Facts, no matter how convincing, rarely trump a good, solid dose of repetition.
I feel like this critique is missing the mark. Yeah, Kirkegaard was a bit uptight, and we're all swingers now, but isn't he right that in consummating a relationship with someone we inherently foreclose certain possibilities and in so doing destroy what it was that we loved about the person in the first place? Yes, maybe we can be worldly-wise and criticize Kirkegaard for making an ordinary part of everyone's life into the Ur-Existential Crisis, but isn't the world a better place for having at least one Kirkegaard in it? We can't all be Kirkegaard, and we shouldn't all be Kirkegaard even if we could, but the "experiments" that he carried out as a philosopher have benefit even for those of us who are unable (or unwilling) to follow in his footsteps.
I also wouldn't be so quick to dismiss Kierkegaard. But what vitriol, eh? Reminds me of this Vonnegut quote:"Any reviewer who expresses rage and loathing for a novel is preposterous. He or she is like a person who has put on full armor and attacked a hot fudge sundae."Kierkegaard's works aren't "a hot fudge sundae" but I do find them delicious (in places). Most of us with existentialist leanings (and certainly anyone who calls himself irony on occasion) are in his debt.
That was a "critique" of Kierkegaard? Are you sure you didn't mean to write "intellectual suicide"?
Post a Comment