Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.89 AVERAGE
3.89 AVERAGE
challenging
informative
reflective
slow-paced
Kierkegaard presents a comprehensive analysis and theory/formula of what it means to be in a state of “despair”. A great deal of his theorising is grounded in theistic existentialism however he does account for the non-religious state of despair and what it could mean as rationalised through the lens of Christianity. While most of the content here is grounded in Christian epistemology and ontology there is still a lot to consider and take away even as someone agnostic/atheist. If anything it reaffirmed many thoughts and feelings that I’ve had but presented them in a new framework of understanding. As Mentioned, I did not however agree with everything—but there is definitely an interesting perspective offered that I will likely sit and reflect over for years to come.
At the risk of sounding like a simpleton, let me just say that Kierkegaard gets it. He's so beyond Christian apologetics and modern emergent church complaints about "religion" that he leaves them looking like children. If you are the type to find yourself reading Rob Bell et al., read this (and also read some Leslie Newbigin). Kierkegaard certainly never makes Christianity easier to accept, and even emphasizes its offensive nature as well as its irrationality (he uses the word paradox). He affirms this difficult notion of faith while simultaneously criticizing current religion, upholding orthodoxy, and preaching a faith that would somewhat correctly be called "dangerous". Of course, this is a comment on all of Kierkegaard's writings and not just on this one book, but I continue to be amazed by this man as I continue through his works, if not because I agree with him then because his opinions are so heroically defiant of the sensibilities of others.
challenging
informative
inspiring
reflective
slow-paced
Very accurately describes the human condition. Or at least my condition. Kierkegaard seems to have been a very funny fellow; I want to learn Danish just so I can more fully appreciate all his wordplay.
I thought while I was reading it that it was destined for a five-star review and a spot on my "favorites" shelf, but for now it only gets four stars. Perhaps that will change when I've had a few weeks to let it settle in my mind; I'll probably revisit certain parts now and then.
What else can I say here? Well, in 2015, for what reason I recall not—no, wait, I actually do recall. I was in the stacks at Hale Library, most likely after getting out of my 8:00 a.m. MATH 222 (Analytic Geometry and Calculus III) and found a copy of this book, and I had heard of Kierkegaard somehow (maybe only through the Switchfoot song "Sooner or Later"), and the title sounded exceedingly intriguing, but I couldn't check it out because even though I was currently enrolled I never bothered to go to the Union and get a student ID card printed. I guess I probably could have checked it out anyway by taking it to the help desk and telling them my ID number, but I was too timid for that and was only willing to use the self-checkout machine, and I couldn't use that without a card. Anyway, I decided that I wanted to read it, so I submitted a request for the public library to buy a copy, and I checked it out as soon as it arrived and carried it around for the first few weeks of twelfth grade and read a few pages and annoyed people by memorizing and quoting the impenetrable first few sentences, but you know how it is with six AP classes—I didn't really have time for extracurricular reading, especially not something as dense as this. So I eventually returned the book, unfinished, to the library. And now here I am, having falteringly started reading it at the end of December and really started reading it less than a fortnight ago, and I'm finally done.
So I guess the point is: just have faith, man.
I don't think I fully understand what he means by "the offense." I mean, "Offence is unhappy admiration," and "The sin of despairing of the forgiveness of sins is offence," but what exactly is that supposed to mean??
And "the paradox." An endnote sort of explains what he means, but I guess I would have to read some of his previous works to grok that.
What does he mean by "relation," anyway? I suppose I'm really still stuck on the first page. Like, a set of tuples? Is this a rigorous philosophical notion explored at length elsewhere, or something Kierkegaard made up for this book and expects us to grasp straightaway?
I think that's all for now.
(Thu 03 Feb 2022 04:41:56 PM CST)
I thought while I was reading it that it was destined for a five-star review and a spot on my "favorites" shelf, but for now it only gets four stars. Perhaps that will change when I've had a few weeks to let it settle in my mind; I'll probably revisit certain parts now and then.
What else can I say here? Well, in 2015, for what reason I recall not—no, wait, I actually do recall. I was in the stacks at Hale Library, most likely after getting out of my 8:00 a.m. MATH 222 (Analytic Geometry and Calculus III) and found a copy of this book, and I had heard of Kierkegaard somehow (maybe only through the Switchfoot song "Sooner or Later"), and the title sounded exceedingly intriguing, but I couldn't check it out because even though I was currently enrolled I never bothered to go to the Union and get a student ID card printed. I guess I probably could have checked it out anyway by taking it to the help desk and telling them my ID number, but I was too timid for that and was only willing to use the self-checkout machine, and I couldn't use that without a card. Anyway, I decided that I wanted to read it, so I submitted a request for the public library to buy a copy, and I checked it out as soon as it arrived and carried it around for the first few weeks of twelfth grade and read a few pages and annoyed people by memorizing and quoting the impenetrable first few sentences, but you know how it is with six AP classes—I didn't really have time for extracurricular reading, especially not something as dense as this. So I eventually returned the book, unfinished, to the library. And now here I am, having falteringly started reading it at the end of December and really started reading it less than a fortnight ago, and I'm finally done.
So I guess the point is: just have faith, man.
I don't think I fully understand what he means by "the offense." I mean, "Offence is unhappy admiration," and "The sin of despairing of the forgiveness of sins is offence," but what exactly is that supposed to mean??
And "the paradox." An endnote sort of explains what he means, but I guess I would have to read some of his previous works to grok that.
What does he mean by "relation," anyway? I suppose I'm really still stuck on the first page. Like, a set of tuples? Is this a rigorous philosophical notion explored at length elsewhere, or something Kierkegaard made up for this book and expects us to grasp straightaway?
I think that's all for now.
(Thu 03 Feb 2022 04:41:56 PM CST)
För Kierkegaard är förtvivlan en slags sjukdom som människan lider av, och som hon inte kan bli kvitt. Denna förtvivlan sitter så djupt inne i vår kärna, att den är en konstant del av oss vare sig vi vill det eller inte. Den går inte att separera från självet och är med oss hela vägen till döden. Men när man är medveten om det hela, och börjar närmar sig självet, kan man på sätt och vis behandla denna “sjukdom”. Härifrån kan en bredare förståelse för människans natur uppenbara sig. Och detta sker, enligt Kierkegaard, främst i samklang med ens tro. Han belyser att människan inte kan inneha ett sant själv utan en relation till Gud. Att själv ge mening till alltet fungerar inte riktigt; på sätt och vis är det kanske också begränsande. Tron på något större öppnar liksom upp för något mer, där förtvivlan inte behöver vara alltför betungande. Men samtidigt kan man se på det hela som att Självet också kan vara sin egen härskare (utan Gud, typ. Eller där Gud redan finns inom allt och alla beroende på hur man ser på det): där förtvivlan tillsammans med lycka och allt annat mänskligt får frodas och finnas till: där man får reflektera sig till en egen tillfredsställelse med livet genom den fri viljan (och där då denna förtvivlan inte riktigt stör en). Men det är inte riiiktigt det som Kierkegaard strävar efter här, men ändå. :))
Hur som helst, för att sammanfatta mina spretiga tankar lite (som förmodligen kommer fortsätta att spreta). För Kierkegaard handlar det lite om, såsom jag också belyste i Cioran inlägget, att nya insikter och förståelse främst kan uppstå ur de ting som skaver. Att man helt enkelt går in i det smärtsamma (aka förtvivlan) och låter det leda en framåt i livet (som en enda lång existentiell resa). Ibland kanske har man ting man vill fly ifrån: ting som pågår där i det inre. Men med tiden inser man att det inte alls går att fly ifrån just det. Just på grund av att förtvivlan ligger därinne och göttar sig, och plågar självet. Men när man väl omfamnar det och försöker skapa en förståelse (genom sin tro då), så är man på vägen mot sanningen. Dock kan man såklart gå igenom livet utan vetskapen om självets förtvivlan, men oavsett vad så menar Kierkegaard att alla människor bär på det i sitt inre. Och när man är medveten om det kan man också växa som person (dock → ju mer medveten du blir, desto mer intensifieras denna förtvivlan (men som sagt, där det skaver kan nya insikter uppstå osv)). Handlar lite om sökandet efter svar, som kanske aldrig kommer, men där själva sökandet är det som är det viktiga. För längst den där vägen så stöter man på en mängd olika (och nya!) synvinklar. Man begränsar liksom inte sig själv till en viss, redan utstakad, väg.
Hur som helst, för att sammanfatta mina spretiga tankar lite (som förmodligen kommer fortsätta att spreta). För Kierkegaard handlar det lite om, såsom jag också belyste i Cioran inlägget, att nya insikter och förståelse främst kan uppstå ur de ting som skaver. Att man helt enkelt går in i det smärtsamma (aka förtvivlan) och låter det leda en framåt i livet (som en enda lång existentiell resa). Ibland kanske har man ting man vill fly ifrån: ting som pågår där i det inre. Men med tiden inser man att det inte alls går att fly ifrån just det. Just på grund av att förtvivlan ligger därinne och göttar sig, och plågar självet. Men när man väl omfamnar det och försöker skapa en förståelse (genom sin tro då), så är man på vägen mot sanningen. Dock kan man såklart gå igenom livet utan vetskapen om självets förtvivlan, men oavsett vad så menar Kierkegaard att alla människor bär på det i sitt inre. Och när man är medveten om det kan man också växa som person (dock → ju mer medveten du blir, desto mer intensifieras denna förtvivlan (men som sagt, där det skaver kan nya insikter uppstå osv)). Handlar lite om sökandet efter svar, som kanske aldrig kommer, men där själva sökandet är det som är det viktiga. För längst den där vägen så stöter man på en mängd olika (och nya!) synvinklar. Man begränsar liksom inte sig själv till en viss, redan utstakad, väg.
I think this book was the final push I needed to really go back to the classics and to take the time to get my philosophical groundings. I have a hard time finding legitimate critiques for this book beyond what I perceive as needlessly obtuse language.
What I can say is that this book is for someone who is accustomed to academic philosophy and are able and willing to parse simultaneously dense and verbose rhetoric.
What I can say is that this book is for someone who is accustomed to academic philosophy and are able and willing to parse simultaneously dense and verbose rhetoric.
This may be the most profound book I have ever read.
Another brilliant work of art from Kierkegaard. Not sure what else I was expecting- but the details and discussion around this book blew me away. I would like to revisit Either/Or, Fear and Trembling and The Sickness unto Death many times throughout my life. I used to so sure of my views on religion, morality etc but I am left more unsure than ever...and that is not necessarily a bad thing.
Another brilliant work of art from Kierkegaard. Not sure what else I was expecting- but the details and discussion around this book blew me away. I would like to revisit Either/Or, Fear and Trembling and The Sickness unto Death many times throughout my life. I used to so sure of my views on religion, morality etc but I am left more unsure than ever...and that is not necessarily a bad thing.
challenging
inspiring
reflective
slow-paced