Cambridge Core – Philosophy Texts – Kierkegaard: Concluding Unscientific Postscript. Cambridge Core – Theology – Kierkegaard’s ‘Concluding Unscientific Postscript’ – edited by Rick Anthony Furtak. One of the most noteworthy features of Kierkegaard’s Concluding Unscientific Postscript: A Critical Guide is that it lives up to its subtitle.
|Published (Last):||9 August 2008|
|PDF File Size:||19.71 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||6.5 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
The Johns Hopkins UP,pp. It then affirms that the passionate idolater, rather than the passionless Christian, is the one who prays aright: The confusion is caused by the words “in truth”, which are just the literal equivalents of the Danish ” i Sandhed “. This fact can be a convenience, but it can also be a curse; in borderline cases, it tempts the translator to sacrifice English clarity for sharper surface echoes of the Danish.
Pages to import images to Wikidata Articles containing Danish-language text Webarchive template wayback links All stub articles. For one thing I had in fact learned very early that there are men who seem to be selected for suffering, and, for another thing, I was conscious of having sinned much and therefore supposed that Christianity had to appear to me in the form of this terror.
It is not composed of propositions or perceptions of the external world, but of introspection, experiences, and especially one’s relationship with God.
Subjective truth is essential or ethico-religious truth. The distinction on which the above “incendiary sentence” pivots — that between subjective and objective concerns as kierkrgaard for authenticity — is in fact the key to the argument of the Postscript as a whole.
Such radical subjectivism about faith is not, however, the actual thrust of the famous line.
Objective truth is that which relates to propositions, that which has no relation to the existence of the knower. This turns out to require some account of the content of Christian faith. So it happens that the issue of system versus the Christian faith has been debated more than a hundred years ago.
This is a regrettable missed opportunity: Aesthetically, it is a masterpiece: Hannay’s translation is the first to retain this crucial nuance. Farewells are exchanged in the confidence that the sun will rise, that we will awake, that the world will return, that our friends will not enter the grave in the night — even as we know that a final farewell awaits, when there will be no tomorrow, when we will not awake, when the beloved will not return A general reservation about this collection of essays: The translation here under review is Hannay’s latest, the Concluding Unscientific Postscriptand his first with Cambridge in the series “Cambridge Texts in the History of Philosophy”.
Through the discipline of resignation, concludinng at an absolute commitment to the highest good, through the discipline powtscript suffering, through the consciousness of guilt, the way leads step by step to a more profound pathos, until by a leap we reach the absolute maximum of subjectivity in the Christian consciousness of sin, with its imperative need for a new departure.
The first began during the Great Depression, and was something of a religious stage. In keeping the principle “understanding is revocation”, the appendix specifies that it itself as the book’s “Understanding” is “indeed precisely the book’s Revocation” An Essay in Experimental Psychology posyscript, tr.
Hannay’s offerings are deservedly popular: Unscintific keeps the English reader’s focus on the how of prayer rather than on the identity of the prayer’s target.
The work is a poignant attack against Hegelianismthe philosophy of Hegelespecially Hegel’s Science of Logic. The Hongs prized consistency and literal precision, if at times at the expense of English flow.
Inability to address all of them does not imply any criticism of those that space demands I omit. Marilyn Gaye Piety Oxford: In Kierkegaard’s usage, the name is likely meant to echo the Postscript ‘s own ladder-like attempt to use reason to scale the unnscientific of a Christianity that defies understanding.
The question as to whether Kierkegaard was an existentialist was brought up by Libuse Lukas Miller.
In the name of Christian faith Kierkegaard rejected not this or that element in Hegelianism but the whole, referring to it in mockery as c the System. Finally — in a grand show of obedience to this same principle — the book ends by revoking itself in an appendix As Mooney puts it, Farewells are exchanged in the confidence that the sun will rise, that we will awake, that the world will return, that our friends will not enter the grave in the night — even as we know that a final farewell awaits, when there will be no tomorrow, when we will not awake, when the beloved will not return It was an attack on what Kierkegaard saw as Hegel’s deterministic philosophy.
Hannay strikes a similar tone — informative, but with a light touch — in his Introduction’s second half, unscientkfic he sketches the Postscript ‘s unsccientific polemical targets Hegel, of course, but even more so the Danish Hegelian pair Heiberg and Martensen, cooncluding with the Romantic theologian Grundtvig. Yet the Postscript also insists echoing the project of Philosophical Crumbs conccluding,  the book to which it is a postscript that the true Christian’s task differs from, and indeed is far harder than, Socrates’ examined life.
It compares a pious idolater, one who prays to his idol “with all the passion of infinity”to a Christian who pays mere lip service to the genuine God. For these reasons, Hannay’s Postscript kierjegaard not merely the book’s best English translation yet; it is also the most inviting and accessible.
Concluding Unscientific Postscript to Philosophical Fragments – Wikiquote
Ferreira contends that in order to make sense of the discrepancy one must read the Postscript as containing “both a kieerkegaard to the Crumbs which elaborated some claims effectively made in Crumbs and a postscript to Crumbs that provided a new and crucial supplement to Crumbs. This means that being a true Christian turns out to be overwhelmingly a matter of subjective concern: As Unscientkfic puts it.
But how cruel and false of you, I thought, if you use it to terrify others, perhaps upset every concludint many happy, loving lives that may very well be truly Christian. Once again, however, while the topic is narrow compared to the more thematic contributions, the implications of this brief passage do have a direct bearing on how the whole of the Postscript is to be understood.
This article about a book on metaphysics is a stub. These puzzles are thick and knotted. I had a kierkeagard and trembling such as perhaps no one else had.
The receiver must experience or have experienced what is being communicated, not just hear it. Is it more essential that a prayer be genuine with regard to matters of “objective” concern — i.
S. Kierkegaard Concluding Unscientific | Valentina Cizmar –
What is more, it brings Kierkegaard’s painstaking use of grammar, so central to his kerkegaard method, one step closer to the English reader. Princeton UP,p. Swenson and Walter Lowrie Princeton: From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. But it does arm readers with the tools necessary to start grappling with it, and in fact that is all that an introduction of this kind should do.
With characteristic courage, Hannay opts for “truly”, rather than “in truth”, to render i Sandhed. His virtue, for the reader, is that posrscript sees the way to the top, while his value depends on his not having got there; for then he would have disappeared from view” xvii.
George Cotkin, Existential America Baltimore: