethicists believe in the need for self-denial (such as indisputable pleasure) to uphold one's duties. Kierkegaard asked Judge William to speak again in his 1845 Stage of Life. Here he describes the enemies faced by an individual while trying to make commitments, possibilities, and results.
There are ghosts that often hang around when making a resolution at stake-that is probability - a person who has nothing, as a dabbler, a Jewish seller, with whom there is no freeborn soul involved, a virtue - not the one who should be imprisoned, not the shaman, male and female, because he cheats people out of what is more precious than money. Anyone with regard to resolution does not exist anymore, never comes farther than deciding on probability grounds, lost for ideal, whatever it becomes. If one does not find God in resolution, if he never makes a resolution where he deals with God, he may never live. But God always does wholesale business, and chances are that security is not listed in heaven. Thus it is very important that there is an element in resolution that implies probability and makes it speechless. There is a fantasy that people who make resolutions pursue the way a dog pursues his shadow in the water; it is the result , the symbol of roundness, the mirage of misfortune-woe against the one who sees it, he is lost. Just like a person who, if bitten by a snake, sees a cross in the desert and becomes healthy, then the person who attributes his view to the outcome is bitten by a snake, hurt by a secular mentality, lost both for time and for eternity. SÃÆ'¸ren Kierkegaard, Stages of Life , Hong, p. 110
Kierkegaard emphasized the nature of marriage "eternal" and said "something new happened" through the wedding ceremony. Aesthetics do not see it that way. The esthete makes "half-hour resolution" but ethical people, and especially religious people, make "good resolutions". A person who is devoted to pleasure is unlikely to make such a resolution. People who are ethical and "Christian" make resolutions because they have the will to have a true and true conception of life. "A resolution involves change but for one Individual this only involves a change in oneself, never means changing the whole world or even changing others.
Interpretation
The highly stacked pseudonym of this work adds to the problem of interpretation. A and B are authors of the work, Eremita is the editor. Kierkegaard's role in all this seems to be that he deliberately attempts to escape from the point of view expressed in his works, although the absurdity of his strange Latin names indicates that he does not expect to hide his identity completely from the reader. Kierkegaard's Papers first edition VIII (2), B 81 - 89 describes this method in writing. On the interpretation there are also many that can be found in the Point of View of My Work as Author .
Furthermore, Kierkegaard is a close reader of the aesthetic works of Johann Wolfgang von Goethe and the ethical works of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. Each one is presented to one's way of life in different ways. Kierkegaard's writings in this book are close to what Goethe wrote in his autobiography.
Soon I formed a connection with Lavater. The Passage of my Pastor's Letter to His Companions has greatly struck him, as many of them agree perfectly with his own views. With his never-exhausting activity, our correspondence soon came to life. By the time he started, he was preparing for his larger work in the field of physiognomy, - a preface that had been put before the public.
Source of the article : Wikipedia
0 Comments