Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T05:56:14.447Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Kierkegaard: First Existentialist or Last Kantian?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 October 2008

R. Z. Friedman
R. Z. Friedman
Affiliation:
Associate Professor of Philosophy, St Michael's College, University of Toronto
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Kierkegaard's leap of faith is one of the most thoroughly explored topics in modern philosophy. What can yet another inquiry into this notion hope to achieve? A number of significant things, I think, of both historical and systematic value.

The main contention of this paper is that the leap of faith, often associated with the emergence of existentialism, is Kierkegaard's response to a problem which is essentially Kantian in origin and structure. Kierkegaard wants to accomodate both the Kantian interpretation of morality as rational command and Kant's insistence on morality as the sole point of access to religion, while rejecting the Kantian moralization of religion and rationalization of faith. The leap of faith is not, as existentialism would have it, an absolute beginning in philosophy or in individual reflection but a transition from morality to religion within an essentially Kantian context.

Type
Articles
Information
Religious Studies , Volume 18 , Issue 2 , June 1982 , pp. 159 - 170
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1982

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 159 note 1 Kierkegaard, Soren, Concluding Unscientific Postscript, trans. Swenson, D. F. and Lowrie, W..(Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1941), pp. 54, 85, 268, 350.Google Scholar

page 159 note 2 ibid. pp. 18, 54.

page 160 note 1 Kierkegaard, , Either/Or, trans. Swenson, David F.. and Swenson, Lillian Marvin (Garden City: Anchor Books, Doubleday, 1959), 1: 20, 74.Google Scholar See also Concluding Unscientific Postscript, p. 226.Google Scholar

page 160 note 2 Ibid.

page 160 note 3 ibid. pp. 92, 304.

page 160 note 4 Kierkegaard, , Either/Or, trans. Lowrie, Walter (Garden City: Anchor Books, Doubleday, 1959), pp. 44, 61; 2:41, 61.Google Scholar

page 160 note 5 ibid. p. 21.

page 160 note 6 ibid. p. 22.

page 161 note 1 ibid. p. 260.

page 161 note 2 ibid. p. 268.

page 161 note 3 ibid. p. 270.

page 161 note 4 This is, I believe, the significance of Kierkegaard's analysis in ‘Ultimatum’, Either/Or, 2: 341–56.Google Scholar

page 161 note 5 Kierkegaard, , Fear and TremblingGoogle Scholar in Fear and Trembling and The Sickness Unto Death, trans. Lowrie, Walter (Garden City: Anchor Books, Doubleday, 1954), pp.68–9.Google Scholar

page 162 note 1 The establishment of this point is the main purpose of Kierkegaard's, Philosophical Fragments, trans. Swenson, David F.. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1962).Google Scholar See also Concluding Unscientific Postscript, p. 182.Google Scholar

page 162 note 2 Kierkegaard, , Concluding Unscientific Postscript, pp. 118, 182.Google Scholar

page 162 note 3 ibid. p. 188.

page 162 note 4 ibid. p. 116.

page 162 note 5 Kierkegaard, , Fear and Trembling, pp. 64–77.Google Scholar

page 162 note 6 ibid. p. 70.

page 162 note 7 ibid. p. 69.

page 162 note 8 ibid. p. 77.

page 163 note 1 ibid. p. 66.

page 163 note 2 Kierkegaard, , Concluding Unscientific Postscript, pp. 96, 231.Google Scholar

page 163 note 3 Kant, Immanuel, The Critique of Practical Reason, trans. Beck, Lewis White (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1956), pp.114–36.Google Scholar

page 166 note 1 Sartre, Jean-Paul, ‘The Singular Universal’, in Kierkegaard: A Collection of Critical Essays, edited by Thompson, Josiah (Garden City: Doubleday, 1972), p. 262.Google Scholar

page 167 note 1 Buber, Martin, ‘What is Man?’ in Between Man and Man, trans. Smith, Ronald Gregor (London: Collins, 1947), p. 244.Google Scholar

page 167 note 2 See Buber's, ‘Replies to My Critics’, in The Philosophy of Martin Buber, edited by Schilpp, Paul Arthur and Friedman, Maurice (La Salle: Open Court, 1967), p. 720.Google Scholar

page 167 note 3 Kierkegaard, , Concluding Unscientific Postscript, p. 182.Google Scholar

page 168 note 1 ibid. p. 181.

page 168 note 2 ibid. p. 109.

page 170 note 1 ibid. p. 119.