Phl 303
Lectures 19 & 20: From Kant to Kierkegaard


I. Kant- Hegel -Kierkegaard
II. The Philosophical Fragments
III. Sketch of Kierkegaard's Existentialism
IV. The Historical Fall & the Origin of Evil

Soren Kierkegaard, Danish thinker (1813-1855). Precursor of existentialism. Influenced 20th century philosophy, theology and literary studies, including:

Heidegger, Sartre, Jaspers, Karl Barth, the Niebuhrs, G. Marcel,..

I. Kant -- Hegel -- Kierkegaard

Kant:

1. Evil cannot be subsequent or parallel to the will, since then there would be no explanation of the universality of sin (no original sin at all).
2. But, evil cannot precede the will either, since it must either be part of our nature or outside our nature.
(a) If evil is part of our nature, then the moral law no longer applies to us, and evil could not still be evil.
(b) If evil is not part of our nature, then the evil we do is the result of this alien intrusion, and we are not really responsible. G. W. F. Hegel (early 19th century)
Kierkegaard

Agreement with Kant:
1. Original sin is not merely an inherited condition, resulting from a historical fall.
2. All sin is the result of the exercise of human freedom.
3. Human nature is not nullified through sin.
4. Sin is a universal phenomenon.
5. Origin of sin is a mystery: "sin presupposes itself".

Disagreement with Kant:
1. Mere self-reform is not an adequate solution.
2. The solution involves going beyond human reason.

Agreement with Hegel:
1. Sin is a kind of developmental phase -- necessary if we are to reach the higher level.
2. Sin does represent a conflict between individuality and universality, and both are necessary.

Disagreement with Hegel:
1. We are not parts or aspects of God (the Absolute). The contrast between our sinfulness and God's holiness is real, not merely apparent.
2. Philosophical thought of a pantheistic sort offers no viable solution, since it denies our real existence as individuals in space and time.
3. There is no permanent solution to sin: the transition from sin to faith must be continually repeated in our experience. We never simply leave sin and guilt behind.

II. Kierkegaard's Philosophical Fragments

Written under a pseudonym: Johannes Climacus.

A thought-experiment, beginning with a single hypothesis, What if?

What if:
we begin life without the truth (the essential truth about who we are), and without even the condition of discovering the truth on our own?

What would follow from this hypothesis?

Kierkegaard reconstructs most of traditional Christian theology in the process of answering this question.

III. A sketch of Kierkegaard's existentialism

1. Human existence is a matter of living through time, which involves having a narrative or history to one's life.

2. Therefore, he central challenge of human life is that of "becoming a self" by constructing and maintaining the continuity of the narrative of one's life through time, despite changes.

3. This unity or continuity of one's life-history is either a unity with God or against God. If it does not include God, it necessarily excludes Him.

4. Therefore, human life begins either in a state of unity with God or of opposition to God.
In the first case, knowing the truth (about oneself and God) is a matter of recollection (making explicit what you already know, deep down).
In the second case, knowing the truth involves learning it through an event (the moment) - an encounter with God in time (= faith).

5. But, human life cannot begin in harmony with God, for two reasons:
(a) This original harmony would destroy our unique individuality. Each of us would be swallowed up in God's being.
(b) This original harmony would make it impossible for us to encounter God as an Other. We would be unable to have an interpersonal relationship with God.

6. So, recollection is not the road to truth -- faith is.

7. For faith to be possible, God (the eternal) must confront us in time, through some sort of incarnation.

8. Such an incarnation of the eternal in time is paradoxical -- rationally incomprehensible.

9. When we encounter God's self-revelation in time (the incarnation), we first become aware of our own opposition to God. Guilt and the consciousness of sin is the first result of the encounter with God.

10. The solution to sin is faith, the acceptance of the paradox.

IV. The Historical Fall, and the Origin of Evil

Kierkegaard can make room for a certain kind of inheritance of sin (unlike Kant).
See -- SK's The Concept of Anxiety.

Becoming a self involves building a narrative unity that includes more than one's own autobiography, but also one's historical roots.

So, sin does have an inter-generational aspect. The matter of evil (its quality and quantity) is inherited from the past, although we are constantly modifying it as act.

Paradox of the origin of evil?
With Hegel, Kierkegaard thinks of sin as a kind of immaturity, something that necessarily precedes our ultimate end.

It is part of our nature (viewed dynamically), but not part of our natural end.

Remaining problem:
how then does sin incur guilt, judgment?

Because sin takes the form of a willful opposition to God.

In order to move through it, we must understand ourselves as guilty.

To minimize the guilt (it was only a phase, it's part of the overall plan) is to short-circuit the movement to faith.


Last updated November 19, 1998
Created by: Robert C. Koons
Send comments to: koons@la.utexas.edu

Phl 303 Home Page | Phl 303 Lecture Outlines | Philosophy Department | Prof. Koons | UT Austin Web Central