Pub Date : 2022-07-14DOI: 10.1515/kierke-2022-0019
D. L. Coe
Abstract Nineteenth-century Lutheran giants C.F.W. Walther and Søren Kierkegaard both stressed over the application of Martin Luther’s doctrine of Law and Gospel. Both viewed Law and Gospel as concepts to be distinguished and as concepts that dialectically belong together. To his Pelagian audience tempted to abuse the Law and abolish the Gospel, Walther stressed the distinction of Law and Gospel. To his Antinomian audience tempted to abuse the Gospel and abolish the Law, Kierkegaard stressed the dialectic of Law and Gospel. Walther and Kierkegaard’s contrasting Law and Gospel emphases are clearly seen in their contrasting accounts of the Rich Young Ruler in the Synoptic Gospels.
{"title":"Law and Gospel, Distinction and Dialectic: C.F.W. Walther, Søren Kierkegaard, and the Rich Young Ruler","authors":"D. L. Coe","doi":"10.1515/kierke-2022-0019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/kierke-2022-0019","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Nineteenth-century Lutheran giants C.F.W. Walther and Søren Kierkegaard both stressed over the application of Martin Luther’s doctrine of Law and Gospel. Both viewed Law and Gospel as concepts to be distinguished and as concepts that dialectically belong together. To his Pelagian audience tempted to abuse the Law and abolish the Gospel, Walther stressed the distinction of Law and Gospel. To his Antinomian audience tempted to abuse the Gospel and abolish the Law, Kierkegaard stressed the dialectic of Law and Gospel. Walther and Kierkegaard’s contrasting Law and Gospel emphases are clearly seen in their contrasting accounts of the Rich Young Ruler in the Synoptic Gospels.","PeriodicalId":53174,"journal":{"name":"Kierkegaard Studies Yearbook","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2022-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90593179","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-14DOI: 10.1515/kierke-2022-0014
Jamie Aroosi
Abstract The right to revolt is a central concept in political philosophy, denoting when it is justified to replace a corrupt government with a new one. As such, it is a normative concept that would-be revolutionaries should consult in order to determine the justness of a possible revolution. However, this article argues that within Kierkegaard’s thought lies a wholly new conception of revolution that does not look to describe when it might be just to revolt but that instead sees revolution as an act we are sometimes obligated to enact. Consequently, revolt transforms from a right to a responsibility, with important ethical and political consequences.
{"title":"Revolutionizing the Right to Revolt: Søren Kierkegaard and the Responsibility to Revolt","authors":"Jamie Aroosi","doi":"10.1515/kierke-2022-0014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/kierke-2022-0014","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The right to revolt is a central concept in political philosophy, denoting when it is justified to replace a corrupt government with a new one. As such, it is a normative concept that would-be revolutionaries should consult in order to determine the justness of a possible revolution. However, this article argues that within Kierkegaard’s thought lies a wholly new conception of revolution that does not look to describe when it might be just to revolt but that instead sees revolution as an act we are sometimes obligated to enact. Consequently, revolt transforms from a right to a responsibility, with important ethical and political consequences.","PeriodicalId":53174,"journal":{"name":"Kierkegaard Studies Yearbook","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2022-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83145712","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-14DOI: 10.1515/kierke-2022-0002
Joakim Garff
Abstract In this article, I investigate Either/Or’s generic affinity with the Bildungsroman. I demonstrate that it both imitates the topological structure (home-homeless-home) of this genre and that it is likewise composed of a number of formation narratives and tropes that mirror the Bildungsroman. This is documented by following the development of an often-overlooked textual figure at the conclusion of the second part of Either/Or and through a reading of “The Seducer’s Diary” as a demonic Bildungsroman with maieutic implications. Finally, I examine the relationship between the Bildungsroman and the Entwicklungsroman [novel of development] with particular attention to Kierkegaard’s late authorship.
{"title":"Either/Or Read as Bildungsroman","authors":"Joakim Garff","doi":"10.1515/kierke-2022-0002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/kierke-2022-0002","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In this article, I investigate Either/Or’s generic affinity with the Bildungsroman. I demonstrate that it both imitates the topological structure (home-homeless-home) of this genre and that it is likewise composed of a number of formation narratives and tropes that mirror the Bildungsroman. This is documented by following the development of an often-overlooked textual figure at the conclusion of the second part of Either/Or and through a reading of “The Seducer’s Diary” as a demonic Bildungsroman with maieutic implications. Finally, I examine the relationship between the Bildungsroman and the Entwicklungsroman [novel of development] with particular attention to Kierkegaard’s late authorship.","PeriodicalId":53174,"journal":{"name":"Kierkegaard Studies Yearbook","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2022-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76233198","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-14DOI: 10.1515/kierke-2022-0017
Joe Larios
Abstract This paper seeks to consider the similarities between Kierkegaard’s life stages and Lacan’s orders to demonstrate that we can understand each description in a structurally similar way to the other. Accordingly, a reading of Kierkegaard is developed that uses his life stages to describe a metapsychology, and a reading of Lacan is developed that shows how his orders can be conceived of progressively. All this leads to a further analysis of the different ways in which each stage relates to repetition and a culmination in which the achievement of faith in Kierkegaard is thought together with the analytic cure in Lacan.
{"title":"Toward an Upbuilding Metapsychology: Kierkegaard, Lacan, and the Infinite Movement","authors":"Joe Larios","doi":"10.1515/kierke-2022-0017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/kierke-2022-0017","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper seeks to consider the similarities between Kierkegaard’s life stages and Lacan’s orders to demonstrate that we can understand each description in a structurally similar way to the other. Accordingly, a reading of Kierkegaard is developed that uses his life stages to describe a metapsychology, and a reading of Lacan is developed that shows how his orders can be conceived of progressively. All this leads to a further analysis of the different ways in which each stage relates to repetition and a culmination in which the achievement of faith in Kierkegaard is thought together with the analytic cure in Lacan.","PeriodicalId":53174,"journal":{"name":"Kierkegaard Studies Yearbook","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2022-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90072318","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-14DOI: 10.1515/kierke-2022-0007
Albrecht Haizmann
Abstract This article describes a rhetorical characteristic of Kierkegaard’s thirteen Discourses “at the Communion” on Fridays (1848 – 1851), namely, their way of expressing religious truths, theological distinctions, and homiletic statements by a certain concept of space, place and movement, thus making them existentially accessible. It illustrates the fundamental meaning of this series of discourses and especially the last discourse for Kierkegaard’s entire work as an author. By focussing on the topological categories and correlations in the last discourse (1851), the article demonstrates the constitutive role of spatial terms and meanings and so discovers the theological topology of the series as a whole with its coincidences of soteriological, anthropological, liturgical, rhetorical, and existential movements—leading the listener/reader to the “place of rest at the foot of the altar.”
{"title":"“A Place of Rest at the Foot of the Altar”: Topological Categories and Correlations in Kierkegaard’s last Discourse at the Communion on Fridays","authors":"Albrecht Haizmann","doi":"10.1515/kierke-2022-0007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/kierke-2022-0007","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article describes a rhetorical characteristic of Kierkegaard’s thirteen Discourses “at the Communion” on Fridays (1848 – 1851), namely, their way of expressing religious truths, theological distinctions, and homiletic statements by a certain concept of space, place and movement, thus making them existentially accessible. It illustrates the fundamental meaning of this series of discourses and especially the last discourse for Kierkegaard’s entire work as an author. By focussing on the topological categories and correlations in the last discourse (1851), the article demonstrates the constitutive role of spatial terms and meanings and so discovers the theological topology of the series as a whole with its coincidences of soteriological, anthropological, liturgical, rhetorical, and existential movements—leading the listener/reader to the “place of rest at the foot of the altar.”","PeriodicalId":53174,"journal":{"name":"Kierkegaard Studies Yearbook","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2022-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81051647","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-14DOI: 10.1515/kierke-2022-0021
E. Ziolkowski
Abstract The subject of this two-part article (the second part will be published in KSYB 2023) is the bearing of Søren Kierkegaard’s writings, and of their reception, upon the development of Religionswissenschaft or the comparative study of religion. This first part opens by taking account of Kierkegaard’s own awareness of, and relationship to, “non-Christian” religions (Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, religions of China, etc.), including his late reading of Schopenhauer; then considers Kierkegaard in juxtaposition with his contemporary F. Max Müller, the Sanskritist and foundational pioneer of comparative religion, and the two men’s contrasting relations to F.W.J. Schelling; and finally examines the interest taken in Kierkegaard by William James, Max Weber, and Gerardus van der Leeuw as early twentieth-century contributors through three different disciplines to the study of comparative religion.
这篇由两部分组成的文章(第二部分将在KSYB 2023上发表)的主题是索伦·克尔凯郭尔(Søren Kierkegaard)的著作及其接受对宗教比较研究的发展的影响。第一部分首先考虑到克尔凯郭尔自己对“非基督教”宗教(犹太教、伊斯兰教、印度教、佛教、中国宗教等)的认识和关系，包括他对叔本华的晚期阅读;然后将克尔凯郭尔与他同时代的比较宗教奠基人、梵文学者f·马克斯·米勒(F. Max m ller)并置，以及两人与f·w·j·谢林的对比关系;最后考察了威廉·詹姆斯、马克斯·韦伯和杰拉杜斯·范德卢对克尔凯郭尔的兴趣，他们是二十世纪早期比较宗教研究的三个不同学科的贡献者。
{"title":"Kierkegaard and Religionswissenschaft: A Source- and Reception-Historical Survey (Part 1)","authors":"E. Ziolkowski","doi":"10.1515/kierke-2022-0021","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/kierke-2022-0021","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The subject of this two-part article (the second part will be published in KSYB 2023) is the bearing of Søren Kierkegaard’s writings, and of their reception, upon the development of Religionswissenschaft or the comparative study of religion. This first part opens by taking account of Kierkegaard’s own awareness of, and relationship to, “non-Christian” religions (Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, religions of China, etc.), including his late reading of Schopenhauer; then considers Kierkegaard in juxtaposition with his contemporary F. Max Müller, the Sanskritist and foundational pioneer of comparative religion, and the two men’s contrasting relations to F.W.J. Schelling; and finally examines the interest taken in Kierkegaard by William James, Max Weber, and Gerardus van der Leeuw as early twentieth-century contributors through three different disciplines to the study of comparative religion.","PeriodicalId":53174,"journal":{"name":"Kierkegaard Studies Yearbook","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2022-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89370615","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-14DOI: 10.1515/kierke-2022-0013
Niels Wilde
Abstract In this paper, I argue that the debate in the environmental humanities about the reconceptualization of the human being as one (humanity as a geologic agent) vs. many (human individuals) in light of the Anthropocene, resembles the very structure of Kierkegaard’s notion of the public as a compound object (one entity) composed of individuals (several entities). Further, I argue that the public provides not only a model for understanding the ontological makeup of the Anthropos but also serves as an early version of it. Hence, the public plays a role in the very emergence of the Anthropocene itself.
{"title":"Colossal Vacuums: Kierkegaard and the Rise of the Public in the Anthropocene","authors":"Niels Wilde","doi":"10.1515/kierke-2022-0013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/kierke-2022-0013","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In this paper, I argue that the debate in the environmental humanities about the reconceptualization of the human being as one (humanity as a geologic agent) vs. many (human individuals) in light of the Anthropocene, resembles the very structure of Kierkegaard’s notion of the public as a compound object (one entity) composed of individuals (several entities). Further, I argue that the public provides not only a model for understanding the ontological makeup of the Anthropos but also serves as an early version of it. Hence, the public plays a role in the very emergence of the Anthropocene itself.","PeriodicalId":53174,"journal":{"name":"Kierkegaard Studies Yearbook","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2022-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90340513","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-14DOI: 10.1515/kierke-2022-0010
R. Kemp, Frank Della Torre
Abstract In a now classic paper, Karen Carr argues that Kierkegaard is a religious “anti-rationalist”: He holds that reason and religious truth exist in necessary tension with one another. Carr maintains that this antagonism is not a matter of the logical incoherence of Christianity, but rather the fact that genuine submission to Christ precludes approaching him through demonstration. In this essay, we argue that while Kierkegaard is in fact an anti-rationalist, the literature has failed to appreciate the full strength of his position. It is not just that reason and obedience are in tension; rather, Kierkegaard holds the stronger view that reason is actively offended by Christianity’s primary claims. Not only is reason incapable of generating any positive evidence for the truth of Christianity, more radically, it provides evidence against it. In order to make this case, we offer a close reading of Practice in Christianity, developing a typology of Kierkegaard’s account of Christ’s “offense.” Finally, having motivated Kierkegaard’s strong anti-rationalism, we consider why, on his account, anyone would want to be a Christian.
{"title":"Kierkegaard’s Strong Anti-Rationalism: Offense as a Propaedeutic to Faith","authors":"R. Kemp, Frank Della Torre","doi":"10.1515/kierke-2022-0010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/kierke-2022-0010","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In a now classic paper, Karen Carr argues that Kierkegaard is a religious “anti-rationalist”: He holds that reason and religious truth exist in necessary tension with one another. Carr maintains that this antagonism is not a matter of the logical incoherence of Christianity, but rather the fact that genuine submission to Christ precludes approaching him through demonstration. In this essay, we argue that while Kierkegaard is in fact an anti-rationalist, the literature has failed to appreciate the full strength of his position. It is not just that reason and obedience are in tension; rather, Kierkegaard holds the stronger view that reason is actively offended by Christianity’s primary claims. Not only is reason incapable of generating any positive evidence for the truth of Christianity, more radically, it provides evidence against it. In order to make this case, we offer a close reading of Practice in Christianity, developing a typology of Kierkegaard’s account of Christ’s “offense.” Finally, having motivated Kierkegaard’s strong anti-rationalism, we consider why, on his account, anyone would want to be a Christian.","PeriodicalId":53174,"journal":{"name":"Kierkegaard Studies Yearbook","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2022-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83342216","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：