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.
No comments:
Post a Comment