(untitled)

Anyone here read Kierkegaard's Fear and Trembling? I read it once probably ten years ago and didn't get it at all, then read it again just a short while ago; there are a lot of parts this time through that I feel like I almost understand.

It’s Christian garbage philosophy.

>>2566 How ignorant you are, he was the first existencialist philosopher. I bet you've never read his books and is just spilling soykaf.

I read it last September but didn't get it either. Something about having faith and being lewded by fishmen.

>>2566 If any Christian philosophy isn't garbage, then it'S Kierkegaard's

Read it 10 years ago. Can't remember anything of it except something about god stopping Abraham at the last moment from killing his son was some amazing religious experience or smth.

>>2565 Kierkegaard here, thank you for reading my book! I could maybe help you if I better understood what exactly you're confused about. Is there a particular problema you have trouble grasping?

>>3290 What about Lossky?

>>3290 >>2566 pseuds So Augustine, Aquinas, Leibniz, Pascal, Kant, Descartes... all soykaf? Actually read before you pretend to know what you are talking about

>>4025 Don't forget Franz Bretano, Roger Bacon, Martin Heidegger and Edith Stein. Like you said, psueds gonna pseud.

>>2566 t. got filtered by pic related.

I haven't read Fear and Trembling yet, but I've read the Seducer's Dairy from Either/Or, the Sickness Unto Death, a discourse titled "The Lily of the Field and the Bird of the Air", and lots of his journal entries and parables. Sickness Unto Death so far has been the most provoking for me personally, especially him describing despair as something that follows either when we realize what we are not or reject who we are. From what I am aware of Fear and Trembling though is the reference to the narrative Abraham and Issac, which is often still today considered a controversial story. However, Kierkegaard I know speaks on the suspension of the ethical realm in order to make room for faith, utilizing the story of Abraham and Issac and classifies the religious life as the highest form of living despite it's irrationality. Then he also has compared this stage to being the stages of the aesthete and the ethical, which are rational, but not complete ways of living. Those are just some of his concepts that I'm aware of in a nut shell, I'm sure I'm mixing some of them around a bit.

>How ignorant you are, he was the first existencialist philosopher. I bet you've never read his books and is just spilling soykaf. And the Marquis De Sade was the first Sadist philosopher. Originality is a great reason to read something new, and it's a great reason to read something old if you're a historian---for us simple folk who just want to get all the good ideas and, wham-bam-thankyouverymuch, get out, the origin is a terrible source.

>>5175 Hegel is cool but his conception of Weltgeist is oddly synonymous with the idea of God. So much so I believe it to be intentional.

Basically What Chan Siu Ming said, it's just a danish boi justifying his faith & making fun of Hegel.