The existentialist theory of Søren Kierkegaard
Maybe the ability to think through abstract ideas it differentiates us from the rest of the animals and allows us to act in very intelligent ways, but it also places us in a position of vulnerability. The fact of being aware of ourselves makes us face existential questions without a clear answer, and that uncertainty is capable of leaving us motionless, trapped in our own lives without knowing what to do.
The thought of Søren Kierkegaard is an attempt to offer a philosophical framework through which to address questions such as "Who am I?" "Why do I live?" Or "What should I do?". It is a form of philosophy that focuses on human subjectivity.
In this article we will review the basics of the existentialist theory of Kierkegaard .
- Maybe you're interested: "How are Psychology and Philosophy alike?
Who was Søren Kierkegaard?
The philosopher Søren Kierkegaard was born in Copenhagen on May 5, 1813 in a wealthy family. He studied theology in his city of origin, and was also trained in philosophy, an area to which he ended up dedicating his life.
Melancholy was one of the elements that marked the story of Søren Kierkegaard, a highly emotional person who, in turn, permeated his philosophy with this characteristic. In turn, he harshly criticized both the Church and Hegelian philosophy, which was hegemonic in Europe during much of the 19th century, given that the latter spoke about absolutes and left subjectivity aside .
Kierkegaard died in Copenhagen in 1855 after suffering a crisis and spending several weeks in the hospital.
- Related article: "Types of philosophy and main currents of thought"
The existentialist theory of Kierkegaard
Below we will see what were the most remarkable aspects of the philosophy of Kierkegaard, in its more existentialist facet.
1. Freedom of choice defines life
Kierkegaard believed that life consists fundamentally in choosing. It is through elections that we are developing our existence, what speaks about who we are and what stories we have left behind us.
2. Elections are inevitable
Whatever we do, we must constantly decide, given that not doing anything is also an option that we have chosen when faced with a crossroads of possible actions to be taken.
3. Morality also part of freedom
Decisions are not limited to observable actions; there are also some that they have a marked moral character . That is why we must choose between what is just and what gives us pleasure.
However, for Søren Kierkegaard the conditions we choose depend solely on us, and not on anyone else or the context. Everything is our responsibility, since for this philosopher we must assume that we choose starting from scratch.
The foregoing implies, for example, that neither our past nor the history of our family or neighborhood influences.
4. Anguish fills us
As we move from one election to another constantly, we experience anguish to a lesser or greater extent. We would prefer to live without having to constantly choose, and the past times, which we see through the illusion that they were not based on decisions, seem more attractive than the present.
5. Vertigo
We constantly feel the weight of freedom, which makes we feel existential vertigo at the idea that there is nothing that separates us from emptiness. Uncertainty makes it seem like everything can go to waste.
- Maybe you're interested: "Utilitarianism: a philosophy centered on happiness"
Criticisms of Kierkegaard's philosophy
The ideas of this Danish thinker are not exempt from criticism. For example, it is usual accuse Kierkegaard of being too individualistic , since part of the philosophical questions that have to do with the person alone and not with the person in society. It is as if the outside world does not exist and social phenomena have a negligible impact on our lives.
On the other hand, it is also criticized for not taking into account the history, what makes a culture is anything. In this way, it makes us see that decisions depend on one, and that neither our past nor the past of our family line influences any of that. This is something that subsequent existentialists tried to correct to get out of that individualism, the price of adopting a philosophy centered on the subjective.
