To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Kierkegaard studies.
Journal articles on the topic 'Kierkegaard studies'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Kierkegaard studies.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Søltoft, Pia. "Kierkegaard, Luther, troen, tilegnelsen og samvittigheden." Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift 80, no. 1 (May 16, 2017): 13–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.7146/dtt.v80i1.106345.
Full textAbstract:
This article first deals with the relation between reason and faith, arguing that Søren Kierkegaard viewed Martin Luther as a rather “undialectical” thinker in his understanding of faith, since Luther, according to Kierkegaard, failed to acknowledge that reason and a possible outrage is the first step of faith, to be followed by a passionate devotion that Kierkegaard calls a “second immediacy”, which is another word for faith. Secondly, the article addresses Kierkegaard’s more positive view of Luther with regard to the appropriation of Christianity bythe individual. Thirdly, Kierkegaard’s, Luther’s, Nietzsche’s and Hannah Arendt’s views on the consciousness are discussed.
2
Pavlíková, Martina, and Bojan Žalec. "Boj za človekov jaz in pristnost: Kierkegaardova kritika javnosti, uveljavljenega reda, medijev in lažnega krščanstva." Bogoslovni vestnik 79, no. 4 (2019): 1015–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.34291/bv2019/04/pavlikova.
Full textAbstract:
Prispevek predstavlja Kierkegaardovo pojmovanje duhovno razvite oseb- nosti, ki jo Kierkegaard imenuje posamičnik, in dejavnikov, ki človeku prepreču- jejo, da bi to postal. Avtorja izpostavljata štiri take dejavnike: javnost, uveljavljeni red, novinarstvo in tisk ter lažno, nepristno krščanstvo. V tem kontekstu pojasnju- jeta Kierkegaardove pojme jaza oz. sebstva, množice, resnice ter pomen notra- njosti, radikalnosti in strasti. Analiza kaže, da je v samem središču Kierkegaardo- vega razumevanja človeka in družbe odnos »človek–Bog« v svoji kristocentrični obliki. Prav tako postane očitno, da so kljub Kierkegaardovemu poudarjanju su- bjektivnosti in pomena notranjosti trditve, da je Kierkegaard individualist, neu- temeljene. Kierkegaard je bil odnosni mislec, ne samo v vertikalnem odnosu »človek–Bog«, ampak tudi v horizontalnem, družbeno-socialnem odnosu »člo- vek–človek«, saj je bil njegov cilj in ideal oblikovanje skupnosti. Slednjo je razli- koval od množice kot skvarjene oblike socialnosti. V pravi skupnosti so ljudje po- vezani po Bogu, gre za vzorec »človek–Bog–človek«. Končna ugotovitev avtorjev je, da je Kierkegaardov ideal skupnost, ki jo prežema kristocentrična radikalna poslušnost Bogu – takšna skupnost pa je v nasprotju z omenjenimi štirimi nega- tivnimi dejavniki razvoja posamičnika. To ne preseneča, saj so temelj skupnosti v Kierkegaardovem smislu Bog in posamičniki, t.j. osebe, ki živijo iz svojega pristne- ga odnosa z Bogom in na tej podlagi gojijo tudi svoje odnose z drugimi.
3
JACOBY, MATTHEW GERHARD. "Kierkegaard on truth." Religious Studies 38, no. 1 (March 2002): 27–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0034412501005868.
Full textAbstract:
The following paper focuses upon what is possibly the most controversial passage in Kierkegaard's writings. On the basis of this passage Kierkegaard's notion of truth as ‘subjectivity’ has been interpreted as being ‘non-objective referential’, that is, as having severed itself from ‘eternal truth’ altogether, so that the emphasis in the question of truth is entirely upon the relationship a person has to what he thinks and that the object of the relationship is a matter of indifference. We shall defend here a reading of Kierkegaard in which the subjectivity that Kierkegaard defines as truth is entirely conditioned by its relation to a specific revelation of eternal truth. In line with this we will also interpret the passage at the centre of the controversy as an ‘impossible hypothetical’ used for the sake of making a provocation.
4
Johansen, Theis Schønning. "Pontoppidans Lykke-Per i lyset af Kierkegaards teologi." Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift 82, no. 1-2 (December 1, 2019): 76–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.7146/dtt.v82i1-2.118577.
Full textAbstract:
This article presents a reading of Pontoppidan’s Lucky Per in comparison with the theological anthropology of Søren Kierkegaard. To this end, the article follows Kierkegaard’s conception of despair as developed in The Sickness unto Death and the act of belief as illustrated in Fear and Trembling. Pontoppidan knew the authorship of Kierkegaard well. This article indicates that Pontoppidan in writing Lucky Per was heavily inspired by the development of Self as presented by Kierkegaard. Finally, the article discusses to what extent Per in his final form stands in a relationship to something divine.
5
Cook, John W. "Kierkegaard and Wittgenstein." Religious Studies 23, no. 2 (June 1987): 199–219. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0034412500018722.
Full textAbstract:
In recent years there has been a tendency in some quarters to see an affinity between the views of Kierkegaard and Wittgenstein on the subject of religious belief. It seems to me that this is a mistake, that Kierkegaard's views were fundamentally at odds with Wittgenstein's. That this fact is not generally recognized is, I suspect, owing to the obscurity of Kierkegaard's most fundamental assumptions. My aim here is to make those assumptions explicit and to show how they differ from Wittgenstein's.
6
Simmons, J. Aaron. "Kierkegaard at the Intersections: The Single Individual and Identity Politics." Religions 12, no. 7 (July 19, 2021): 547. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/rel12070547.
Full textAbstract:
Kierkegaard’s authorship is frequently charged with being so radically individualistic that his work is of little use to social theory. However, in this essay, I argue that Kierkegaard’s notion of “the single individual” actually offers important critical resources for some aspects of contemporary identity politics. Through a focused consideration of the two notes that form the little essay, “The Individual” (published with Point of View), I suggest that Kierkegaard does not ignore embodied historical existence, as is sometimes claimed, but instead simply rejects the idea that one’s moral dignity is determined by, or reducible to, such embodied differentiation. Instead, what we find in Kierkegaard is a rejection of the quantitative judgment of “the crowd” in favor of the qualitative neighbor-love of community. In light of Kierkegaard’s claim that it is the specifically religious category of the single individual that makes possible true human equality, I contend that we can develop a Kierkegaardian identity theory consistent with some aspects of the standpoint and intersectionality theory of Patricia Hill Collins and Kimberlé Crenshaw. Although Collins and Crenshaw operate at a structural level and Kierkegaard works at a theological level, they all offer important reminders to each other about the stakes of lives of meaning in light of the embodied task of social justice.
7
TURNBULL, JAMIE. "Kierkegaard on emotion: a critique of Furtak's Wisdom in Love." Religious Studies 46, no. 4 (February 5, 2010): 489–508. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0034412509990436.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractIn Wisdom in Love: Kierkegaard and the Ancient Quest for Emotional Integrity, Rick Furtak argues that emotions are cognitive phenomena to be understood in terms of the relation between subject and object. Furtak uses his conception of emotion to argue (in what he takes to be a Kierkegaardian spirit) that love is the source of meaning and value in human (and, specifically, Christian) life. This paper places Kierkegaard's views, and the role love plays in them, in his historical context. I argue that Furtak's approach fails to account for the subtle and complex role religious love plays in Kierkegaard's thought, and ultimately leaves him at odds with Kierkegaard methodologically and metaphysically.
8
Kirmmse, Bruce H. "Hverdagens Martyrium – “at gesticulere med sin daglige Existents”." Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift 76, no. 2 (May 10, 2013): 82–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.7146/dtt.v76i2.105665.
Full textAbstract:
The term “martyr” literally means “witness,” but it has generallybeen associated with those who give up their lives voluntarilyfor their convictions. In the years leading up the Revolution of 1848,and even more so in the years following, Kierkegaard occupied himselfincreasingly with the notion of martyrdom, often defi ning a martyras a “witness to the truth” and sometimes including the unambiguousassertion that such a witness would necessarily die for his or herconviction, while at other times leaving unclear the matter of actualdeath and speaking of a life of ridicule and humiliation. The presentpaper, “Everyday Martyrdom”, emerges from the author’s immersionin Kierkegaard’s journals and notebooks and follows the sinuous pathof Kierkegaard’s refl ections on the necessity of martyrdom in the moderndemocratic age. When one of Kierkegaard’s conservative friendsexpressed hope for a strong man, a “tyrant,” to set things right, Kierkegaard wrote that what was needed was not a tyrant, but a “martyr.”
9
Glöckner, Dorothea. "Kan du nå saltet?" Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift 76, no. 2 (May 10, 2013): 115–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.7146/dtt.v76i2.105668.
Full textAbstract:
This article brings into dialogue Kierkegaard and modern sociolinguistics.A common starting point is provided by focussing on indirect communication. For what occurs between meaning and saying? And to what extent can social relations be influenced by indirect communication? Included is the survey by P. Brown and S.C. Levinson, Politeness. Some universals in language usage (1987) as well as latest studies on impoliteness that consider strategies of confl ict avoiding communication. Kierkegaard also shows that human communication has to include the receiver. Nevertheless, his thoughts on communication are at the same time fundamentally embedded in analyses of human selfconception. Reflections upon these thoughts are then addressed using Kierkegaard’s work, The Sickness Unto Death. In these selected encounters between Kierkegaard and sociolinguistics, ethical challenges of speech acts are approached as topic of a potential dialogue.
10
Moser, Paul K. "God de re et de dicto: Kierkegaard, faith and religious diversity." Scottish Journal of Theology 74, no. 2 (May 2021): 135–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0036930621000314.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractIn his Concluding Unscientific Postscript, Kierkegaard, writing as Johannes Climacus, famously distinguishes two kinds of religiousness, kind A and kind B. He claims that, even though kind A is basic to kind B, including as represented in Christian religious commitment, kind A both has God ‘in its ground’ and ‘can be present in paganism’ that is atheist or agnostic. This apparent conflict calls for a resolution, if kind A is to be coherent. This article offers a new resolution with a familiar distinction between God de re and God de dicto, even though interpreters have overlooked the importance of this distinction for understanding Kierkegaard. In addition, the article contends that this distinction is supportable from Kierkegaard's own writings, even though he himself did not draw it explicitly. The article also explains the importance of the distinction for understanding Kierkegaard on religious diversity in intellectual content. It proposes that it enables Kierkegaard to offer a compelling position on such diversity, given his understanding of God's perfectly good character and activity.
11
Hatem, Nicole. "Eliade et l’exemplarité de Kierkegaard dans Gaudeamus." Studia Universitatis Babeș-Bolyai Philologia 66, no. 1 (March 30, 2021): 27–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.24193/subbphilo.2021.1.02.
Full textAbstract:
"Eliade and the Exemplarity of Kierkegaard in Gaudeamus. Eliade's relationship with Kierkegaard began in his youth and has been the subject of serious studies. Those studies analyzed and interpreted passages, which were few in number, in which an explicit reference to the Danish thinker appeared in the scholarly production of the Romanian writer in both his Memoirs and Journals. Kierkegaard's underground influence on Eliade's literary work remained to be studied. In our article, we were interested in the strongly autobiographical novel, written in 1928, Gaudeamus, in which alongside an explicit reference to the Danish thinker, were important elements (in terms of structure, characters, thematic, symbolism, etc.) of the aesthetic writings of Kierkegaard that Eliade had discovered shortly before, notably The Seducer’s Diary and In vino veritas. Our interest focused on the reiteration in both the Kierkegaardian and Eliadian works of the myths of Pygmalion and the Eternal Feminine. It thus appeared to us that it was not only, at times of great existential choices, as he himself asserts, that the example of Kierkegaard was decisive, for Eliade, but also on the literary level. Keywords: Mircea Eliade, Gaudeamus, Kierkegaard, The Seducer’s Diary, Pygmalion "
12
Rosfort, René. "“at forstaaeliggjøre og tyde Naturens Runer”." Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift 76, no. 2 (May 10, 2013): 133–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.7146/dtt.v76i2.105669.
Full textAbstract:
Kierkegaard’s attitude to natural science is equivocal. Whilethe published works deal with the open criticism of Hegel and his Danishfollowers, in his journals and notebooks we find a more clandestine,albeit no less intense, critique of the scientific endeavours of his day. Thebiting sarcasm that characterises this critique has often led to the viewthat Kierkegaard, as a Christian thinker of subjectivity, naturally hasto be stubbornly against scientific progress. On a closer look, though,we fi nd a more complex view hidden underneath the noisy surface ofKierkegaard’s vigorous rhetoric. The point of this article is to articulatethis more complex view against the backdrop of a historical sketch ofthe relationship between science and religion at the time of Kierkegaard,and through an interpretation of the Kierkegaard’s statements inhis journals and notebooks.
13
Roberts, Robert C. "Is Kierkegaard a “Virtue Ethicist”?" Faith and Philosophy 36, no. 3 (2019): 325–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/faithphil201981125.
Full textAbstract:
Several readers of Kierkegaard have proposed that his works are a good source for contemporary investigations of virtues, especially theistic and Christian ones. Sylvia Walsh has recently offered several arguments to cast doubt on the thesis that Kierkegaard can be profitably read as a “virtue ethicist.” Examination of her arguments helps to clarify what virtues, as excellent traits of human character, can be in a moral outlook that ascribes deep sin and moral helplessness to human beings and their existence and salvation entirely to God’s grace. The examination also clarifies the relationship between virtues and character and between the practices of virtue ethics and character ethics. Such clarification also may provide a bridge of communication between Kierkegaard scholarship and scholars of virtue ethics beyond the theistic communities. In particular, I’ll argue that a character ethics that is not a virtue ethics would be suboptimal as an aid to the formation of Christian wisdom and sanctification. Kierkegaard’s character ethics is a virtue ethics.
14
Hustwit, Ronald. "Adler and the Ethical: A Study of Kierkegaard's On Authority and Revelation." Religious Studies 21, no. 3 (September 1985): 331–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0034412500017431.
Full textAbstract:
In the second of his three prefaces to On Authority and Revelation, Kierkegaard writes: ‘“My reader”, may I simply beg you to read this book, for it is important for my main effort, wherefore I am minded to recommend it’ The question I will put to myself to begin my reflections on the book is: why should Kierkegaard recommend it so strongly? What is Kierkegaard doing in this book? One notices in his recommendation that it is addressed to his reader who, presumably, is not simply the reader of this book but the reader of his other books as well. The Concluding UnscientUc Postscript was being published about the same time (1846), and so the reader may well have been familiar with most of Kierkegaard's main philosophical works. The recommendation then is set in this context. The book is, on the face of it, so unlike the other works, concerned with certain odd claims to a revelation by a Danish pastor named Adler. Much of the book discusses the details of a deposition of Adler given to the local bishop and some details of later defences which Adler gave of his revelation in several works and sermons. It appears to be a local squabble of no general interest and certainly not the sort of thing that had occupied Kierkegaard's philosophical attention to this point. The book, then, stands in need of a recommendation to Kierkegaard's reader who is not otherwise prepared for this genre. But the recommendation does not say, ‘Try this, though quite different, you may like it.’ It says rather that the reader should read it, and later he adds read it carefully, because it is ‘important for my main effort’. So the book is to be seen as of a piece with the other main works of Kierkegaard. This is what I should like to understand in the following discussion: how is this book important for Kierkegaard's main effort?
15
Hart, David A. "Kierkegaard." Theology 102, no. 806 (March 1999): 137–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0040571x9910200223.
Full text
16
Albinus, Lars. "Tro og beslutsomhed." Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift 76, no. 4 (May 20, 2018): 276–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.7146/dtt.v76i4.105693.
Full textAbstract:
Kierkegaard and Heidegger agree in seeing the prominenceof human existence in the reflexive concern for itself and the anxietywhich follows from recognizing the abyss of possibility and nothingness.However, Heidegger misses a notion of the formal structure of beingin Kierkegaard’s work, which he conceives to merely offer a theologicalsolution to questions that only a phenomenological outlook mightprovide on neutral grounds. Kierkegaard, on the other hand, lends hisvoice to forms of existence by which the “existentiell” dimension restson the awakening of the Spirit as the condition of possibility. Contraryto Heidegger, Kierkegaard does not regard the fulfi llment of existenceas something the subject can decide for itself without falling into despair.Using the literary figure of Hans Castorp from the novel Zauberbergby Thomas Mann, the article aims to show how easily the decisionto confront life with love falls back into a spell of escapism, leavingKierkegaard with the upper hand in pointing out the inadequacy of thehuman spirit, including philosophical endeavors, to ground itself.
17
Ferreira, M. Jamie. "The Point Outside the World: Kierkegaard and Wittgenstein on Nonsense, Paradox and Religion." Religious Studies 30, no. 1 (March 1994): 29–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0034412500022708.
Full textAbstract:
Much has been made of the Kierkegaardian flavour of Wittgenstein's thought on religion, both with respect to its explicit allusions to Kierkegaard and its implicit appeals. Even when significant disparities between the two are noted, there remains an important core of de facto methodological agreement between them, addressing the limits of theory and the dispelling of illusion. The categories of ‘nonsense’ and ‘paradox’ are central to Wittgenstein's therapeutic enterprise, while the categories of ‘paradox’ and the ‘absurd’ are central to much of Kierkegaard's attempt (pseudonymous and non-pseudonymous) to dispel religious illusion. Writing of how the ‘urge to thrust against the limits of language’ yields ‘nonsense’, Wittgenstein explicitly appealed to Kierkegaard: ‘Kierkegaard, too, recognized this thrust and even described it in much the same way (as a thrust against paradox)’.1 I want to consider whether Kierkegaard's category of paradox of the absurd is assimilable to Wittgenstein's view of nonsense and paradox. I shall argue that a consideration of Wittgenstein's view of paradox can highlight contrasting strands in Kierkegaard's writings on religious faith, strands which take paradox more or less strictly – in particular, it can clarify several different opinions concerning the status of religious claims. My exploration will bring to the fore some implications of the attempt to make room, in the religious employment of language, for a ‘higher understanding’ of truths which we are said to be able to grasp but cannot express.
18
Bennington, Geoffrey. "A Moment of Madness: Derrida's Kierkegaard." Oxford Literary Review 33, no. 1 (July 2011): 103–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.3366/olr.2011.0008.
Full textAbstract:
Beginning with his famous 1963 lecture on Foucault, Derrida repeatedly invokes a line from Kierkegaard, often translated from his French as ‘the instant of decision is madness,’ without ever giving a precise reference or subjecting that sentence to anything like a reading in the Derridean sense. This paper tracks some of the unsuspected complexities that emerge when that sentence is located in Kierkegaard and the Pauline tradition to which Kierkegaard is appealing. It is suggested that the singular functioning of this sentence in Derrida nonetheless, in its very failure to read, shows up something of the madness, folly or stupidity at play in Kierkegaard's thinking, and thus performs in its repetitions something of the unreadability that opens the possibility of reading itself.
19
Jothen, Peder. "Kierkegaard." Faith and Philosophy 29, no. 1 (2012): 111–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/faithphil201229110.
Full text
20
TORRANCE, ANDREW B. "Can a person prepare to become a Christian? A Kierkegaardian response." Religious Studies 53, no. 2 (July 27, 2016): 199–215. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0034412516000172.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractIs it possible to prepare oneself to become a Christian? For Kierkegaard, there is no straightforward answer to this question, especially since such a transition depends upon a divine activity that is outside the realm of human control. Despite the challenge that this question poses, Kierkegaard's writings do provide us with a way to respond, and this response will be the subject matter of this article. Following an analysis of his position, this article will conclude that, although Kierkegaard recognizes that there are precedent ways of existing that are more conducive to becoming a Christian, it is not helpful to describe them as preparatory.
21
Dell’Eva, Gloria. "Kierkegaards Modernität." Neue Zeitschrift für Systematische Theologie und Religionsphilosophie 61, no. 1 (March 1, 2019): 51–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/nzsth-2019-0003.
Full textAbstract:
Zusammenfassung Im nachfolgenden Artikel möchte ich aufzeigen, dass die traditionellen Interpretationen Kierkegaards – als Beispiele analysiere ich Aufsätze Sybille Lewitscharoffs und Karl Löwiths – reduktiv sind, weil sie ihn als Vertreter einer Anthropologie des Einzelnen betrachten, der nur „im Sprung“ vor einem allmächtigen und transzendenten Gott und in der Abschottung von der Gesellschaft seinen Sinn entdecken kann. Ich werde hingegen nachweisen, dass Gott bei Kierkegaard nicht auf diese patriarchalische Weise, sondern als ein Gott, der im Menschen selbst und in der Welt ist, zu deuten ist. Die religiöse Bindung ist daher für den Menschen kein weltfeindlicher Sprung zu Gott hin, sondern eine Vertiefung in sich selbst, die ihn gleichzeitig in Verbindung mit allen Lebenden, mit seinen Mitmenschen und seiner Umwelt setzt, weil Gott selbst als dieses soziale und ökologische Netzwerk interpretiert wird. Dieser innovative Zugang findet im Denken Kierkegaards ein theologisch-anthropologisches Modell, das im Vergleich zum patriarchalischen den heutigen Menschen viel intensiver und existenzbezogener ansprechen kann. In Hinsicht darauf werde ich darlegen, wie modern Kierkegaard ist, indem ich nachzeichne, dass seine Gottes- und Menschenauffassung der Jürgen Moltmanns sehr nahe steht.
22
Morgan, Jeffrey. "Guilt, Self-Awareness, and the Good Will in Kierkegaard’s Confessional Discourses." Studies in Christian Ethics 33, no. 3 (January 9, 2019): 352–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0953946818822277.
Full textAbstract:
The specific aim of this article is to focus on Kierkegaard’s confessional discourses and to examine his appreciation for the experience of guilt—the feeling of guilt and the acknowledgment of guilt—in a person’s efforts to act with a good will, or what he calls ‘purity of heart’. The article offers an interpretation of what Kierkegaard means by the ‘purity of heart’ that guilt serves, and it makes an argument that in this service to ‘purity of heart’ the relationship between guilt and self-awareness is especially significant. For Kierkegaard, without the subjective feeling of guilt and without a self-reflective endorsement of that feeling, a person cannot overcome a bad or divided will; a person who strives to have a good will is a person who is able rightly to acknowledge, appropriate or endorse his or her guilt. Furthermore, Kierkegaard’s claim is not simply that this acknowledgment of guilt is a necessary precondition for a good will but that it is itself a quintessential action of a good will. The article concludes with a note of caution that while Kierkegaard does not want to make guilt a final word about a person, a word that overshadows grace and pardon, he is also very wary of the ways people fail to take their own guilt seriously and thereby forfeit the benefits of its self-disclosing power.
23
Simmons, J. Aaron. "Militant Liturgies: Practicing Christianity with Kierkegaard, Bonhoeffer, and Weil." Religions 12, no. 5 (May 12, 2021): 340. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/rel12050340.
Full textAbstract:
Traditional philosophy of religion has tended to focus on the doxastic dimension of religious life, which although a vitally important area of research, has often come at the cost of philosophical engagements with religious practice. Focusing particularly on Christian traditions, this essay offers a sustained reflection on one particular model of embodied Christian practice as presented in the work of Søren Kierkegaard. After a discussion of different notions of practice and perfection, the paper turns to Kierkegaard’s conception of the two churches: the Church Triumphant and the Church Militant. Then, in light of Kierkegaard’s defense of the latter and critique of the former, it is shown that Kierkegaard’s specific account gets appropriated and expanded in Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s account of “costly grace” and “religionless Christianity,” and Simone Weil’s conception of “afflicted love.” Ultimately, it is suggested that these three thinkers jointly present a notion of “militant liturgies” that offers critical and constructive resources for contemporary philosophy of religion.
24
Welz, Claudia. "Frihed til kærlighed hos Luther og Kierkegaard." Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift 72, no. 2 (June 17, 2009): 99–121. http://dx.doi.org/10.7146/dtt.v72i2.106458.
Full textAbstract:
”You shall love thy neighbour as yourself”. How does commanded love turn into the praxis of loving? According to Kierkegaard, works of love are not just grounded in human agency and capability, but are done in the Spirit of love. The key words of Kierkegaard’s explanation – ‘spirit’, ‘interiority’, ‘gift’ and ‘debt’ – are decisive also for the Pauline-Lutheran tradition. This tradition holds that the human being becomes free to love his neighbor only if he has been freed from self-centredness. Yet, what does that imply for the view of the person, who is simul iustus et peccator, at once a sinner and justified, at once ‘the old Adam’ and ‘a new creature’? The anthropological implications are controversial, especially in regard to the relation between the ‘inner’ and the ‘outer’, the ‘old’ and the ‘new’ person, the sinner’s nature and his self-transcendence. Kierkegaard’s insights could contribute to the clarification, if not correction, of some notorious problems that belong to Luther’s heritage.
25
Podmore, Simon D. "Kierkegaard as Physician of the Soul: On Self-forgiveness and Despair." Journal of Psychology and Theology 37, no. 3 (September 2009): 174–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/009164710903700303.
Full textAbstract:
Despair (sickness of the spirit) and divine forgiveness are decisive psychological and theological themes essential to both Søren Kierkegaard's relational vision of ‘the self before God’ and his own personal struggles with guilt and the consciousness of sin. Reading Kierkegaard as both a physician and a patient of this struggle, therefore, this article examines The Sickness unto Death (1849) as an attempt to resolve the sinful ‘self’ by integrating a psychological perspective on despair with a theology of the forgiveness of sins. It is suggested that by presenting this integrative notion of self-knowledge through the ‘higher’ Christian pseudonym of Anti-Climacus, Kierkegaard is indicting his own resistances to accepting divine forgiveness and thereby operating—via a ‘higher’ pastoral identity—as a physician to his own soul. By diagnosing the unconscious psychological and theological relationships between sin/forgiveness, offense, and human impossibility/divine possibility, Kierkegaard finally reveals faith—as a self-surrendering recognition of acceptance before the Holy Other—to be the key to unlocking the enigma of the self in despair.
26
Goold, Patrick. "Reading Kierkegaard." Faith and Philosophy 7, no. 3 (1990): 304–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/faithphil19907324.
Full text
27
Helenius, Timo. "Ricoeur’s Kierkegaard." International Journal of Philosophy and Theology 80, no. 4-5 (October 29, 2018): 356–73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21692327.2018.1525572.
Full text
28
Nielsen, Jesper Tang. "Moral, isolation, diakoni, tilblivelse og fortvivlelse – i vidt forskellige teologiske sammenhænge." Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift 82, no. 1-2 (January 15, 2020): 1. http://dx.doi.org/10.7146/dtt.v82i1-2.118189.
Full textAbstract:
Årets årgang af Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift består af to dobbeltnumre. Med dette bind foreligger det første. Det er i sagens natur mere omfattende end normalt. Næste dobbeltnummer følger inden for overskuelig tid. Ud over den utraditionelle nummering følger Dansk Teologiske Tidsskrift sin traditionelle redaktionelle stil. Vi bringer fem artikler, der dækker alle teologiens discipliner og behandler såvel nye teologiske spørgsmål som gamle spørgsmål på en ny måde.
Første artikel af Jan Dietrich omhandler moralsk realisme i Det Gamle Testamente eller den Hebraiske Bibel, som man rettelig bør sige, når man ikke ønsker at anvende det kristne perspektiv på denne skriftsamling. Dietrich tager udgangspunkt hos Platon og stiller spørgsmålet, om det gode er godt i sig selv; eller det er godt, fordi Gud siger, at det er godt? Hvordan forholder Gud sig til det i den første del af Bibelen?Efter eksegesen kommer kirkehistorien. Mette Birkedal Bruun præsenterer sin store disputats om Armand-Jean Rancé og hans reform af cistercienserklosteret La Trappe. Rancés asketiske program indebar en isolation fra samfundet, men samtidig foregik en ret intens udveksling med den omgivende verden. Det dynamiske forhold mellem tilbagetrækning og engagement er temaet for hendes undersøgelse.I den næste artikel præsenteres diakonien som et nyt fagområde inden for dansk teologi. Med anledning i kandidatuddannelsen i diakonived Aarhus Universitet præsenterer Jakob Egeris Thorsen det faglige felt både nationalt og internationalt.De to sidste bidrag omhandler på forskellig vis Søren Kierkegaard. Det første af Anne Louise Nielsen afdækker en teologi hos Kierkegaard. Det er et gammelt spørgsmål, om Kierkegaard overhovedet kan siges at have fremlagt en teologi. Artiklen argumenterer for, at der faktisk foreligger en teologi i Filosofiske Smuler, som kan karakteriseres som en tilblivelsens teologi. Den sætter forfatteren i relation til nyere teologiske positioner.Den sidste artikel læser Lykke-Per på baggrund af Søren Kierkegaards Sygdommen til Døden. Dermed afdækkes, at Henrik Pontoppidanhar været langt mere influeret af Søren Kierkegaards tanker, end man ellers har været opmærksom på. Romanens hovedperson, Per Sidenius, er visse steder fortvivlet på en måde, som bedst forstås gennem Kierkegaards definitioner.Til dette nummer er der god grund til at ønske god læselyst.
29
Redmond, M. "The Hamann–Hume Connection." Religious Studies 23, no. 1 (March 1987): 95–107. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0034412500018564.
Full textAbstract:
It is well known that the eighteenth century Scottish philosopher and sceptic David Hume was a severe critic of religious belief, but what may not be so familiar, and has been brought to our attention in recent years by Isaiah Berlin, is that some religious believers have found in Hume's sceptical arguments a source of nurture for their religious faith. In particular, Berlin singles out the example of Hume's contemporary, Johann Georg Hamann (17388), a devout but unconventional believer as well as one of the leaders of the German Counter-Enlightenment. Hamann's primary claim to fame, however, rests upon his influence upon the Danish theologian, Soren Kierkegaard. Although Kierkegaard never met Hamann, he was familiar with his writings, and calls Hamann ‘his only teacher.’ Kierkegaard's vast influence on modern Christianity, especially Protestantism, is, of course, a commonplace. What, though, is often overlooked, and Berlin calls our attention to, is that this man who influenced Kierkegaard was himself deeply influenced by Hume. The student of religion, as well as the philosopher, cannot help but be struck by this historical connection between Hume and believers such as Johann Hamann and thus, ultimately, between David Hume and modern Protestantism.
30
Levy, Ze'ev. "On the Aquedah in Modern Philosophy." Journal of Jewish Thought and Philosophy 15, no. 1 (2007): 85–108. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/105369907781148560.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThe story of the Aquedah represents one of the most moving stories of the Bible. Most modern discussions on it take their point of departure from Soren Kierkegaard's Fear and Trembling. I shall do so too in this essay, which focuses on the relations between ethics and religious belief and tries to show that Kierkegaard misinterpreted the story. The inquiry analyzes philosophical responses to the Aquedah from Philo and Jewish and non-Jewish philosophers until the present. It underscores its paradoxical implications, including a structuralist analysis and comparison of the Aquedah with the biblical story of Yephta's daughter. The final conclusion asserts that what Kierkegaard extolled, Judaism condemns as sacrilege.
31
Søltoft, Pia. "Giveren, gaven, modtageren og gensidigheden." Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift 76, no. 2 (May 10, 2013): 95–114. http://dx.doi.org/10.7146/dtt.v76i2.105666.
Full textAbstract:
In this article we will read Kierkegaard in continuation of theun-going debate about the economy of the gift. I will argue that Kierkegaard’snotion of love as a three-part-relation in many ways exceedsthe insights in the economy of the gift that Marcel Mauss gained holdof in his anthropologic studies in 1925. Insights which have led to anun-going debate about the “pureness” of the gift between philosopherslike Jacques Derrida, Emmanuel Lévinas and Jean-Luc Marion andin recent theological studies as the ones by Bo Holm og Niels HenrikGregersen. In what follows I will put attention to how Kierkegaard inhis upbuilding discourses and in Works of Love describes love as a specialmutual relation between the lover (the giver) the beloved (the receiver)and love itself (the gift). Hereby I wish to show that Kierkegaard’s notionof love contains a deliberate contribution to the recent debate of theeconomy of the gift.
32
Pattison, George. "Eternal Loneliness: Art and Religion in Kierkegaard and Zen." Religious Studies 25, no. 3 (September 1989): 379–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0034412500019910.
Full textAbstract:
When we compare a thinker as complex and many–sided as Søren Kierkegaard with a cultural phenomenon as significant as Zen Buddhism it is unlikely that we will be able to come up with any simple formula by which to summarize the results of the comparison. But the value of such comparative studies need not in any case lie in the conclusions we reach but in the intrinsic interest and importance of the material itself, in the questions and insights raised by both similarities and dissimilarities. All this is still true if we confine the field of comparison to a very specific area, as here, where we are concerned with the relationship between art and religion in Kierkegaard and Zen. For this is of course no marginal issue: the distinction between the aesthetic and the religious is fundamental to the whole structure of Kierkegaard's authorship while the arts provde one of the main manifestations of the spirit of Zen. Our line of enquiry may be narrow but it takes us straight to the heart of the matter and the questions which it raises are crucial to the overall assessment of both Kierkegaard and Zen and of the relationship between them.
33
Mahn, Jason A. "Kierkegaard after Hauerwas." Theology Today 64, no. 2 (July 2007): 172–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/004057360706400204.
Full textAbstract:
With the “return of the virtues” in theology and church practice, Christians seek to develop dispositions that make moral excellence more likely. By contrast, the writings of Søren Kierkegaard, though retrieved by virtue ethicists, develop dispositions (anxiety, self-doubt, the real possibility of offense) that lead to self-conflict and make virtue more difficult. If Kierkegaard does develop virtue, he most closely resembles Stanley Hauerwas, who suggests that virtue makes conflict and moral failure increasingly possible. In this essay, I read Kierkegaard through Hauerwas in order to trace a peculiar version of Christian training and to question assumptions about the immediate benefit of religious formation.
34
Law, David. "Kierkegaard on Baptism." Theology 91, no. 740 (March 1988): 114–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0040571x8809100206.
Full text
35
Fishburn, Jan Forsythe. "Søren Kierkegaard, Exegete." Interpretation: A Journal of Bible and Theology 39, no. 3 (July 1985): 229–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/002096438503900302.
Full textAbstract:
In response to the search for the factually true or historically probable elements in the Bible that influenced the interpretation of his day, Kierkegaard persisted in seeking the truth in Scripture through imaginative and total immersion in its content.
36
Rodríguez, Yésica. "Kierkegaard y Kant: educación para la ética." Trilhas Filosóficas 11, no. 1 (June 26, 2018): 125–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.25244/tf.v11i1.3036.
Full textAbstract:
Resumen: El presente artículo pretende realizar una aproximación entre los pensamientos éticos de Kant y Kierkegaard concentrándonos en los conceptos de educación y libertad. Para ello pondremos foco en el pensamiento práctico desarrollado por el filósofo alemán en el año 1790, al cual denominamos la segunda ética kantiana, y en la primera autoría kierkegaardiana, es decir, O lo uno o lo otro (1843) y El concepto de angustia (1844). Consideramos que estos dos periodos, en ambos autores, nos brindan la posibilidad de encontrar puntos de contactos que nos permiten sostener que la ética que Kierkegaard tiene en mente para estas obras es el pensamiento moral desarrollado por Kant en este periodo.Palabras claves: Kant. Kierkegaard. Libertad. Educación. ÉticaAbstract: The present article intends to make an approximation between the ethical thoughts of Kant and Kierkegaard concentrating on the concepts of education and freedom. For this we will focus on the practical thought developed by the German philosopher in the year 1790, which we call the second Kantian ethic, and in the first Kierkegaardian authorship, that is, Either/Or (1843) and The Concept of Anxiety (1844). We consider that these two periods, in both authors, give us the possibility of finding points of contact that allow us to maintain that the ethics that Kierkegaard has in mind for these works is the moral thought developed by Kant in this period.Keywords: Kant. Kierkegaard. Freedom. Education. Ethics Resumo: O presente artigo pretende fazer uma aproximação entre os pensamentos éticos de Kant e Kierkegaard concentrando-se nos conceitos de educação e liberdade. Para isso, vamos nos concentrar no pensamento prático desenvolvido pelo filósofo alemão no ano de 1790, que chamamos a segunda ética kantiana, e na primeira autoria de kierkegaardiana, ou seja, Ou/Ou (1843) e O conceito de Angústia (1844). Consideramos que esses dois períodos, em ambos os autores, nos darão a possibilidade de encontrar pontos de contato que nos permitam sustentar que a ética que Kierkegaard tem em mente para essas obras é o pensamento moral desenvolvido por Kant nesse período.Palavras-chave: Kant. Kierkegaard. Liberdade. Educação. Ética REFERENCIASALLISON, Henry. Kant's Theory of Freedom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995.ASSISTER, Alison. Kant and Kierkegaard on Freedom and Evil. In: International Journal for Philosophy of Religion, Vol. 72 (April 1996), pp 275-296.DI GIOVANNI, George. Freedom and religion in Kant and his immediate successors: The vocation of mankind, 1774–1800. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.DIP, Patricia. Judge William: the Limits of the ethical. In: Kierkegaard Research: Sources, Reception and Resources, Volume 17, Katalin Nun,Jon Stewart (Eds.), London-New York, Routledge, 2016.FOUCAULT, Michel. Una lectura de Kant: Introducción a la antropología en sentido pragmático. Traducción Ariel Dilon. Buenos Aires: Siglo veintiuno, 2013.FREMSTEDAL, Roe. Kierkegaard and Kant on Radical Evil and the Highest Good. Virtue, Happiness, and the kingdom of God, New York: Palgrave Macmillan , 2014._______. The concept of the highest good in Kierkegaard and Kant. Int J Philos Relig (2011) 69:155–171._______. The moral argument for the existence of God and immorality. Kierkegaard and Kant. Journal of Religious Ethics, Inc, JRE 41. (2013), pp. 50–78._______. The Moral Makeup of the World: Kierkegaard and Kant on the Relation between Virtue and Happiness in this World. Kierkegaard Studies Yearbook. N° 1 (2012), pp. 25-47.FRIEDMAN, R. Kant and Kierkegaard: the limits of the Reason and the cunning of faith. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion, 19:3-22, pp. 3-22. _______. Kierkegaard: First Existentialist or last Kantian?. Religious Studies, Cambridge University Press, Vol. 18, Nº 2 (1982), pp. 159-170.FRIERSON, Patrick. R. Freedom and anthropology in Kant’s moral philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.GOUWENS, David. Kierkegaard as religious thinker. Cambridge: University Press, USA, 1996.GREEN, Ronald. Kant und Kierkegaard.The Hidden Debt. New York: State University New York Press, 1992.HELLER, Ágnes. Crítica a la Ilustración. Traducción Gustau Muñoz y José Ignacio López Soria. Barcelona: Ediciones Península, 1999.HEIDEGGER, Martin. Kant y el problema de la metafísica. Traducción Gred Ibscher Roth. México: Fondo de cultura económica, 2013.KANT, Immanuel. Antropología en sentido pragmático. Traducción José Gaos. México: Fondo de Cultura Económica, 2014._______. La metafísica de las Costumbres. Traducción Adela Cortina Orts y Jesús Cornill Sancho. Madrid: Tecnos, 1994._______. Pedagogía. Traducción Lorenzo Luzuriaga y José Luis Pascal, Madrid: Akal, 2003.KIERKEGAARD, Soren. O lo uno o lo otro I. Traducción Bogonya Saez Tajafuerce y Darío González. Madrid: Trotta, 2006._______. O lo uno o lo otro II. Traducción Darío González. Madrid: Trotta, 2007._______. El concepto de angustia. Traducción Darío González y Óscar Parcero. Madrid: Trotta, 2013._______. En la espera de la fe, Traducción Luis Guerrero Martínez y Leticia Valadez. México: Universidad Iberoamericana, 2005.KNAPPE, Ulrich. Theory and practice in Kant and Kierkegaard. (Kierkegaard studies. Monograph serie; 9), Copenhagen: Søren Kierkegaard Research Centre, 2004.KOSCH, Michelle. Freedom And Reason in Kant, Schelling and Kierkegaard. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006._______. Choosing Evil: Schelling, Kierkegaard, and the legacy of Kant's conception of Freedom. (Dissertation Philosophy). New York: Columbia University, 1999.LÖWITH, Karl. De Hegel a Nietzsche: La quiebra revolucionaria del pensamiento en el siglo XIX. Trad. Emilio Estiú. Buenos Aires: Katz, 2012.MOONEY, Edward. On Soren Kierkegaard, Dialogue, polemics, Lost Intimacy, and Time. Syracusa, Ashgate, 2007.MUENCH, Paul. Kierkegaard’s Socratic Task. (Dissertation). University of Pittsburgh, 2006.MUÑOZ FONNEGRA, Sergio. La elección ética. Sobre la crítica de Kierkegaard a la filosofía moral de Kant. Estudios filosóficos, Universidad de Antioquia, n. 41, pp. 81-109, 2010.NAES, Arnes. Kierkegaard and the values of education: Contribution to the Kierkegaard Conference of the International Institute of Philosophy, Copenhagen, 1966.NEGT, Oskar. Kant y Marx. Un diálogo entre épocas. Traducción Alejandro del Río. Madrid: Trotta, 2004.OLIVARES-BØGESKOV, Benjamín. El concepto de felicidad en las obras de Søren Kierkegaard: principios psicológicos en los estadios estéticos, ético y religioso. México: Universidad Iberoamericana, 2015._______. El concepto de felicidad en el estadio ético. La integración de la estética en la vida ética. La Mirada Kierkegaardiana. Nº 0, pp. 43-64, 2008.PECK, William. On Autonomy: The Primacy of the Subject in Kant and Kierkegaard. (Ph. D. Dissertation). Connecticut: Yale University, 1974.RODRÍGUEZ, Pablo. El descubrimiento de la libertad infinita. Kierkegaard y el pecado. El títere y el enano. Revista de Teología Crítica, Vol. 1, ISSN N°: 1853 – 0702, pp. 207-216, 2010.RODRÍGUEZ, Yésica; RODRÍGUEZ, Pablo; PEÑA ARROYAVE, Alejandro. El concepto de aburrimiento en Kierkegaard. Revista de Filosofía. Universidad Iberoamericana. Año 49, N° 142, ISSN: 0185-3481, pp. 97-118, 2017.RODRÍGUEZ, Yésica. Kierkegaard y Kant. Una interpretación del sí mismo a partir de la segunda ética kantiana. In: DIP, Patricia., RODRÍGUEZ, Pablo (Coord.) Orígenes y significado de la filosofía Poshegeliana. Buenos Aires, Gorla, 2017, pp. 113-139.STACK, George. Kierkegaard's Existential Ethics. Alabama: University of Alabama Press, 1977.TORRALBA, Francesc. Poética de la libertad: Lectura de Kierkegaard. Madrid, Caparrós Editores, 1998.
37
Williams, Clifford. "Kierkegaardian Suspicion and Properly Basic Beliefs." Religious Studies 30, no. 3 (September 1994): 261–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0034412500022873.
Full textAbstract:
It is a commonplace that Kierkegaard believed Christians should adopt a stance of suspicion toward their beliefs. What appear to be genuine Christian beliefs may, he thought, really be spurious, not by virtue of being false, but by virtue of arising in illegitimate ways. Kierkegaard's works are replete with descriptions of these illegitimate ways – the psychological and sociological conditions that produce what people mistakenly take to be genuine Christian beliefs.
38
Emmanuel, Steven M. "Kierkegaard On Doctrine: A Post–Modern Interpretation." Religious Studies 25, no. 3 (September 1989): 363–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0034412500019909.
Full textAbstract:
Though Kierkegaard never explicitly formulated a theory of religious doctrine, he did have a clear position on the role that Christian doctrine ought to play in the lives of believers. Briefly stated, he maintained that Christianity, as a human activity, involves more than merely believing certain propositions about matters of fact. The doctrines of Christianity take on a true religious significance only when they are given the power to transform the lives of those who accept them; only when they are given expression in the existence of the believer. This was, however, far from evident to Kierkegaard's theological contemporaries who, in the collective absentmindedness of the age, sought to replace the Christian virtue of faith with the philosophical ideal of objective knowledge.
39
Piety, Marilyn Gaye. "Kierkegaard on Rationality." Faith and Philosophy 10, no. 3 (1993): 365–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/faithphil19931037.
Full text
40
Lippitt, John. "Kierkegaard after MacIntyre." Faith and Philosophy 22, no. 4 (2005): 496–502. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/faithphil200522464.
Full text
41
Stern, Kenneth. "Kierkegaard on Theistic Proof." Religious Studies 26, no. 2 (June 1990): 219–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0034412500020370.
Full textAbstract:
It has been customary among analytic philosophers not to think highly of, and even to denigrate Kierkegaard. Their view is exemplified by the late Henry Aiken who writes that that Kierkegaard ‘usually does not argue for his position: he merely presents it’. Or that, as according to Aiken, one ‘distinguished Oxford philosopher’ is reported to have remarked, ‘Kierkegaard is not one of those philosophers on whom you can sharpen your wits’. It seems to me on the contrary, that Kierkegaard does indeed present arguments for his views. What follows is an example of this.
42
Pattison, George. "Kirkestormen, neo-Gnosticism and Secular Christianity." Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift 73, no. 4 (December 31, 2010): 282–95. http://dx.doi.org/10.7146/dtt.v73i4.106442.
Full textAbstract:
The article notes that Kierkegaard’s writings on the Church had a considerable impact on theology in the 20th century including, not least, the theological movement sometimes referred to as ‘religionless’ or ‘secular’ Christianity. Like that movement, Kierkegaard problematized the very idea of a Church. However, his writings also reflect a rejection of life in the world rather than the ‘secular’ affirmation of thisworldliness. This can seem like a version of Neo-Gnosticism. However, it is argued that Kierkegaard’s rejection of the world is neither to be understood in the perspective of the Augustinian doctrine of original sin nor of Gnostic dualism but reflects a modern understanding of theworld as a unitary whole. The question then is whether such a world is favourable to human flourishing.
43
Polka, Brayton. "Kierkegaard and Theology." European Legacy 18, no. 3 (June 2013): 358–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10848770.2013.773499.
Full text
44
Furnal, Joshua. "The Dialectic of Faith and Reason in Cornelio Fabro’s Reading of Kierkegaard’s Theology." Theological Studies 78, no. 3 (August 21, 2017): 718–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0040563917714618.
Full textAbstract:
This essay explores the impact of Søren Kierkegaard upon the important Italian Thomist, Cornelio Fabro. Fabro rejected the caricature of Kierkegaard as an “irrationalist” and placed him firmly in the Christian tradition. By highlighting the influence of Kierkegaard upon a Thomist like Fabro, the relevance of Fabro’s own thought is opened up for more contemporary debates in theology regarding the enduring legacies of German idealism, existentialism, and atheism.
45
ANDIC, MARTIN. "SIMONE WEIL AND KIERKEGAARD." Modern Theology 2, no. 1 (October 1985): 21–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0025.1985.tb00103.x.
Full text
46
Plant, Stephen. "Book Reviews : Kierkegaard Reassessed." Expository Times 109, no. 10 (July 1998): 313. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/001452469810901016.
Full text
47
Plekon, Michael. "Kierkegaard and the Eucharist." Studia Liturgica 22, no. 2 (September 1992): 214–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/003932079202200207.
Full text
48
Law, David R. "Book Reviews: On Kierkegaard." Expository Times 113, no. 3 (December 2001): 103. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/001452460111300315.
Full text
49
Kleinert, Markus. "Ausnahme und Autorität. Neue Literatur zu Kierkegaard und Nietzsche." Nietzsche-Studien 48, no. 1 (November 1, 2019): 265–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/nietzstu-2019-0014.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Exception and authority are core themes of Kierkegaard’s and Nietzsche’s works. These themes are used as points of comparison in more recent studies on the two authors which focus on structural parallels developing the figure of the single one resp. the lonely one and on concepts of power with regard to religious and philosophical authority. Methodological difficulties relevant to the popular comparison of Kierkegaard and Nietzsche in general concern the interpretation of the totality, teleology and style of each works.
50
Whittaker, John H. "Kierkegaard and Existence Communications." Faith and Philosophy 5, no. 2 (1988): 168–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/faithphil19885213.
Full text