Thesis (M.A.)--Catholic Theological Union at Chicago, 2004. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 104-108).

Thesis (M.A.)--Catholic Theological Union at Chicago, 2004. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 104-108).

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Baylor University, 2009. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 245-249).

L’œuvre de Kierkegaard se présente sous une forme poétique, non seulement par les fictions qu’il produit, mais encore par les pseudonymes auxquels il donne la parole et qui confèrent aux textes les plus conceptuels l’apparence fictive d’un discours subjectif. La forme poétique n’est donc pas un jeu arbitraire. Elle répond aux exigences de la pensée de l’existence : une pensée subjective, car l’on n’existe pas dans l’abstraction, où il s’agit de se comprendre soi-même dans l’existence. Une pensée existentielle n’est pas un savoir objectif qui peut être transmis directement : elle nécessite une communication indirecte. Tel est le rôle de la forme poétique. Son emploi est donc essentiellement philosophique, et ne fait pas de Kierkegaard un poète. Du poète, il s’agit, au contraire, de dénoncer l’illusion, en particulier celle du romantique. Confondant la possibilité et la réalité, le poète plane au-dessus de sa propre existence. Il faut alors de l’ironie pour libérer l’individu d’une telle illusion et l’amener au commencement de la vie personnelle, d’une existence éthique. C’est pourquoi la forme poétique est, ici, ironique ; il s’agit de parler la même langue que ceux à qui l’on s’adresse, un langage esthétique, afin de les amener à une pensée véritable d’eux-même : tromper en vue du vrai. Fondée philosophiquement pour utiliser la possibilité, qui est sa forme, en vue de la réalité, qui est son horizon éthique, la poétique kierkegaardienne peut ainsi présenter à l’individu les déterminations dialectiques de l’existence, et l’ouvrir au passage de la possibilité à la réalité : un saut qualitatif, une décision qui n’appartient qu’à lui. Grâce à la forme poétique, la pensée subjective se fait maïeutique ; l’auteur s’efface pour laisser la place à celui dont parle la fiction et à qui elle s’adresse, celui que l’auteur veut éveiller à lui-même : l’individu singulier. / Kierkegaard uses a poetic form in its works, not only by the fictions he composes but also by the pseudonyms he makes speak, who give to the most conceptual texts the fictional appearance of a subjective speech. Thus, the poetic form is not an arbitrary game. It is an answer to the requirements of the thinking of existence, a subjective thinking, for one does not exist in abstraction : be understandable oneself in one’s own existence. An existential thought is not an objective knowledge, which can be given directly : it requires an indirect communication. Such is the role of the poetic form. It is essentially a philosophic employment, and does not make a poet of Kierkegaard. On the contrary, his works tend to denounce the poet’s delusion, especially of the Romantic. The poet confuses possibility with reality, and glide above his own existence. Irony is then needed to free the subject from his delusion, and lead him to the beginning of his personal life, an ethical existence. That’s why the poetic form of Kierkegaard’s works is ironic in itself, for it is to speak the langage of those whom the speech speaks to, an aesthetic langage, in order to lead them to a true thinking of themselves : deceive toward the truth. Philosophically founded to use possibility, which is its form, with the reality in mind, which is its ethical horizon, the kierkegaardian poetic is enabled to present to the individual the dialectical determinations of existence, and show him the passage from possibility to reality : a qualitative leap, as his own decision. Through the poetic, the subjective thinking appears to be maïeutics. The author disappears to hand over the place to the one whom the fiction talks about and whom it speaks to, the one who the author wants to awaken within himself : the Individual.

No description available.

Thesis (M.A.)--Boston University / PLEASE NOTE: Boston University Libraries did not receive an Authorization To Manage form for this thesis or dissertation. It is therefore not openly accessible, though it may be available by request. If you are the author or principal advisor of this work and would like to request open access for it, please contact us at open-help@bu.edu. Thank you. / The purpose of this thesis is to discover the meaning of, and relationship among, what Kierkegaard refers to in his writings as the aesthetic, the ethical and the religious spheres of existence. The sources consulted cover the majority of Kierkegaard's pseudonymous writings. In the first chapter it is shown that Kierkegaard developed the concept of spheres of existence in an effort to show that philosophical categories must be derived from the structure of existence rather than the structure of thought. Contrary to Hegel, Kierkegaard maintains that in existence thought and being can never be identified, but are dialectically related in the sense of being in dialogue with each other. It is the principle of mediation to which Kierkegaard most objects. The consequence of the identification of thought and being is to put them into an immediate relationship to each other and thereby remove from thought its traditional philosophical function of elucidating and directing being. Kierkegaard uses the word existence to refer to the giveness of being, the facticity of the individual. It is in recognizing that the Hegelian attitude toward the dialectical character of existence represents a possible mode of consciousness and that his own attitude represents an opposing mode that Kierkegaard distinguishes between the aesthetic and the ethical spheres of existence. The third sphere of existence, the religious, arises from the possibility that consciousness may relate itself to that which underlies existence, i.e. God. The identification of the spheres of existence with the self-conscious development of human subjectivity is further supported by Kierkegaard's discussion of the self in Sickness Unto Death. Kierkegaard maintains that if one is to secure a position in the flux that is existence, consciousness must cease to be passive and establish itself through resolution. Hence a sphere of existence is defined not only by its moce of consciousness but by its telos. In the second chapter it is shown that the aesthetic consciousness is an immediate, non-reflexive consciousness which has its telos in the external world. It reveals itself as an essentially unstable and unfree consciousness in that it is vulnerable to events over which it has no control. This vulnerability is the sign of despair, which is the occasion for consciousness to heal itself in self-choosing or abdicate its task to exercise itself as free spirit in the dialogue of thought and being. In the phenomenon of irony Kierkegaard finds an illustration of what he calls "boundary zones" to the spheres of existence, by which he means the consciousness of the ideal and all it involves without the choice of it. In the "boundary zone" there is no telos in the proper sense as consciousness entertains the telos of both spheres it bounds. In the third chapter ethical consciousness is seen to be a reflexive, self-choosing consciousness. The self that is chosen is personal existence, which reveals itself as given, in virtue of which one has a history and because of which one must repent. The ethical telos is the eternal validity of the self, which reveals itself as the universal human. Kierkegaard characterizes the ethical choice as absolute, and thus, even though the choice is of subjectivity, the qualification of absolute rules out the possibility of capricious and anarchic subjectivity. such an absolute choice, Kierkegaard believes, must give continuity to the self and must recognize its relation or dependence on something other than itself as it immediately is. With the subjectivity of choice arises the danger of temptation in the form of the possibility of a teleological suspension of the ethical. With this possibility arises the awareness that the self did not create itself but was created by Another, to Whom consciousness may establish a relationship. At this point consciousness may again enter a "boundary zone" of existence as the humorous consciousness, prior to the decision to relate itself to God. In the fourth chapter it is seen that consciousness, in its awareness of itself as dependent is also aware of itself as separated from that on which it defends, and hence that it can assume two attitudes toward this separation, that of resignation and that of faith. When the religious consciousness is characterized by resignation, Kierkegaard calls it religiousness A. When it is characterized by faith, he calls it religiousness B. In religiousness A the dialectical character of existence becomes fully explicit and consciousness becomes a sufferin; consciousness because the continuity it desires cannot be achieved in existence. Hence, in religiousness A consciousness resigns itself to a life of strife. In religiousness A consciousness has arrived as close to the truth as it is able through its own effort. Religiousness B is possible only if the condition for truth is given by God. The condition is faith, not as an exercise of thought, but as a mode of being. The temporality and finitude that characterized personal existence and separate it from its eternal happiness are made compatible with the religious telos in the person of Christ. That is, Christ is the only true mediction. However, Kierkegaard emphasizes that belief in this mediation is possible only at the offense of thought. In the last chapter it is asserted that the significance of Kierkegaard's conception of spheres of existence is that existence is not absurd, and that while man is not self-creating, he is self-choosing. / 2031-01-01

Fideism, or basing one’s religious belief on faith, is popular especially amongst modern Protestant Christians. For the fideist, religious belief-systems are not subject to rational evaluation, and faith as the act of belief forms the essence of truth and the ultimate criterion for embracing a religion. Critics of fideism say that epistemologically, a hierarchy of methods can be used to derive the truth, and each method gives us varying confidence levels. These methods include mathematics and logic, science, personal experience, history, expert testimony, inference and Faith. Among these, the critic says, pure faith in something is the least successful in getting at the truth. Radical fideists like Kierkegaard do not cite logical reasons for defending their belief that God exists. Personal reasons are instead offered for their decision to believe. In this thesis I seek to demonstrate that the radical fideism advocated by Kierkegaard constitutes good justification for belief in the Christian God. I will begin with a discussion on fideism and some of its proponents, followed by a discussion on the place of faith (as a non-rational belief in God’s existence) in religion. I will then appeal to Kierkegaard’s philosophy in defending my view that religious belief in God is a matter of faith and personal commitment, feeling and passion, and this is an inner process not grounded in arguments. References will be drawn from Kierkegaard’s themes of faith, subjectivity and inwardness. I conclude by saying that even if no objective grounds exist to justify our belief, Kierkegaard standpoint remains right in two ways: Firstly, the fideist rejection of the attempt to justify his belief through offering reasons for it is precisely what makes his decision to believe deeply meaningful in his life. Secondly, those who ‘try to judge faith by objective, critical reflection will go on forever that way, and will never reach the point of having faith and of being religious’. (Peterson et al, 2003:53)

Doktorgra--Teologiske Fakultet--Københavns Universitet, 1996. / Résumé en allemand. Bibliogr. p. 433-438. Index.

Thesis (doctoral) - Humboldt-Universität, Berlin, 2005. / DatabaseEbrary. EAN: 9783110189636 (cl.). Includes bibliographical references (p. [211]-220) and indexes.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Ruprecht-Karl-Universität, Heidelberg, 1980. / Includes bibliographical references.