The Sickness Unto Death :: The forms with regard to consciousness (Part 6)

Consciousness enjoys a dialectical relationship with despair; for as consciousness of despair increases so does the intensity of despair. Consequently despair at its maximum is absolute defiance and at its minimum is a kind of innocence.

1. Despair that is ignorant of having an eternal self

Such ignorence is the kind of self deception the individual is resistant to leave behind. It is the hallmark of one taken by worldy pleasures; the individual does not have the courage to risk being spirit. For such an individual being in error is the least concern. The individual may build a palace with his words but he is content to live in the garden shed out back. To inhabit his ideas is a task he cannot fathom. To point out this contradiction in him is to invite reproach. For in ignorence the individual is safe from his own undoing: awareness. It is only when one passes into the religious that the individual becomes conscious of this contradiction. For such an individual takes himself to be an unaccountable something, and beneath it all lies despair, readily exposed when life begins to shake him.

2. Despair that is conscious of having an eternal self but in despair wants, or does not want, to be itself

Whilst on some level I may be conscious that I am in despair, this does not mean that I am in despair. Do I have clarity of what the self is, and what it is to be in despair? Because whilst consciousness determines intensity there can be great variation in how conscious I am that I am in despair. Like any sickness I may detect symptoms but do I understand it? I may only have a dim grasp on what despair is; intentionally because I do not wish to face this actuality, or in ignorence because I do not understand it.

(A) In despair not wanting to be oneself; The despair in weakness.

I. Despair over the earthly

In such despair there is no conciousness of the self as eternal. It is living into the fragile realities of good and bad fortune. To fail to recognise the cause of this despair and to attribute it to something temporal rather than the loss of the eternal. If help comes it is business as usual and if no help comes, he learns to deceive himself and imitate others. A despairer of this kind doesn't recognise himself. He is instead deluded that change in circumstance is all that is required. He believes that such change comes naturally over time like teeth, a beard and that sort of thing. Such a transformation never leads to the kind of struggle that intensifies despair or else leads to faith.

II. Despair of the eternal or over oneself; the despair over ones weakness

All despair is over the eternal. For even if it seems to be over something earthly; that the individual values the earthly so greatly is precisely to despair of the eternal. The individual takes it a step further, in that he is conscious of this weaknesses, but instead of turning to faith in God he indulges in this despair. He despairs of himself as a father disinherits a son, the self will not acknowledge itself after it has been so weak. Yet this did not rid him of the son, least of all in his thoughts.

(B) The despair of wanting in despair to be oneself – defiance

To want to be oneself there has to be a greater consciousness of despair and the self than before. However, this infinite self is really only the most abstract form of the self, the most abstract possibility of the self. It is not the self. The image it perceives is detached from the power that established it, like viewing oneself through a fairground mirror. The active form wishes to reforge the image of its self as it sees fit, and in accordance with a more palitable image. That the self might becomes its own master. Yet this absolute ruler is a king without a country, he rules over nothing; not his position, his kingdom, or his self. And the passive form? He would rather be himself with all the torments of hell than ask for help. To avoid becoming a pliant nothing in the hands of his saviour. It is especially important to ensure that he has his agony on hand, so that no one can take it from him – for then he would not be able to convince others and himself that he is right. To be himself in his agony, so as to protest with this agony against all existence against the second rate authorship of God.

The Sickness Unto Death :: The forms without regard to consciousness (Part 5)

The person who gets lost in possibility soars with the boldness of despair; but the person for whom all has become necessary strains his back on life, bent down with the weight of despair

Within the introduction we identified that for most humans life is lived towards death. We orientate our lives as though death is the end. For the Christian however the picture is reframed; death is not the end of the self and there is something eternal in man. This realisation that the picture of what we are is incomplete is what it means to become eternally conscious. To realise that who I am is not defined by my temporality alone. The self I have inhabited thus far, is an incomplete picture of what I really am.

The more conscious I am that there is something eternal in man, that death is not the end, the more inclined [Will] I am to live differently. Consciousness plays an important role within Kierkegaards concept of the self. However this self that I am in this conscious moment is not present until it is brought into existence by becoming it. Put differently, who I am is not an abstraction, it is something concrete that I embody in the world. To not embody this self that I am before God; to live inauthentically as though temporality is all there is, is to despair.

Kierkegaard proposes that We can deduce the forms of despair by reflecting upon how the self is constituted. He begins with the forms of despair that relate to the self synthesis:

1. Despair under the aspect of finitude/infinitude

(i) Infinitude’s despair is to lack finitude

Fantasy is the faculty by which man represents himself to himself; What he imagines himself to be. My feelings, thoughts and will are an abstraction. A literary description of those real world experiences. In this way imagination is a reflection of what I could be; the possible self that I consider myself to be. As such the risk here is that infinitude leads me away from what I am into the endless possible me's I could become. My feelings become detached and volatile, my thoughts do not lead to self knowledge, and my will subtlely leads me away from myself.

(ii) Finitude’s despair is to lack infinitude

Finitudes despair is narrowness; to percieve onself as the same as all others. To become a clone, a copy, a number indistinguishable from the herd. It is the exchange of selfhood for performance and success. There is no challenge or difficulty with the self because he allows what he is to be worn away in exchange for an easy life. To sacrifice the self to avoid payment in the disagreeable consequences of decisive action.

2. Despair viewed under the aspect of possibility/necessity

(i) Possibility’s despair is to lack necessity

For a self to become itself is must have the freedom of possibility. For the despair of possibility is that I never become what I imagine myself to be. It is the movement that when united with necessity is what I am. For actuality is the unity of possibility and necessity. Possibility is the offer of a treat to a child; the child agrees but will the parents [necessity] consent also?

(ii) Necessity’s despair is to lack possibility

To lack possibility means that in the current moment, humanly speaking nothing is possible. But the christian knows that with God all things are possible, and the escape here is faith. The means of my redemption is not my concern. There is always possibility because with God all things are possible. It impossible to breath necessity alone, it is suffocating.

The Sickness Unto Death :: The Generality of Despair (Part 4)

It is a commonly held assumption that man knows himself best. We ask him and he reports to us when he is in good health or bad health. But as any physician worth his salt knows there can be imagined illness, and there can be imagined health. So it is with the commonly held view of despair. We believe that if we wish to know if someone is in despair or not we need only ask and he will report, we hope, truthfully.

But despair is unlike physical health. It is a sickness not of the body, but of the whole of mans being. As such it may well be the case that I am not conscious of being in despair at all. That I experience no symptoms; that life may afford me great fortune and may very well conceal the dread that is despair. Kierkegaard goes so far as to say to have never to have had despair is precisely to be in despair. For this is the awakening to the reality of being in despair. It is fortuitous to acquire this illness, but the mortality rate is staggering.

As such the common place view of despair is incorrect. Despair is not rare but general. The one who says he is in despair is a dialectical step ahead. For it is contentment with life which precisely is despair. For this self that I am, this synthesis of body [temporal] and soul [eternal], being a self is a issue. To be content with the self that I am is precisely to be unconscious of the issue. Kierkegaard argues that the only life wasted is the one so decieved by lifes pleasures as to never become eternally conscious of himself as spirit. This is the real tragedy in despair; that it can be so concealed in a person that he himself is not aware of it.

The Sickness Unto Death :: Despair is the Sickness (Part 3)

If there was nothing transcendent [eternal] within man despair would not be possible. Man would simple be what he is, like all other animals. But this isn't the case. The reality is for man, broadly speaking, that he is dissatisfied with himself. His being is an issue for him. In despair man seeks to be rid of the self that he is. He is not content to be his self. This could either be because (a) he does not want to be the self he is, or (b) because he is not the self he aspires to be. In both instances he seeks to tear himself away from that which established him. He seeks to find his own way forward. Consequently what he is is not to his liking or what he would like to become is just beyond his grasp.

The tragic reality is that man in despair cannot be rid of his self. The transcendent nails a man to himself. Put plainly because despair is possible there is something transcendent within man, and consequently his being is an issue. Whether he likes it or not he cannot be rid of the self and is in despair. He discovers what it is to be in despair; to will the end of the self whilst powerless to make this a reality. For, unlike the Christian, whilst he wishes for the end of the self he does so without the hope of life beyond. He wishes to be rid of himself, for his self to end. But the Christian knows that death is not the end. It is instead the beginning of life in all its richness and glory.

The Sickness Unto Death :: Possibility and Actuality (Part 2)

There is a distinction between the possibility of a thing, and its actuality. For example I may decide to always tell the truth, but when confronted with a situation in the real world I can still lie. For this possibility of always-truth-telling to be actualized I still need to tell the truth in each situation. Possibility then is a detached abstraction whereas its actuality is an embodied reality. For despair this distinction between the idea of and reality of being in despair is important. The idea is advantageous insofar as it confronts the Christian with the possibility of despair, that he might avoid its ruinous reality.

For whilst the Christian is aware of the possibility of despair its actuality is yet to be realised. Here the Christian is presented with a choice to (a) embody what he truly is in relationship with God, or (b) not to do so. A decision within which the peril of despair of one sort or another is a very real possibility. To be be truely free of despair, Kierkegaard explains, is to actualize the possibility of its negation. Put plainly to make the choice not to despair.

Whilst it is not uncommon to attribute despair to some misfortune, the reality is that despair is a choice. One might catch a cold through careless interactions with others. Despair, however is different. In every moment the possibility of despair is also the possibility to not despair. I cannot escape the choice. I cannot simply blame happenstance. Now is the time to decide.

The Sickness Unto Death :: Despair is the Sickness Unto Death (Part 1)

Note: Dreyfus has referred to this section as one of the most dense passages in all western thought and with good reason. It is virtually unintelligible, and I am under no illusions that I have unpacked even half of what is said. Good luck.

Kierkegaard indicates man is an indivisible whole. There are aspects of the finite [my body physically being here] and infinite [death is not the end]. Yet how these relate, and what I am remains an issue for me. This aspect of my being that questions the "why" and "what" I am, is the self. For this self that I am, being a self is a issue. The self can respond to the issue of being a self either negatively by suppressing one aspect of this synthesis [choosing either the finite or the infinite], or positively by relating to itself as a whole self. Either way the self is an issue for the self because without it the human being is incomplete and is in despair.

Kierkegaard offers an example noting that (a) if being a self is something that is self-established, and (b) being is an issue for my self, then (c) the only thing I could want to be is something else. In such a situation I could only work myself into greater despair given I cannot escape being myself. The other option is that the self is established by something else. If this is the case three forms of despair are possible namely:

1. Being unconscious of having a self

2. Not wanting to be oneself

3. Wanting to be oneself

These forms of despair might be understood to mean (1) not realising I am incomplete, (2) wishing to be something else, and (3) the discovery I cannot pull myself together. Kierkegaards conclusion is that I cannot independently resolve the issue of the why and what I am. As such If I am truely committed to finding out what I am; I am invited to live transparently before God through the power that made my being possible.

The Sickness Unto Death :: Introduction

For human beings death overshadows life. Death for humans is the last thing of all; the end of the self. All of life then is orientated in accordance with this trajectory. How we view life, sickness, suffering and even death itself is contingent upon our view of death. That for humans whilst there is life there is hope, and conversely, without life there is no hope. Yet this is not the case for the Christian.

For the Christian death does not represent the the end of the self. For all who would accept Christ by faith, it is merely another minor event in an eternal series of events. In answer then to the question "And what good would it have done Lazarus to be awoken from the dead if in the end he must die anyway? What good would it have done Lazarus if He did not exist" we must think differently. To the Christian his resurrection brings glory to God, and his second death is not the end. He does not cease to exist. For the Christian there is, in death, infinitely more hope than in life in all it's flourishing and glory.

Life for the Christian then is no longer orientated towards death as some grand finale of the self. Yet man is preoccupied with this notion and even sets up life as an idol; to preserve at all costs. Kierkegaard uses the analogy here of a child drawing back in fear of what the adult thinks nothing of. For the Christian there is something greater to fear the sickness unto death. That is to live and orientate life as though death were the end of the self; to presume that what I am should be defined by my temporality consciously or not. For Kierkegaard the courage to live is drawn from a greater fear of this sickness as something even more horrifying.

The Sickness Unto Death :: Preface

There were two brothers each dreamed of becoming a Doctor. The first studied all that he would need to know from academic journals, books and sources; the second by doing the work of a physician, learning on the job from his mistakes. Which of these brothers became a Doctor? 

Kierkegaard begins TSUD by challenging the readers assumptions that we know what it is to be something; specifically to be human. We may well have scientific or historic knowledge about humans but this is detached; taken from context. If an non-human acquired this same scientific and historic knowledge would it also know what it is to be human? It may learn that Socrates died in 399BC, and how the thyroid is involved in body temperature regulation, but is this sufficient for it to know what it's like to die or to have a fever? Furthermore in describing what it means to be human many would talk about beauty, love, happiness and other unique aspects of their life. Yet the most amusing, precious or even difficult times are typically difficult to convey to others in words. We tend to give up and resort to statements like "I guess you had to be there" or "walk a mile in my shoes" to indicate their unintelligiblity.

This is the point that Kierkegaard is making in the preface. Scientific and historic knowledge are detached from the contexts they describe and therefore cannot holistically account for them. So to understand what it is to be human we must be somehow involved in being human; a participant not just an observer. For Kierkegaard it is a romantic pretence that by accumulating and cataloguing "pure concepts" one might arrive at a full understanding of what it is to be human. So if we  concede that Kieregaard is right and our non-human will never know; what about the human me? can I know? 

The fact that I am asking this question, that I entertain the possibility that I do not know, is a starting place. I suspect this is the very place Kierkegaard wishes the reader to begin. To dismantle the confidence we have in our scientific and historical world view. I begin with a suspicion that I may very well not know, and a desire to discover if I do. Kierkegaard then suggests that to know what it is to be human; if I am truely committed to finding out I must choose be what I am, and to be accountable for that great undertaking before God. Ultimately this opening preface is  a terrifying invitation to become a committed participant in ones own life to discover what it means to be human.