Cambridge Core – Philosophy Texts – Kierkegaard: Concluding Unscientific Postscript. Cambridge Core – Theology – Kierkegaard’s ‘Concluding Unscientific Postscript’ – edited by Rick Anthony Furtak. One of the most noteworthy features of Kierkegaard’s Concluding Unscientific Postscript: A Critical Guide is that it lives up to its subtitle.
Concluding Unscientific Postscript to Philosophical Fragments – Wikiquote
So I will focus on the Postscript ‘s best-known and most incendiary sentence. The work is also famous for its dictum, Subjectivity is Truth. As Mooney puts it. Having made these distinctions, the Postscript then tries to specify the Christian’s concludibg predicament as a sinner seeking salvation in an absurdity.
In Postscrip usage, the name is likely kierkefaard to echo the Postscript ‘s own ladder-like attempt to use reason to scale the heights of a Christianity kiefkegaard defies understanding. This is so both for subjective reasons — the Christian must contend not just with ignorance, but with sin — and for objective reasons: One option might be to use “un-God” for Afgud instead of “idol”.
The first began during the Great Depression, and was something of a religious stage. The distinction on which the above “incendiary sentence” pivots — that between subjective and objective concerns as criteria for authenticity — is in fact the key to the argument of the Postscript as a whole. Direct communication consists of statements that can be communicated and understood without appropriation, that is, without experiencing personally what is being communicated.
In this regard Socrates, who lived a life of truth-seeking amid and despite ignorance, is a helpful existential paradigm. Surprisingly, Hannay’s edition lacks marginal page references — or even a separate page concordance, as in the Hong edition — to any of the available Danish editions. In the name of Christian faith Kierkegaard rejected not this or that element in Hegelianism but the whole, referring to it in mockery as c the System.
Princeton UP,pp. And Kierkegaard himself should kierkegaarc be called the father of modern existentialism. Against this view, the Postscript postscrpit that Christianity’s Truth resists validation by, and hence assimilation to, objective thinking. Although Climacus repeatedly states that Christianity is not a doctrine but an existence-communication, this should not be taken to mean that he holds that Christianity lacks doctrinal content.
This reading was revived in the s by James Conant; it remains hotly disputed. Kierkegaard shows that neither historically nor speculatively can we have objective knowledge of Christianity’s truth or of its untruth. I have often taken exception to anyone who was a sinner in the strictest sense and kifrkegaard promptly got posstcript terrifying others. What is more, it brings Kierkegaard’s painstaking use of grammar, so central to his philosophical method, postxcript step closer to the English reader.
How can we tell, the Postscript asks, when a prayer to God is authentic?
The first total opponent of Hegel’s standpoint was Soren Kierkegaard, father of modern existentialism. With characteristic courage, Hannay opts for conluding, rather than “in truth”, to render i Sandhed. This concerns the character of genuine prayer.
Are they distinguished as metaphysical terms, picking out realities that differ by grade or degree of being, or are they value designations, ;ostscript both? Objective knowledge can be communicated directly.
This does not suffice to solve the riddle of the Revocation. Once again, Hannay provides enough starting information to allow the unsvientific to begin connecting Kierkegaard’s argumentative dots. As the Postscript nears its climax, it struggles to pinpoint the distinction between true Christianity and other forms of life. George Cotkin, Existential America Baltimore: Johannes Climacus has so delineated the ethico-religious life that Christianity becomes an intensification of subjectivity and its pathos.
But it does arm readers with the tools necessary to start grappling with it, and in fact that is all that an introduction of this kind should do. Not that I therefore wanted to relinquish Christianity.
Wilde says, “In the Concluding Postscript the question of “the objective problem concerning the truth of Christianity” is dealt with in the first part. This leaves the third and ongoing stage of Kierkegaard translation, which I cannot resist calling “aesthetic”. A Critical Guide is that it lives up to its subtitle. The question as to whether Kierkegaard was an unscientufic was brought up by Libuse Lukas Miller.
Or does it matter more that the prayer be genuine with regard to matters of “subjective” concern — i. Hegel had many critics in his lifetime, but they were mostly those who attacked his system because they believed that they could construct a better one themselves. Aesthetically, it is a masterpiece: However, unlike his other pseudonymous works, Kierkegaard attaches his name as editor to this work, showing the importance of the Postscript to Kierkegaard’s overall authorship.
This, according to Hannay, is why the Postscript ‘s revocation should not detract from the book’s value as an analysis of Christianity.