Introduction
For the philosophic doctrine of S. Kierkegaard, the concepts of choice, individuality, and self are central. As he believed, a self emerges from an individual and is expressed in a choice. I agree with Kierkegaard’s definitions of these concepts, but I do not believe that neglecting a choice leads to a lost self.
The Philosophic Context of the Problem
The ideas of S. Kierkegaard belong to such philosophic direction as existentialism, which places an individual in the center of philosophic thinking. The concepts related to the problem of an individual are the most significant for the doctrine of Kierkegaard. The central problem for this philosopher is the question of what kind of a person should one be. The way, in which Kierkegaard presented his views, was in some part shaped by his polemics with the Hegelianism. The main reason, for which the philosopher disagreed with Hegelians was their rationalism; for them, the reality was a systematic unity possible to be comprehended by thought. Such a notion contradicts Kierkegaard’s view on individual; Hegelians, he stated, presented an individual as if it was an Absolute God, able of comprehending reality, without falling for the evil or striving to the good (Wade par. 2-4). It is also important that Kierkegaard was a Christian, particularly Protestant, thinker, and religion has had a strong impact on his philosophy (Ewing 3).
The Concept of a Choice
Among the essential concepts of Kierkegaard’s philosophy is the concept of a choice. For Kierkegaard’s, a choice is an independent decision of an individual. Even though a lot of factors influence a choice, such as upbringing, traditions, and other people, an individual himself or herself decides whether to submit to these factors or not, and it is a choice as well. In “Either/Or,” the philosopher demonstrates the importance of the outcomes of a choice. According to him, on the one side, there is the evil while on the other side, there is the good, and it is highly important to choose the side correctly. The choice is a content of a personality, and a personality expresses itself in a choice. Kierkegaard also rejects the notion that an issue, in regard to which a person makes a choice, is not in a relationship to the chooser. The chooser, as he states, cannot stay indifferent to this issue. Postponing a choice can lead to a missed opportunity (Solomon 12-13).
The Concept of Individuality
The concept of individuality or individual is another essential component of Kierkegaard’s philosophy. This concept is presented in “Concerning the Dedication to ‘The Individual.’” In this work, the philosopher juxtaposes the concepts of the crowd and an individual. According to him, the crowd is unworthy, while an individual possesses the infinite importance. It is an individual that God communicates with, judges, and saves, not the mass (Solomon 32-33). The decisions of individuals compose reality. In “Truth is Subjectivity,” he claims that the contemporaries do not understand the necessity and importance of being an individual, which he considers “the immorality of our age.” As the philosopher believes, the denial of the true concept of an individual makes people deceive themselves and cling to Hegelianism. The reason for such an attitude, as he is sure, is that becoming an individual is connected with a fear of a person that they would vanish once they die; associating oneself with a nation or age allows to feel immortal. However, the philosopher considers such reflections invalid. An individual, Kierkegaard claims, should be above the “we,” above the crowd and the historical period (Solomon 23).
The Concept of Having a Self
In Kierkegaard’s philosophy, the concept of having a self is linked to the concept of consciousness. A person that is performing some activities is aware of these activities. Moreover, a person is aware of this awareness. Such a phenomenon is called consciousness. The self-awareness creates the sense of identity. According to Kierkegaard, the self is based on the relationship between consciousness and identity. The ability of a person to define themselves is what raises humans above animals. Kierkegaard does not consider all humans capable of self-awareness; such people, who are not capable of it, are on the same level with animals. Thus, self-knowledge is the only type of knowledge needed to qualify for an ethical being. Having a self requires a constant search for self-knowledge; this is what it takes to have a self. The lack of self-understanding for Kierkegaard literally equals immorality (Stack 109).
The Connections Between the Concepts
The concepts of choice, individuality, and having a self are interconnected in the philosophy of Kierkegaard. An individual is a central concept in the doctrine; hence, everything should be comprehended through the prism of the subjective individual. A self derives from an individual since a self is an understanding of itself by an individual. There is no other source, from which a self may come, but an individual. The concept of choice is linked to these two concepts. By making a choice, an individual defines one’s self. As it was said in “The Rotation of Method,” a person, who has postponed a choice, loses an opportunity, thus losing their self (Solomon 14). Therefore, it is through a choice that a person defines their self. In “Fear and Trembling,” Abraham defines his self by making a choice to sacrifice his son (Solomon 17). His choice can be perceived and understood only through the prism of his individuality; thus, his choice is not understandable for others. In such a way, a self emerges from an individual and is defined by a choice made by that individual.
An Assessment of Kierkegaard’s View
The importance of Kierkegaard as a philosopher is that he was one of the first to emphasize the subjectivity of human nature and, hence, the impossibility for us to comprehend reality in an objective way (Schrag 67). He has also demonstrated that it is hard to become a self and maintain self-awareness (Vardy 105).
To my opinion, Kierkegaard is mostly right in his depiction of what it means to have a self and be an individual. However, I somewhat disagree with his understanding of choice. While I support the view that a self is defined through a choice, I cannot agree with the notion that a postponed choice necessarily means a missed opportunity and leads inevitably to losing a self. Such a notion seems over-generalizing. Postponing a choice is itself a choice; a person chooses not to choose. If it is a choice, then the self of this person is defined through this choice. Therefore, this person does not lose their self.
Conclusion
The concepts of individuality, choice, and having a self are central to Kierkegaard’s philosophy and are strongly interconnected. While I generally agree with his understanding of these concepts, I do not agree that postponing a choice leads to losing a self.
Works Cited
Ewing, Christine Elizabeth. Kierkegaard’s Christian Existentialism: Unresolved Tensions in the Sickness Unto Death. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 2000. Print.
Schrag, Calvin O. “Note on Kierkegaard’s Teleological Suspension of the Ethical.” Ethics 70.1 (1959): 66-68. Print.
Solomon, Robert C. Existentialism. New York City, New York: Oxford University Press, 2005. Print.
Stack, George J. “Kierkegaard: The Self and Ethical Existence.” Ethics 83. 2 (1973): 108-125. Print.
Vardy, Peter. The SPCK Introduction to Kierkegaard. London, UK: SPCK, 2012. Print.
Wade, Donald V 1944, The Concept of Individuality in Soren Kierkegaard. Web.