Thankfulness: Kierkegaard’s First-Person Approach to the Problem of Evil

IF 0.6 Q2 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE Philosophies Pub Date : 2024-03-01 DOI:10.3390/philosophies9020032
Heiko Schulz
{"title":"Thankfulness: Kierkegaard’s First-Person Approach to the Problem of Evil","authors":"Heiko Schulz","doi":"10.3390/philosophies9020032","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The present paper argues that, despite appearance to the contrary, Kierkegaard’s writings offer promising argumentational resources for addressing the problem of evil. According to Kierkegaard, however, in order to make use of these resources at all, one must necessarily be willing to shift the battleground, so to speak: from a third- to a genuine first-person perspective, namely the perspective of what Climacus dubs Religiousness A. All (yet also only) those who seek deliberate self-annihilation before God—a God in relation to whom they perceive themselves always in the wrong—shall discover the ideal that an unwavering and in fact unconditional thankfulness (namely, for being forgiven) is to be considered the only appropriate attitude towards God and as such both necessary and sufficient for coming to terms with evil and suffering, at least in the life of someone making that discovery. I will argue that Kierkegaard’s (non-)pseudonymous writings provide reasons, at times unwittingly, for adopting the perspective of Religiousness A; however, I will also and ultimately argue that the principle of infinite thankfulness as a corollary of that perspective flounders when it comes to making sense of (the eschatological implications of) the suffering of others.","PeriodicalId":31446,"journal":{"name":"Philosophies","volume":"58 6 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/philosophies9020032","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The present paper argues that, despite appearance to the contrary, Kierkegaard’s writings offer promising argumentational resources for addressing the problem of evil. According to Kierkegaard, however, in order to make use of these resources at all, one must necessarily be willing to shift the battleground, so to speak: from a third- to a genuine first-person perspective, namely the perspective of what Climacus dubs Religiousness A. All (yet also only) those who seek deliberate self-annihilation before God—a God in relation to whom they perceive themselves always in the wrong—shall discover the ideal that an unwavering and in fact unconditional thankfulness (namely, for being forgiven) is to be considered the only appropriate attitude towards God and as such both necessary and sufficient for coming to terms with evil and suffering, at least in the life of someone making that discovery. I will argue that Kierkegaard’s (non-)pseudonymous writings provide reasons, at times unwittingly, for adopting the perspective of Religiousness A; however, I will also and ultimately argue that the principle of infinite thankfulness as a corollary of that perspective flounders when it comes to making sense of (the eschatological implications of) the suffering of others.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
感恩:克尔凯郭尔对邪恶问题的第一人称方法
本文认为,尽管克尔凯郭尔的著作表面上与此相反,但它为解决邪恶问题提供了很有希望的论证资源。然而,克尔凯郭尔认为,要想利用这些资源,就必须愿意转移战场,即从第三人称视角转向真正的第一人称视角,也就是克里马库斯称之为 "宗教性A "的视角。所有(但也只有)在上帝面前刻意寻求自我毁灭的人--他们认为自己总是错的上帝--都会发现这样一个理想,即坚定不移的、事实上是无条件的感恩(即对被宽恕的感恩)被认为是对上帝唯一恰当的态度,因此对于接受邪恶和苦难既是必要的,也是充分的,至少在发现这一理想的人的生命中是如此。我将论证,克尔凯郭尔的(非)笔名著作为采用宗教性 A 的观点提供了理由,有时是在不知不觉中提供的;然而,我也将最终论证,作为该观点必然结果的无限感恩原则,在理解他人苦难的(末世论意义)时,会陷入困境。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Philosophies
Philosophies Multiple-
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
11.10%
发文量
122
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊最新文献
Horror as Film Philosophy Poetic Judgement in Everyday Speech Didier Eribon vs. ‘The People’—A Critique of Chantal Mouffe’s Left Populism Decolonial Philosophies and Complex Communication as Praxis Belarus’s Sound Body
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1