Claudine Davidshofer
Emory University
This article analyzes the “Interlude” in Kierkegaard’s Philosophical Fragments. In particular, it examines Johannes Climacus’s response to Hegel’s view that a past actuality is necessary. I provide an in-depth analysis of Hegel’s view of modality and of what he means when he says that a past actuality is necessary. In contrast to the standard scholarly interpretation, I argue that Climacus need not reject Hegel’s view because Hegel’s view of the necessity of the past is not so controversial or difficult to accept. Finally, I show that Climacus’s main critique is that we cannot know the past as necessary in any meaningful way. He worries that we might get so preoccupied with the futile task of trying to know the Hegelian necessity of the past that we forget to personally appropriate the past in a way that can help us live in the present.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
DOI 10.5840/ipq2021421172
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 71,410
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Kierkegaard’s “Hegelian” Response to Hamann.Stephan N. Dunning - 1988 - Neue Zeitschrift für Systematicsche Theologie Und Religionsphilosophie 30 (1):315-326.
On Ockham’s Way Out.Alvin Plantinga - 1986 - Faith and Philosophy 3 (3):235-269.
Critical Review of Kierkegaard’s Conceptual Elements Through His Critique of Hegelian Philosophical System.Mohammad Mehdi Ardebili - 2016 - Journal of Philosophical Investigations at University of Tabriz 10 (19):23-43.
Kierkegaard’s Non-Dialectical Dialectic or That Kierkegaard is Not Hegelian.Henry B. Piper - 2004 - International Philosophical Quarterly 44 (4):497-517.
Kierkegaard's "Hegelian" Response to Hamann.Stephen N. Dunning - 1980 - Thought: Fordham University Quarterly 55 (3):259-270.
Contingency, Necessity, and Causation in Kierkegaard's Theory of Change.Shannon Nason - 2012 - British Journal for the History of Philosophy 20 (1):141-162.
The Criticism of Hegelian Mediation in Kierkegaard's Second Volume of Enter-Eller (Either/Or). A Social Critique?Eduardo Assalone - 2014 - Las Torres de Lucca: Revista Internacional de Filosofía Política 3 (4):63-83.
Kierkegaard’s Relation to Hegel.John W. Elrod - 1980 - The Owl of Minerva 12 (2):6-7.
Kierkegaard’s Relation to Hegel. [REVIEW]John W. Elrod - 1980 - The Owl of Minerva 12 (2):6-7.


Added to PP index

Total views
18 ( #611,197 of 2,519,871 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #406,012 of 2,519,871 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes