Some thoughts about Kierkegaard 's philosophy /part 2/
The category of choice is a major category of existentialism and even more of its Sartre version. When a person reads Sartre and Kierkegaard , he unintentionally compares and again unintentionally draws conclusions that point to the direct genetic link in their views. It may be quite certain that some basic principles and formulations of Sartre amazingly resemble Kierkegaard's speeches. In the history of philosophical knowledge, such a practice of interacting with predecessors is not excluded. Very often the difference between two philosophical teachings may be more terminological than a principle.
In Kierkegaard's concept of choosing the personality, three other basic notions are circulated without which it is impossible to understand the whole meaning of his position - doubt, despair, remorse. That's why her author leaves us no doubt that doubt is the first and most ineffective way of realizing the great law, the duty and the pleasure to self-model in a mostly vertical perspective, to choose. Fundamental is despair; as paradoxical as it may sound, it guarantees the security and prosperity of our choice, its dynamic direction and the aspirations of the absolute dimensions.
In developing the concept of choice, Kierkegaard arrives at statements which he clearly presents as an immediate precedent of existentialism. How else could he define his conception of the identity of absolute and self, of the center of his place in the whole cosmic hierarchy; Kierkegaard nourishes the anthropological and anthropomorphic ideas of existentialism. In "The term fear", Kierkegaard sets a goal to consider the psychological notion of fear. In such a way that it also has in mind the dogma of the first-born sin. It deals so much with the concept of sin, while sin is not a psychological concern, and it may be a misunderstood spirituality. Sin has its own place or is lacking at all, but that is the very definition of it. When sin is brought into aesthetics, then the setting becomes either frivolous or melancholic, because the category to which sin belongs is the contradiction, and it is either comical or tragic.
When we in Europe speak of philosophy, we think of the "old Greeks".
But at the same time those old Greeks were basically ""inventing" everything in philosophy in just a few generations, the same happened in China and India. (Including existentialism)
Sometimes it sounds like those schools just copied from each other even though they very surely did not know of each other.
This post has received a 6.81 % upvote from @boomerang.
To listen to the audio version of this article click on the play image.
Brought to you by @tts. If you find it useful please consider upvoting this reply.