Kierkegaards Philosophical Viewpoints on Ethics and Critics of his Essay

Kierkegaards Philosophical Viewpoints on Ethics and Critics of his Work - Essay ExampleThe object lens of this paper is to divulge into Ethics and provide more information on a chosen philosopher of this field of philosophy. For the purpose of this paper was chosen Soren Kierkegaard. Danish natural he firmly supported the involvement of religion in philosophy. His ideas are progressively developed and critics, among which Hegel and the Romantics, of his ideas are laid out.Kierkegaard was born in Copenhagen, the capital of Denmark, in 1823 in a wealthy family. He suffered from melancholy and depression (Kemerling, 2002). His long list of works involves the most famous Fear and Trembling (1883), The Concept of affright (1884), Concept of Irony (1841), and The Sickeness unto Death (1844).Fear and Trembling2 is the piece of work where the philosopher discusses on ethics. It deals with the aesthetic and the honourable. Having given a multidimensional dimension to all of his works Kier kegaard followed the identical principle with his Ethics too. According to the philosopher ethics (i) is not a whole existential lever but is rather overtaken by the higher sphere of the sacred life leaded and (ii) is preserved after the religious life ceases to exist. In this sense the first notion identifies with the Hegelian notion of Sittlichkeit, or rather the superseding affable norms, which are the higher bureau no one is allowed oversee, pretty much like the expedition of Troy when Agamemnon had to sacrifice his daughter for the success of the mission (McDonald, 2006). In Fear and Trembling nonetheless, the philosopher also recognises responsibilities to the higher power also than prevail the social norms. The Abraham sacrifice of his son to God prevails the social norm of not violent death an innocent person and not hurting his child. Abraham here finds himself in contradiction he has to decide betwixt the will of God and his beloved son. In this case Abraham will br eak the social norms on one hand and will have to give up his love for his child. His desire however to attain the providential, commit to God and his faith and reach a religious status he commits to the teleological suspension of the ethical, or rather stick to the cargo to the higher power rather than power social manners of conduct. On a deeper level Abraham here also needs to decide between his in the flesh(predicate) desire and Gods will. The individual here needs to go beyond the aesthetical to the ethical aspect of life. The former is the earthy realization of the human life which drifts between imagination and sensation, the latter is the divide which calls for decision making on grounds of commitment to God. Kierkegaard firmly contended that good and evil cannot be defined on ethical grounds but rather on God. Such distinction can only be made then on the grounds the higher power sets which may not be understandable to the individual at any point. Johannes de Silentio3 a rgues on the case of Abraham in Fear and Trembling that the sacrifice Abraham was required to run cannot be termed as good or evil since it does not comply with the social norms