To use our price comparison to get the cheapest price, please click on the "Find the Cheapest Price" button located above for Present Age by Soren Kierkegaard (ISBN-10: 0061300942, ISBN-13: 9780061300943).
At this time we have not yet written a review for Present Age by Soren Kierkegaard (ISBN-10: 0061300942, ISBN-13: 9780061300943). Please continue to keep checking back to this page as we are constantly adding reviews.
Summaries and Customer Reviews are supplied by Amazon.com
"Those who would know Kierkegaard, the intesely religious humorist, the irrepressibly witty critic of his age and ours, can do no better than to begin with this book. [In it] we find the heart of Kierkagaard. It is not innocuous, not genteel, not comfortable. He does not invite the reader to realx and have a little laugh with him at the expense of other people or at his own foibles. Kierkegaard deliberately challenges the reader's whole existence."Nor does he merely challenge our existence; he also questions some ideas that had become well entrenched in his time and that are even more characteristic of the present age. Kierkegaard insists, for example, that Christianity was from the start essentially authoritarian--not just that the Catholic Church was, or that Calvin was, or Luther, or, regrettably, most of the Christian churches, but that Christ was--and is. Indeed, though Kierkegaard was, and wished to be, an individual, and even said that on his tombstone he would like no other epitaph than 'That Individual,' his protest against his age was centered in his lament over the loss of authority." --Walter Kaufman, in the Introduction
Philosophy and Authority
| Customer Rating:   | In this review I would like to consider the second essay collected in this edition -'On the Difference between the Genius and the Apostle'- which is too often overlooked by readers. Kierkegaard begins this meditation by denouncing the tendency of nineteenth century Christians to assume (even hope that) the Apostles were 'geniuses'. But according to Kierkegaard "St. Paul cannot be compared with either Plato or Shakespeare, as a coiner of beautiful similes he comes pretty low down on the scale, as a stylist his name is quite obscure..." So, why read the Apostle Paul? "Genius is what it is of itself, i.e. through that which it is in itself; an Apostle is what he is by his divine authority..." The Apostle represents an Eternal Paradox, the Word made flesh, while the genius may initially be paradoxical "but ultimately the race will assimilate what was once a paradox in such a way that it is no longer paradoxical." Thus the mere 'genius' St. Paul becomes, like the 'mere' genius of Plato, another name one surveys in a 'History of Western Thought' college course.
But an "Apostle is not born; an Apostle is a man called and appointed by God, receiving a mission from him." And what of the Apostle's message? "The new which he may have to bring forth is the essential paradox. However long it may be proclaimed in the world it remains essentially and equally new, equally paradoxical, and no immanence can assimilate it." Kierkegaard is here maintaining that while the Hegelian dialectic may assimilate every other; it cannot assimilate the Eternal Other of God's Word - "for the essential paradox is the protest against immanence." And genius, or so Kierkegaard maintains, is merely the finest flower of imminence. "Divine authority is, qualitatively, the decisive factor." Thus ultimately the Apostle appeals to Authority while the genius can only has resort to his all-to-human reason and rhetoric.
Kierkegaard rightly sees this attempt to assimilate the category 'genius' to the category 'Apostle' as a consequence of modern skepticism about God and authority. But as a consequence of this assimilation the Apostle is "an examinee who appears on the market with a new teaching." And once this teaching is assimilated "there would cease to be any difference between the teacher and the learner." Of course, this is the ideal of Enlightenment; knowledge spread through the world equalizes everyone. To these "impertinent people who will not obey, but want to reason" Kierkegaard says that, "Authority is, on the contrary, something which remains unchanged, which one cannot acquire even by understanding the doctrine perfectly." Divine Authority can never be subsumed in any dialectic because "if authority is not 'the other', if it is in any sense merely a higher potency within the identity, then there is no such thing as authority." In fact, "between man and man qua man, then, no established or continuous authority was conceivable..." Kierkegaard is indicating that either we submit to Divine Authority or we submit to nihilism. There is no third choice.
Many Christians agree with this last but still want to see the Apostle as a genius. But to do so is to make the same what is forever Other and to compare the Incomparable. "To ask whether Christ is profound is blasphemy, and is an attempt (whether conscious or not) to destroy Him surreptitiously; for the question conceals a doubt concerning His authority, and this attempt to weigh Him up is impertinent in its directness, behaving as though He were being examined, instead of which it is to Him that all power is given in heaven and upon earth." Kierkegaard reminds us that no apodictic statement can be profound. "The decisive thing is not the statement, but the fact that it was Christ who said it..." One is tempted to here sneer that people too unintelligent or immature to judge statements on their own will always need some authority. Of course, it is now commonly thought that the Enlightenment is the 'adulthood of the human race', as Kant once remarked. But this is the exact possibility that Kierkegaard is denying; humanity, in its relation to God, will never achieve adulthood. Humanity will always be under the Authority of the Divine Other.
Even the great genius of the genuine philosopher does not escape this stricture. "What Plato says on immortality really is profound, reached after deep study; but then poor Plato has no authority whatsoever." In fact, philosophy, which is thought to be the ultimate 'authority' for our modern 'enlightenment', can be considered the ultimate target of this essay. "The whole of modern philosophy is therefore affected, because it has done away with obedience on the one hand, and authority on the other, and then, in spite of everything, claims to be orthodox." By 'modern philosophy' Kierkegaard is of course here alluding to Hegel. The most important distinction that Kierkegaard makes between the philosopher (i.e., the greatest genius) and the Apostle is that it is only the Apostle that has a purpose, properly speaking. How can we recognize the Apostle? "...[T]hat a man is called by a revelation to go out in the world, to proclaim the Word, to act and to suffer, to a life of uninterrupted activity as the Lord's messenger." But it is otherwise with genius. "Genius has only an imminent teleology; the Apostle is absolutely, paradoxically, teleologically placed."
The genius is "an unnecessary superfluity and a precious ornament." This superfluity is underlined by Kierkegaard's closing remarks on genius: "he has nothing to do with others, he does not write in order that: in order to enlighten men or in order to help them along the right road, in order to bring about something; in short, he does not write in order that. The same is true of every genius. No genius has an in order that; the Apostle has absolutely and paradoxically, an in order that." A genuine 'in order that' (i.e. purpose) must come from God or it is only, at bottom, a private fancy. All philosophers, from Plato to Hegel and beyond, ultimately only have their word on the Truth of whatever it is they teach. Only the Apostle ultimately has a purpose, because it is only he that is not spreading some private fancy.
If there is a God then there is something that endures. If there is no God then we can only have a succession of genius de jour - forever. The History of Philosophy is in fact this History of 'genius de jour'. As High Modernity continues its long disintegration into our low postmodernity we see the consequences of trusting in genius without Authority. It has now been seen by our postmodern nihilists that, regarding their grand theories, Plato and Hegel (and Marx and Nietzsche) only have their word on it. Thus 'reasons' and, far more ominously, thus does everyone (or an ever increasing fraction of everyone) on the planet. Modernity had staked everything on philosophical creativity -the ongoing creation of 'world-views'- but the ongoing war between various philosophical artifacts makes on wonder about the intelligence of this bet. It is the various irreconcilable philosophical artifacts, and their world-views, that are tearing our world apart.
One certainly doesn't need to believe in Divine Authority in order to believe in the utility of authority. But, and this is the answer of philosophy to Kierkegaard's attack, if Divine Authority remains powerless (or unwilling) to enforce its Will then philosophy must continue to 'create'; that is, philosophy will continue to bring a temporary but unifying purpose into the world. All that philosophy has is this ersatz purpose to pit against nihilism - a world bereft of meaning and purpose. And this is all philosophy ever will have... |
Nihilism, Forfeited Individuality & The Passionless Age
| Customer Rating: | .
Soren Kierkegaard was a contemporary and unique thinker. In "The Present Age" one finds many thoughts that are both subsequently echoed in parallel thoughts and/or have directly influenced other great thinkers. For instance Kierkegaard speaks of the danger of loosing individuality to the abstract form of public opinion. Many of his thoughts can be found in later writings of Alex de Tocqueville, Nietzsche and Heidegger. In Kierkegaard's case, true individualism is based on the Christian religion (apart from Christendom). Written over almost two hundred years ago and yet so contemporary are Kierkegaard's words to our present age of nihilism and rule of public opinion.On Nihilism and relativism, Kierkegaard writes: "A passionate tumultuous age will overthrow everything, pull everything down; but a revolutionary age, that is at the same time reflective and passionless, transforms that expression of strength into a feat of dialectics; it leaves everything standing but cunningly empties it of significance. Instead of culminating in a rebellion it reduces the inward reality of all relationships to a reflective tension which leaves everything standing but makes the whole of life ambiguous; so that everything continues to exist factually whilst by a dialectical deceit, privatissime, it supplies a secret interpretation - that it does not exist: p. 42 On individualism and public opinion, Kierkegaard writes: "The abstract principle of leveling . . has no personal relation to any individual but has only an abstract relationship which is the same for every one. There, no hero suffers for others, or helps them; the taskmaster of all alike is the leveling and himself becomes greatest does not become an outstanding man or a hero - that would only impede the leveling process, which is rigidly consistent to the end - he himself prevents that from happening because he has understood the meaning of leveling; he becomes a man and nothing else, in the complete equalitarian sense. That is the idea of religion. But, under those conditions, the equalitarian order is sever and the profit is seemingly very small; seemingly, for unless the individual learns in the reality of religion and before God to be content with himself, and learns, instead of dominating others, to dominate himself, content as priest to be his own audience, and as author his own reader, if he will not learn to be satisfied with that as the highest, because it is the expression of the equality of all men before God and of our likeness to others, then he will not escape from reflection. " p.57 "The public is a concept which could not have occurred in antiquity because the people en masse, in corpore, took part in any situation which arose, and were responsible for the actions of the individual, and, moreover, the individual was personally present and had to submit at once to applause or disapproval for his decision. Only when the sense of association in society is no longer strong enough to give life to concrete realties is the Press able to create that abstraction 'the public', consisting of unreal individuals who never are and never can be united in an actual situation or organization - and yet are held together as a whole." p. 60 "The man who has no opinion of an event at the actual moment accepts the opinion of the majority, or, if he is quarrelsome, of the minority. But it must be remembered that the majority and minority are real people, and that is why the individual is assisted by adhering to them. A public, on the contrary, is an abstraction. To adopt the opinion of this or that man means that one knows that they will be subjected to the same dangers as oneself, that they will be led astray with one if the opinion leads astray. But to adopt the same opinion as the public is a deceptive consolation because the public is only there in abstracto. p.61 |
It could describe today
| Customer Rating: | | Written over 150 years ago, it remarkably seems to describe our age, for example "A revolutionary age is an age of action; ours is the age of advertisement and publicity. Nothing ever happens but there is immediate publicity everywhere". And those in government may appreciate "In the end a whole age becomes a committee". Perhaps the Internet is both a great leveler that Kierkegaard warned of, but also a perpetrator of the anonymous. I think Kierkegaard might laugh at some of the pseudonyms floating around the net, far less creative than his many including Johannes Climacus. Perhaps this anonymous net means no risk, but we need to "Come on, leap cheerfully, even if it means a light-hearted leap, so long as it is decisive". This book provides a good, short intro to Kierkegaard, and the humor keeps this moving without masking the personal challenges. |
Kierkegaard's most accessible
| Customer Rating: | This version of "The Present Age" also includes "On the Difference Between a Genius and an Apostle." These two treatises are two of the most intelligible and actually enjoyable of Kierkegaard's works. "The Present Age" is remarkable because, although it was written in the Nineteenth Century, it has a great deal to say about modern society. Kierkegaard's central thesis is that the modern age (that is It is important to understand, however, that K. does not mean passion as defined by the mob mentality, hate or lust. This is what Marcel, a later Existentialist, meant by "passion." Rather, he is refering to a powerful sense of inward spirituality.
Kierkegaard was a Christian (despite what philosophy professors might tell you) and the second essay in this volume is, essentially, a theological treatise on apostolic and divine authority. K. argues that Christianity is at its core an authoritatian religion. Authoritarian, that is, in the sense that the word and teachings of God have ultimate authority over man and human institutions.
This book isn't a bad place to start if one wants to read a bit of Kierkegaard. The two essays are really pretty easy to read and will surprise you with how appropriate they are to the modern and even post-modern era. |
|
