This thesis argues that the concept of hiddenness is useful in understanding the authorship of Sø... more This thesis argues that the concept of hiddenness is useful in understanding the authorship of Søren Kierkegaard. By understanding “the melancholy Dane” as first and foremost a Christian thinker who sought to “reintroduce Christianity into Christendom,” this work gives special attention to how the form of Kierkegaard's authorial task complements its content, giving particular attention to Kierkegaard's use of pseudonyms. The majority of this work is divided using the dichotomy of form and content: “what” and “how”. The first part addresses the explicit “what” of the authorship, and the second section addresses the implicit “how” as it concerns Kierkegaard's reader. Then there is a third section which addresses the deeper “how” as it concerns Kierkegaard himself.
Firstly, the content of Kierkegaard's task is outlined as being concerned with apprehending the truth of Christianity as a “single individual”. Because of this, direct communication along with other forms of outwardness was seen to be incompatible and contradictory to his task. Attention is given to pseudonym Johannes Climacus' contrasting of Christian truth with the Socratic understanding of truth. In this way, Kierkegaard emphasised an embodied, passional knowing, for the Christian. In short, the central content of the authorship is that the hidden truth of the Christian gospel can only be known in truth in “hidden inwardness”.
The second part, addressing the outward form of the authorship, discusses how its form was utilised by Kierkegaard to bring about the very content of which it spoke. By employing the strategy of indirect communication, it is suggested that Kierkegaard enabled his reader to subjectively (that is, personally) encounter the truth of Christianity. Kierkegaard's own explanation of his communicative strategy is followed: that his authorship consisted of two “hands”. The aesthetic works served to remove the illusions of false understandings of Christianity, while the religious works served as the corrective and as a demonstration of Kierkegaard's understanding of true Christianity. It is suggested that between these “hands”, Kierkegaard left the reader to come to faith herself, through her own encounter with God in “hidden inwardness”, thereby claiming that Kierkegaard hid himself for the sake of his reader.
The third section seeks to defend the claim that Kierkegaard's hidden authorship was also for the sake of his own relationship with God. Using Works of Love as a hermeneutical lens, it is demonstrated that Kierkegaard's communication was not only outward, but also inward. Kierkegaard's concepts of existence-communication and reduplication, along with a careful examination of his use of pseudonyms and the circumstances under which his own explanation of his authorial strategy were published, leads to the suggestion that Kierkegaard's authorship was a outworking of his own attempt to be “in the truth”. Such suggestions are not put forth as definitive proofs of Kierkegaard's own “hidden inwardness”, but are, rather, put forth as a demonstration for reading Kierkegaard in love.
By understanding Kierkegaard's authorship under this concept of hiddenness, Søren Kierkegaard is put forward as an example of a Christian communicator. As one who strove to be “in the truth”, Kierkegaard can be seen to have attempted to only speak what his own life could uphold, and to communicate deeply in a form which complemented the words he spoke.
Providing an incurvatus in se understanding of sin in relation to notions of the self, what is th... more Providing an incurvatus in se understanding of sin in relation to notions of the self, what is the place of language?
This thesis argues that the concept of hiddenness is useful in understanding the authorship of Sø... more This thesis argues that the concept of hiddenness is useful in understanding the authorship of Søren Kierkegaard. By understanding “the melancholy Dane” as first and foremost a Christian thinker who sought to “reintroduce Christianity into Christendom,” this work gives special attention to how the form of Kierkegaard's authorial task complements its content, giving particular attention to Kierkegaard's use of pseudonyms. The majority of this work is divided using the dichotomy of form and content: “what” and “how”. The first part addresses the explicit “what” of the authorship, and the second section addresses the implicit “how” as it concerns Kierkegaard's reader. Then there is a third section which addresses the deeper “how” as it concerns Kierkegaard himself.
Firstly, the content of Kierkegaard's task is outlined as being concerned with apprehending the truth of Christianity as a “single individual”. Because of this, direct communication along with other forms of outwardness was seen to be incompatible and contradictory to his task. Attention is given to pseudonym Johannes Climacus' contrasting of Christian truth with the Socratic understanding of truth. In this way, Kierkegaard emphasised an embodied, passional knowing, for the Christian. In short, the central content of the authorship is that the hidden truth of the Christian gospel can only be known in truth in “hidden inwardness”.
The second part, addressing the outward form of the authorship, discusses how its form was utilised by Kierkegaard to bring about the very content of which it spoke. By employing the strategy of indirect communication, it is suggested that Kierkegaard enabled his reader to subjectively (that is, personally) encounter the truth of Christianity. Kierkegaard's own explanation of his communicative strategy is followed: that his authorship consisted of two “hands”. The aesthetic works served to remove the illusions of false understandings of Christianity, while the religious works served as the corrective and as a demonstration of Kierkegaard's understanding of true Christianity. It is suggested that between these “hands”, Kierkegaard left the reader to come to faith herself, through her own encounter with God in “hidden inwardness”, thereby claiming that Kierkegaard hid himself for the sake of his reader.
The third section seeks to defend the claim that Kierkegaard's hidden authorship was also for the sake of his own relationship with God. Using Works of Love as a hermeneutical lens, it is demonstrated that Kierkegaard's communication was not only outward, but also inward. Kierkegaard's concepts of existence-communication and reduplication, along with a careful examination of his use of pseudonyms and the circumstances under which his own explanation of his authorial strategy were published, leads to the suggestion that Kierkegaard's authorship was a outworking of his own attempt to be “in the truth”. Such suggestions are not put forth as definitive proofs of Kierkegaard's own “hidden inwardness”, but are, rather, put forth as a demonstration for reading Kierkegaard in love.
By understanding Kierkegaard's authorship under this concept of hiddenness, Søren Kierkegaard is put forward as an example of a Christian communicator. As one who strove to be “in the truth”, Kierkegaard can be seen to have attempted to only speak what his own life could uphold, and to communicate deeply in a form which complemented the words he spoke.
Providing an incurvatus in se understanding of sin in relation to notions of the self, what is th... more Providing an incurvatus in se understanding of sin in relation to notions of the self, what is the place of language?
Uploads
Papers by Jacob Sawyer
Firstly, the content of Kierkegaard's task is outlined as being concerned with apprehending the truth of Christianity as a “single individual”. Because of this, direct communication along with other forms of outwardness was seen to be incompatible and contradictory to his task. Attention is given to pseudonym Johannes Climacus' contrasting of Christian truth with the Socratic understanding of truth. In this way, Kierkegaard emphasised an embodied, passional knowing, for the Christian. In short, the central content of the authorship is that the hidden truth of the Christian gospel can only be known in truth in “hidden inwardness”.
The second part, addressing the outward form of the authorship, discusses how its form was utilised by Kierkegaard to bring about the very content of which it spoke. By employing the strategy of indirect communication, it is suggested that Kierkegaard enabled his reader to subjectively (that is, personally) encounter the truth of Christianity. Kierkegaard's own explanation of his communicative strategy is followed: that his authorship consisted of two “hands”. The aesthetic works served to remove the illusions of false understandings of Christianity, while the religious works served as the corrective and as a demonstration of Kierkegaard's understanding of true Christianity. It is suggested that between these “hands”, Kierkegaard left the reader to come to faith herself, through her own encounter with God in “hidden inwardness”, thereby claiming that Kierkegaard hid himself for the sake of his reader.
The third section seeks to defend the claim that Kierkegaard's hidden authorship was also for the sake of his own relationship with God. Using Works of Love as a hermeneutical lens, it is demonstrated that Kierkegaard's communication was not only outward, but also inward. Kierkegaard's concepts of existence-communication and reduplication, along with a careful examination of his use of pseudonyms and the circumstances under which his own explanation of his authorial strategy were published, leads to the suggestion that Kierkegaard's authorship was a outworking of his own attempt to be “in the truth”. Such suggestions are not put forth as definitive proofs of Kierkegaard's own “hidden inwardness”, but are, rather, put forth as a demonstration for reading Kierkegaard in love.
By understanding Kierkegaard's authorship under this concept of hiddenness, Søren Kierkegaard is put forward as an example of a Christian communicator. As one who strove to be “in the truth”, Kierkegaard can be seen to have attempted to only speak what his own life could uphold, and to communicate deeply in a form which complemented the words he spoke.
Firstly, the content of Kierkegaard's task is outlined as being concerned with apprehending the truth of Christianity as a “single individual”. Because of this, direct communication along with other forms of outwardness was seen to be incompatible and contradictory to his task. Attention is given to pseudonym Johannes Climacus' contrasting of Christian truth with the Socratic understanding of truth. In this way, Kierkegaard emphasised an embodied, passional knowing, for the Christian. In short, the central content of the authorship is that the hidden truth of the Christian gospel can only be known in truth in “hidden inwardness”.
The second part, addressing the outward form of the authorship, discusses how its form was utilised by Kierkegaard to bring about the very content of which it spoke. By employing the strategy of indirect communication, it is suggested that Kierkegaard enabled his reader to subjectively (that is, personally) encounter the truth of Christianity. Kierkegaard's own explanation of his communicative strategy is followed: that his authorship consisted of two “hands”. The aesthetic works served to remove the illusions of false understandings of Christianity, while the religious works served as the corrective and as a demonstration of Kierkegaard's understanding of true Christianity. It is suggested that between these “hands”, Kierkegaard left the reader to come to faith herself, through her own encounter with God in “hidden inwardness”, thereby claiming that Kierkegaard hid himself for the sake of his reader.
The third section seeks to defend the claim that Kierkegaard's hidden authorship was also for the sake of his own relationship with God. Using Works of Love as a hermeneutical lens, it is demonstrated that Kierkegaard's communication was not only outward, but also inward. Kierkegaard's concepts of existence-communication and reduplication, along with a careful examination of his use of pseudonyms and the circumstances under which his own explanation of his authorial strategy were published, leads to the suggestion that Kierkegaard's authorship was a outworking of his own attempt to be “in the truth”. Such suggestions are not put forth as definitive proofs of Kierkegaard's own “hidden inwardness”, but are, rather, put forth as a demonstration for reading Kierkegaard in love.
By understanding Kierkegaard's authorship under this concept of hiddenness, Søren Kierkegaard is put forward as an example of a Christian communicator. As one who strove to be “in the truth”, Kierkegaard can be seen to have attempted to only speak what his own life could uphold, and to communicate deeply in a form which complemented the words he spoke.