David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
International Journal of Philosophical Studies 3 (2):307 – 321 (1995)
Abstract Kierkegaard and his pseudonym, Johannes Climacus, advance a ?theory? of indirect communication which designates it as the appropriate vehicle for ethico?religious discourse. This paper examines the justification for this claim, as it is elaborated in the Postscript, and traces the similarity between Climacus? account of indirect communication and his broader existential ethics. Both accounts locate the identity of the subject in the repeated renunciation of finitude. Just as the autonomy of the Kantian subject demands indifference to phenomenal incentives, so too the ?infinite possibility? of the Climacean subject is assured only through its repeated renunciation of finite determinants. The paper argues that this project of self?determination underlies both the theory of indirect communication and the Postscript's existential ethics, and both are critiqued by Kierkegaard under the rubric of ?Religiousness A?. The theory of indirect communication and the existential ethics of which it is a part demand that the individual's freedom be literally ?thought at every moment? ? a requirement which is as divorced from the circumstances of actual existence as Hegel's much maligned ?System?. The paper closes by considering the significance of Climacus? ?Absolute Paradox? for the subject's predicament and for Kierkegaard's authorship: does the notion of the Absolute Paradox represent an alternative to the subject's self?assertion, or is it merely its pre?eminent expression?
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
C. Stephen Evans (2009). Kierkegaard: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press.
Søren Kierkegaard (2009). Concluding Unscientific Postscript to the Philosophical Crumbs. Cambridge University Press.
Alexander Pruss, Faith, Paradox, Reason and the Argumentum Spiritus Sancti in Climacus and Kierkegaard.
Antony Aumann (2008). Kierkegaard on the Need for Indirect Communication. Dissertation, Indiana University
Rick Anthony Furtak (ed.) (2010). Kierkegaard's 'Concluding Unscientific Postscript': A Critical Guide. Cambridge University Press.
Jack Mulder (2002). Re-Radicalizing Kierkegaard: An Alternative to Religiousness C in Light of an Investigation Into the Teleological Suspension of the Ethical. [REVIEW] Continental Philosophy Review 35 (3):303-324.
Jack Mulder Jr (2002). Re-Radicalizing Kierkegaard: An Alternative to Religiousness C in Light of an Investigation Into the Teleological Suspension of the Ethical. [REVIEW] Continental Philosophy Review 35 (3):303-324.
John Lippitt (1999). Illusion and Satire in Kierkegaard's Postscript. Continental Philosophy Review 32 (4):451-466.
Antony Aumann (2010). Kierkegaard on Indirect Communication, the Crowd, and a Monstrous Illusion. In Robert L. Perkins (ed.), International Kierkegaard Commentary: Point of View. Mercer University Press.
Added to index2009-02-01
Total downloads13 ( #100,521 of 1,088,400 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #69,601 of 1,088,400 )
How can I increase my downloads?