Kierkegaard and Subjective Truth
Kierkegaard is regarded retrospectively as the first existentialist philosopher since he put great emphasis on the individual, searched for meaning in truth in a way that prods the human consciousness and examines emotions (especially angst) in a unique way. One of the key themes that sprang from the Danish philosopherfs peculiar, religious existential philosophy, is his concept of subjective truth. Many of his readers, at least at first glance, may deem subjective truth to be an oxymoron which does not make sense, but when there is objective uncertainty, subjective truth can without contradicting objectivity, take its place for truth. In a nutshell, subjective truth is truth that matters most to oneself and is wholeheartedly embraced with a passionate inwardness. Kierkegaard chose Christianity as his subjective truth and ended up devoting his life to it. Kierkegaard does not prescribe any particular subjective doctrine of truth per se so long as the subjective truth is genuinely suited to the person and is passionately embraced with the intensity of commitment and faith. Onefs unique upbringing, surroundings, and predispositions may incline someone to embrace one subjective truth over another.
In the case of Kierkegaard, his background is no less pivotal in his decision to embrace Christianity.
Kierkegaard was born in the Lutheran country of Denmark during the Victorian era of 1813 within a milieu where people seemed to take Christianity for granted and called themselves Christians simply because they were born in a Christianized country and passively accepted what the priests and professors taught (Microsoft). Kierkegaard thought that this was ridiculous and asserted that people essentially had no idea of faith, the true essence of what it meant to be a Christian. Kierkegaard was a complex character who had been strongly influenced by his fatherfs gloomy, guilt-ridden, and imaginative temperament (Wikipedia). Kierkegaard practiced Lutheranism and studied Hegel in Copenhagenfs University, but shortly after he stopped focusing on religion altogether and lead a more extravagant life (what Kierkegaard would later refer to as the aesthetic life) (Microsoft). After his fatherfs death in 1838, however, he seemed to have reverted to his studious ways in theology (Wikipedia). He decided to try and enter the ethical life by becoming engaged to a young girl by the name of Regine, but he soon suspected that they were not compatible what with Kierkegaardfs complex nature, introverted brooding, as well as his inspiration to do something with the vexing issues he had with Christianity through writing; he had no room for her (Wikipedia). They immediately broke off their relationship just a couple years later and the lonely Kierkegaard devoted the rest of his life to writing and produced more than 20 books on philosophical and religious matters. The turning point in his life wherein he made the hard decision to call off one possible path in life in exchange for another in which he decided to devote himself to one particular thing, has many parallels with Kierkegaardfs central notions of progressing through the three stages (aesthetic, ethical, religious), and fleap of faithe with the esubjective truthf that comes with it.
Denmark, being adjacent to Germany, was influenced by German thought, especially that of Hegel, who basically asserted that Christianity was the ultimate form of religious consciousness and that Christianity had already been proved to be the true religion by philosophy (Kierkegaard, 11). Left-wing Hegelians would later assert that Christianity was something to be transcended or abolished since it was deemed to be the next step to freedom (Wikipedia). Kierkegaard staunchly disagreed. In a show of satire, Kierkegaard sarcastically remarked that there was no need for faith now since the professors would supposedly do you the favor by proving that Christianity was true in an objective manner. Kierkegaard was a believer in objective truth much like any rational being at the time. That is, he had no objections with arithmetic, science, logic, and the like, and he thought that they had their place in the world, but not in religion. He asserted that trying to objectify Christianity is an error which would undermine faith and prevent one from making the eleap of faithf in esubjective truthf. There is no way to prove religion, and trying to do so would be ludicrous.
Many truths are objective, and in fact many etruthsf that we know of are indeed objectively known. However, where there is uncertainty which objectivity cannot prove, there may lie, according to Kierkegaard, a place for subjective truth, so in that sense at least, subjective truth does not oppose objectivity directly. Trying to objectify religion, ethics, and miracles would undermine the function of subjectivity altogether, though Kierkegaard did believe in certain objective rules within ethics. The pursuit of objective truths by many philosophers and scientists had crossed paths into the subjective realm many times throughout history, but Kierkegaard argues that not everything can be objectified, but even if it could be, it would simply render subjectivity and faith meaningless. Even if scientists now could somehow bring up evidence which made stories as presented in the book of Exodus plausible, it would simply undermine religion and prod into the subjective by fitting it within the paradigm of science. The notion of subjective truth to Kierkegaard is something that may not necessarily reflect reality, rather it should be deemed more like a personal, passionate commitment. Kierkegaard uses this term in the context of his rather prescriptive writing style in a way that tries to coerce, or at least convince the reader, to understand the implications behind eleap of faithf which leads one to commit or participate in something to which one he or she is genuinely inclined and, in a way, fulfills a spiritual need. Tied to this ethical notion is the idea of existence, which is an essential theme to Kierkegaard.
Kierkegaard distinguishes the idea of plain existence and existing. One who is existing in a non-passive way is one who has values, makes decisions, has emotions, attachments, thoughts, and passions while taking hold of the subjective. One who actively exists is one who genuinely expresses his voice and commits to his passions while one avoids the influences of authority and the crowd. Kierkegaard writes, gWhat a falsehood! The falsehood first of all is the notion that the crowd does what in fact only the individual in the crowd does, thought it be every individual. For ecrowdf is an abstractionch (Kaufmann, 95) In that quote he tries to convince readers on the importance of inwardness which requires one to eschew the influences of outside forces thereby allowing oneself to make a true commitment by understanding oneself better and subsequently undergo a series of steps pertinent to the decision one has made, whether it be to adhere to a certain faith or initialize a life-long relationship.
Kierkegaard chose Christianity and stuck with it until his death not so much because it was a doctrine grounded in many truths, but rather for the opposite reason. Kierkegaard chose it because it was absurd. The sheer importance of Christianity to him and the many miracles it claims, as well as the many paradoxes produced by it are the things which evoked passion in Kierkegaard and made him further pursue it. If Christianity were simple, objective fact, one would quickly acknowledge it and then briskly disregard it, perhaps even with boredom (Microsoft). Thus, Kierkegaard argues that the absurd and subjective truth is what makes life more meaningful. Though Christianity may seem absurd, so does the outside world seem absurd to us when we see people engaging in raillery or, in allusion to Camus, a man talking in a phone booth. But suddenly it doesnft become so absurd to us when we ourselves engage in those activities and experience the subjective nature of those activities ourselves as they have a direct affect on our consciousness. In Fear and Trembling, Kierkegaard illustrates to us through Abraham, the struggles of faith and the decision to engage oneself to a particular belief while setting aside all else.
Hegelians have talked about transcending faith, but to Kierkegaard, Abrahamfs staunch illustration of faith is enough to make him awe. Abrahamfs decision to sacrifice Isaac is a show of an especial obeisance to God and is a paradox which Kierkegaard deems a true display of faith wherein the eteleological suspension of the ethicalf takes place, but Abraham follows through anyway on the belief that he must serve the directive from God for God. Kierkegaard argues that Abrahamfs sacrifice should serve as an example for others and espouses it as a challenge for anyone who thinks themselves as being a Christian. Kierkegaard says, gTo speak humanly about it, as if it had occurred yesterday, letting only the greatness of Abraham be the distance.h (Kierkegaard, 85) By this, Kierkegaard meant that Abrahams greatness was totally human and his great display of greatness is no more or less attainable now than it was 3000 years ago.
Kierkegaard goes on to talk about two main different types of knights of faith. He expounds on the knight of infinite resignation and the knight of faith. The former was one who gave up all material things including relatives whereas as the latter did so too, but also expected them back. Abraham was a knight of faith. Not only did he inwardly sacrifice his all, his son Isaac, he also expected him back because he had faith in God . God at the last minute in fact sacrifices the lamb instead of Isaac. If Abraham had not expected Isaac back, he would not have been ready to embrace Isaac again as readily for he would not have had the same feelings for him. Instead, he would learn helplessness and not care as much about Isaac in order to abate his trembling and dread of not having a son anymore. However, Abraham showed a great deal of trembling and dread which could not be explained in words when he expected Isaac back. That is what is associated with faith, according to Kierkegaard.
Kierkegaard is a philosopher who introduces a new way about thinking about the self and tries to revive not so much the Christian church, but the concept of faith and the subjective truth that stems from it as it pertains to the individual in his quest for meaning by way of pursuing genuine passions. He is rightly regarded as the first existentialist, but he is a peculiar in that he is the only religious existentialist and one who chose to embrace Christianity for a different reasons that one might expect. Through Christianity, Kierkegaard embraced the absurd which in turn lead him to the subjective experience of subjective truth. Faith is for Kierkegaard, the pinnacle in the pursuit of subjective truth. He tries to make it harder for self-proclaimed Christians to be true, faithful Christians and asserts that it is not objective truth that makes Christianity meaningful, but rather the uncertainty surrounding it.
Workfs Cited
Kaufmann, Walter. Existentialism from Dostoevsky to Sartre. Princeton University Press, 1944.
Kierkegaard, Soren. Fear and Trembling. England: Penguin Books, 1985
gSoren Kierkegaardh. Microsoft@ Student 2009 [DVD]. Redmond, WA: Microsoft Corporation, 2008
Wikipedia. gSoren Kierkegaardg 2008. 11 Feb. 2009. Wikpedia Encyclopedia. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kierkegaard>.
