Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Disable your ad blocker to continue using our website.
Last semester, he took a philosophy class, I think cause he knows how much I enjoy philosophy now and was curious perhaps. Whatever the reason, I secretly wished that I could take a class as well...someday maybe.
I asked him if the class was hard (he got a b)...he said, 'sort of, yeah."
Anyway, I thought I would share the video and my reply so that we could maybe get a discussion going about K or some snide remarks about my understanding....lol. I would welcome both!
Thanks for the video, J.
I don't know what this guy is talking about...he read a much different K than I did. No wonder K got so pissed off at people. People just didn't get him. Trust me when I say K was not talking about Christianity so much as he was using Christianity in order to make a point...to show people something they have never considered before. If he was advocating Christianity as it is the highest goal a person could achieve, he would have strive to live that life. He didn't.
In fact, the woman he loved, who he was engaged to, he dumped...even though he remained in love with her. Her father even came to beg K to reconsider, as the shame K brought to her was too much. A distraught K could not do it even though he loved her...no one really knows why...instead he left for Germany and attended school where he wrote about his despair.
When his love was old , having married another man, she spoke of how she loved k. They had something powerful, but for whatever reason, the Christian thing to do... is not something k could do . Some believe his writings are an explanation to regine (his girl).
Whatever the reasons, to think K thought that Christianity was the ultimate highest "good" that one can achieve, is to miss the point. In fact, his books are funny as hell in sarcasm against Christianity. You actually laugh out loud he is so funny/ironic sometimes. K thought Christians missed the point, the only 'knight of faith' was someone who did what they thought was right no matter what society said...and there was no way they could make themselves understood, which makes it all the more isolating and rare.
He knew this from his subjective understanding and it is very clear to me this guy making the video didn't get it. I get k, because I am so like him it's not even funny. I think you would get him too. If you ever get a chance to read "fear and trembling' in the future (perhaps when I am dead you'll remember I said this and want to know more about your mom) you won't be sorry.
I read it in Disneyland, with Leslie. We'd be standing in line and I would crack up and tell her, "you gotta listen to this...!" And then I would read her a page. lol poor Leslie didn't get it...lol...I tried to explain but she still didn't get it. Oh well.
Anyway, the whole day going from ride to ride I was reading while we walked, stood in line, walked...etc. At the end of the day, we sat at the chicken place by the castle and I finished the book while the fireworks were going off. It was surreal. It was the first time I ever felt understood. Seriously amazing!
I hope one day that happens to you in whatever form it takes. I hope it is your wife....but even if it's a dumb book...lol...it still will make you feel well...understood, if that makes sense.
It's irrelevant to understand Kirkegaard, he has no relevance, he likes to speak of his objective truth, which is "rainbow chasing" ..this is 1 of the reasons why philosophy is outdated and no companies really request philosophers.
HexHammer wrote:It's irrelevant to understand Kirkegaard, he has no relevance, he likes to speak of his objective truth, which is "rainbow chasing" ..this is 1 of the reasons why philosophy is outdated and no companies really request philosophers.
Because as we all know, Companies are the holy grail of understanding and wisdom....not.
Only around for quickies - I've decided to limit my posts and focus on language learning. Pertickelerly German - deffo not Danish
Good Luck with all your threads !!!
Melchior wrote:Who the f*** gives a damn about Kierkegard? Why did you post this shit?
Um...because this is a philosophy forum and K was a philosopher? Perhaps you'd rather swap recipes and do each other's hair?
LOL! ..sure this is a philosophy forum, and you know ..philosophy = "love of wisdom".
So what wisdom are there to be found in Kirkegaard ...NOTHING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! GTFO!!!!!!!!!!!!
As the video demonstrates, Kierkegaard was against objective truth found in rational philosophy and theology, so he was somewhat of a thorn in the side of the Danish Church. Like most existentialist philosophers to come after Kierkegaard, he attempts to address the problems associated with existence and making sense of our experiences. In is literary works, K addresses the problems of existence as only coming up with solutions that are absurd and meaningless, so his satirization is an attempt to get the reader to question their own existence.One of the techniques K uses is to invoke Plato's idea of 'recollection' and the problem of eternal knowledge.
K uses the problem of Plato's prior knowledge, but offers up a different solution. The Platonic solution being that we never actually learn anything we didn't already know"; instead we are just re-aquainting ourselves with knowledge itself. K accepts this problem raised by Plato,but replaces 'recollection' with the idea of a type of privileged insight into the problem of knowing. In other words, something miraculous happens upon the moment of learning... we are no longer the person we once were. Prior to this change in the learner, he/she must have been in a state of ignorance incapable of distinguishing truth from falsehood. K's hypothesis is not one of explaining knowledge as Platonic recollection, but explains knowledge as due to some inexplicable transformation that takes place in the learner.
