/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.11490475]

Favourite part?

[Anonymous No.11490479]

I didnt get it

[Anonymous No.11490492]

>>11490475
The part where Abraham sacrifices Isaac.

[Anonymous No.11490598]

>>11490479
Breh that means you got it cause muh paradoxes!

[Anonymous No.11490621]

>>11490475
When he talks about Agamemnon as the knight of infinite resignation who's only consolation is that his sacrifice can be understood ethically - compared to Abraham who cannot be understood rationally

[Anonymous No.11490634]

>>11490621
Which part is that again?

[Anonymous No.11491074]

>It is hard not to find the person to whom one can give oneself, but it is unspeakably hard not to be able to give oneself.
This plus the parts where Johannes de Silentio goes on about how understanding Abraham is beyond him.

[Anonymous No.11491083]

>>11490475
Good starting point for Kierkegaard?

[Anonymous No.11491089]

>>11491083
Either/Or

[Anonymous No.11491095]

>>11491089
what either/or what

[Anonymous No.11491109]

>>11491083
Ignore this entirely - start with Fear & Trembling + Sickness Unto Death, Either/Or should be savoured last as it is also the largest of his works

[Anonymous No.11491118]

>>11491095
Underrated post

[Anonymous No.11491125]

>>11490475
I want to hug Kierkegaard and tell him that god loves him.

Or maybe not, I don't want to catch syphilis.

[Anonymous No.11492288]

Concluding Unscientific Postscript gives me feels. Book on Adler is depressingly overlooked. His journals will change the way you read him.

[Anonymous No.11492399]

>Tfw no love for his best work

[Anonymous No.11492430]

>>11491083
Provocations.

[Anonymous No.11492542]

>>11490475
Reading it right now, what am I in for boys?

[Anonymous No.11492552]

>>11492542
Sexy Merman.

[Anonymous No.11492557]

>>11491125
>I want to hug Kierkegaard and tell him that god loves him.
*God

[Anonymous No.11492566]

>>11490475
The part where I became Despair.

[Anonymous No.11492574]

>>11491109
larger than Concluding Unscientific Postscript?

Honestly, Fear and Trembling/Sickness unto Death are a lot shorter so they may be able to pique interest. The "sermons" are also good. However, I almost feel like it's easier to appreciate them if you've read Either/Or first. Maybe just reread them if you're stickin with Kierkegaard?

[Anonymous No.11492578]

the narrow and steep path. the whole of the third section seems to illustrate how this kind of supernatural awareness can isolate you, and faith is accepting this subjective metaphysical exile. Reminds me alot of cioran except hopeful. I think all these people reach the ends of experience and its interesting to see how they writhe in anguish and toil over putting their thought out there to either save themselves or others.

[Anonymous No.11492581]

>>11491125
hit me right in the feels

[Anonymous No.11492587]

>>11492557
You're not wrong.

[Anonymous No.11492602]

i have never read him, the only famous philosopher in my country. Give me three reasons why i should.

[Anonymous No.11492612]

>>11492602
He single-handedly (sp?) elucidated the Problem of Faith in religion.

[Anonymous No.11492621]

>>11492612
How so?

[Anonymous No.11492635]

>>11492602
“the poet of inwardness”
I’ve never felt such a connection with anyone in my lifetime as I have with K.
He’s helped me understand myself and in a sense, heal myself.

[Anonymous No.11492651]

Why should I read this guy if I’m an atheist?

>inb4 conversion

[Anonymous No.11492653]

>>11492621
It's a long story and I shouldn't have said single-handedly, he goes over a couple of Philosophers who gave him some ideas. What is central to his idea is the Subjectivity of the Subject. Which he bemoans as being a problem since he can't come out and say directly what he's trying to say, because it's subjective and therefore won't actually make sense. So he goes in a roundabout way to try and drop the hints for you to find yourself. Kinda like philosophical midwifery. Only the Subject can face God, and only through his Faith can he live as a Christian.

The one thing I dont remember him addressing very well was whether or not Faith is a gift from God, or some sort of conscious effort on the part of the Believer. Though I think (given FaT and TSUD) that he would lean more towards a conscious effort.

[Anonymous No.11492680]

WE WERE SOMEWHERE IN THE MIDDLE OF COPENHAGEN WHEN THE DRUGS BEGAN TO TAKE HOLD...

[Anonymous No.11492710]

>>11492651
It may help you to understand why religion was/is taken so seriously for so long by so many people.

It's possible you already have given religion its dues, but in my experience, atheists tend to just blow it off as some kind of stupidity, which it is not.

[Anonymous No.11492743]

>>11492542
probably in for a lightbulb falling on your head

seriously, that setup can't be safe

[Anonymous No.11492783]

>>11492651
go experience psychedelics first then come back for Kierkegaard

[Anonymous No.11493013]

>>11492783
Sounds like a waste of psychedelics. Read Nietzsche --> Deleuze ---> Land instead.

[Anonymous No.11493017]

>>11492651
>conversion
That seems like a potentially very good reason to me

[Anonymous No.11493059]

How needful is it to read Hegel before diving into Kierk's works?

[Anonymous No.11493211]

>>11493059
Hegel is obviously going to give u context of what Kierk is talking about but I wouldn’t say it’s absolutely necessary. Kierk himself will elucidate hegel’s philosophy + the problems w/ it. Besides, kierk contending w/ Hegel is a small fraction of the greater whole in what he’s trying to convey. And in getting to his point, his lyrical language will give u feels.

[Anonymous No.11493228]

Whole class on this guy next semester, can’t wait

[Anonymous No.11493235]

>>11492635
1. Reach levels of inwardness you were unaware existed
2. Engage the poet-philosopher: how to write philosophy, poetically
3. Stop making excuses lazy shit

[Anonymous No.11493248]

>>11492602 ^^

[Anonymous No.11493269]

Hey buds. Any good multi language editions of Kierk's works? Im Norwegian and looking for multi lang. with either
>Modern Norwegian - Original Danish
>Modern Danish - Original Danish
>Modern english - Original Danish

[Anonymous No.11493273]

>>11490475
The part where he talks about looking for the knight of faith and describes him as a tax collector was pretty funny.

But I really don't understand any of it.

[Anonymous No.11493277]

>>11492651
Because Kierkegaard makes the best argument for faith that can be given provided you actually try to understand it.

[Anonymous No.11493281]

>>11493273
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nr93xND_1Qs&t=
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xjC_RCyQeI&t=

https://soundcloud.com/gregorybsadler/sets/kierkegaards-fear-and

>Merry Happy from Gregory "I'm not Gregory B. Sadler" Sadler

[Anonymous No.11493293]

>>11490475
complete autist. he wouldn't have written a single thing if Regina put out for him.

[Anonymous No.11493307]

What should i read of "The Big K." after "The Big 3"?

[Anonymous No.11493320]

>>11492710
I see religion as having two distinct parts. First is spirituality, which I recognize as an important aspect of the human condition. The Second, however, is dogma, which I do have a problem with, particularity if it is imposed upon other people

[Anonymous No.11493356]

>>11493320
>*psst* "Hey boy, i got just the thing for you."

[Anonymous No.11493369]

>>11493277
How? What's his argument?

[Anonymous No.11493427]

>>11493320
Dogma is merely interpretation of the Spiritual experience. It comes from the Desire to know one's Spirituality is True. I think it's a natural consequence and should not be seperated from the spiritual experience.
You are correct in seeing the two different perspectives however. Stace, in Mysticism and Philosophy also sees this, and attempts to determine what the Mystical (Spiritual) experience is, objectively. He comes to the conclusion that it is a "Transubjective experience" which is just a fancy way of saying it is a subjective experience that we know exists objectively.
The interpretational part (Dogma) is the Cultural Expression of Sprituality, and Culture is an important part of the Human Experience. This is why I think the two are inseparable. Even saying that it is merely arbitrary is and expression of Dogma (and therefore Culture). However, this Dogma of Arbitrariness is a bit Marxist, and since I am not a Marxist, I inherently disagree with it. If you're a marxist then go for it, just be aware of which Cultural Organism it is you're rooting for.

[Anonymous No.11493429]

>>11493369
>>11492653
thoughts?

[Anonymous No.11493446]

>>11492399
It really is amazing, but it's also explicitly Christian, so it ends up being less universal in practice.

[Anonymous No.11493465]

>>11490634
My favourite part

[Anonymous No.11493514]

>>11493465
Which problemata?

[Anonymous No.11493517]

>>11493369
I can't really do it justice and don't understand it fully myself.

[Anonymous No.11493521]

>>11493427
don't you think that the fact that dogma varies widely and more specifically along cultural/racial lines is evidence that it is objectively arbitrary, at least to some degree? if there were some common spirituality accessible to all, wouldn't there be more agreement among dogmatists? It seems to me that the entire purpose of dogma is to draw lines between an "us" and "them", often unnecessarily so

[Anonymous No.11493532]

>>11493521
I don't know about you but I see many similarities between all the world religions.

[Anonymous No.11493557]

>>11493521
Drawing the lines isn't unnecessary, it's imperative. A Culture with no distinctions is not a Culture capable of asserting itself. It is inherently a collection of non-entities. The Spiritual experience itself is accessible to most people, but the Interpretation in necessarily the domain of Cultural beliefs. However this does not mean it is Objectively meaningless. Objectivity is only applicable if there are distinctions that can be made. The Culture gives Objectivity its meaning, and further, Objectivity is only capable in a Cultural Context.

I believe what you're trying to do is put Spirituality in a nice little Mathematical box, like the Laws of Physics. But this is impossible. Even the Laws of Physics would not look the same if conceived by a different Cultural Organism.

[Anonymous No.11493566]

>>11493557
I should be saying "Cultural Context," not "Cultural Organism." Forgive me.

[Anonymous No.11493796]

>>11493557
sounds an awful lot like postmodernism

[Anonymous No.11493864]

>>11493796
I can't say I know enough about postmodernism to say for sure, but the idea I'm talking about is more like Subjective Objectivity. It is a view that Cultures are "alive" and, like all living things, have a Life cycle.

[Anonymous No.11493869]

>>11493796
also, I should note that most of what I've been saying these last few posts is more my own interpretations. Kierkegaard never went beyond examining Faith.

[Anonymous No.11493976]

>>11493293
But the whole point was that she did, you massive pseud

[Anonymous No.11494931]

>>11490475
His retellings of Abraham and Isaac at the beginning were extremely cool

[Anonymous No.11495237]

I have been slowly working through Purity of Heart is to Will One Thing, started with part 12-end then went back through the whole thing again upon translator's recommendation in the introduction.

Thoughts on the book or concepts? I find general agreement in it though I like to hear dissenting opinions

[Anonymous No.11495323]

>>11490475
When I moved on to more accomplished writers like Nietsche, Stirner, the list could go on...
'Den formidable Længe, hans Udvikling antager, maa forklares [...] ved Egocentriciteten. Han gaar ud fra, at alt maa interessere alle andre, lige så levende som det optager ham'; 'en anden Grund til den dårlige Komposition er sikkert netop den Isolerthed, han vaagede over. [...] Han minder om de gamle Damer, der er trængt op i en Krog af Tilværelsen, og nu lever i overdrevne Forestillinger om deres for længst afdode Familiemedlemmer'; 'vender vi os fra Konstruktionen til Indholdet, saa vil det ses, at Dybsindighederne i Værket lovlig ofte bestaar i at sige, at en Ting ikke er det, den er, eller endnu bedre, at en Ting er det modsatte af det, den er'; 'for mig maa man gerne kalde dette Dybsindighed eller Elegance eller Dialektik eller hvad man vil, i mine Orer er det Ordgyderi'.

[Anonymous No.11495343]

>>11495323
Danskefaen!

[Anonymous No.11495890]

>>11492651
>tfw I was converted by "Special K"

[Anonymous No.11495907]

>>11493228
lucky bastard

[Anonymous No.11497109]

>>11494931
You didnt get past the first 10 pages?