/lit/ - Literature

>>4436139

A dilemma is a problem with two possible solutions, neither of which is particularly appealing – think of the idioms, ‘damned if you do, damned if you don’t’ or ‘stuck between a rock and a hard place’. The two possible solutions are called the problem’s two ‘horns’, the idea being that you would rather not be impaled by either one. Kierkegaard’s dilemma is this:

Either (a) you had a wank this morning or (b) you did not have a wank this morning
(b) If you did not have a wank this morning, then it is impossible to prove that you did have a wank this morning

(a) If you did have a wank this morning, then it is foolish to want to demonstrate it, since I have already presupposed that you had a wank this morning

So, the dilemma starts with a problem in the form of a disjunction (either… or… ). The next step is to take up each horn of the dilemma separately, and see what happens. So we assume (b) you did not have a wank this morning. But if we assume this is true, then how can we prove that you did not have a wank this morning? Then we assume (a) you did have a wank this morning But if you wanking this morning is my starting point, then why bother trying to prove it? Of course I could prove it:

Premise 1: you had a wank this morning.
Conclusion: you had a wank this morning.

But such a proof, at least according to Kierkegaard, seems pointless.

Hey /lit/ how do i into kierkegaard

i've heard good things about what he has to say on religion and faith so where do i start? are there any other significant things he wrote about?

and most importantly was he a qt?