Kierkegaard considers that the existence is more worthy than the universal essence of

systematic philosophy. Whereas he on the other hand rejects the abstract speculative philosophy.

As an existentialist, Kierkegaards fundamental center was with a person and not with the all-

inclusive abstracts. He was concerned with subjects and not unique objects. He was concerned

with will and not reason. It is what God wants the subjects to do and not sound hypotheses of the

presence or the nature of God that overwhelmingly things. Revelation of objectivity, taking after
Kierkegaard, has no tasteful advantage for existing people.

He is known as the “grandfather of existentialist movement”, but at slightest as critical

are his studies of Hegel and of the German sentimental people, his commitments to the

advancement of innovation, his elaborate experimentation, his distinctive representation of

scriptural figures to bring out their cutting edge pertinence, his development of key concepts

which have been investigated and redeployed by scholars ever since, his intercessions in modern

Danish church legislative issues, and his intense endeavors to examine and renew Christian

confidence.

KIERKEGAARD SAID.

“An existential system cannot be formulated.... Existence itself is a system -- for God; but

it cannot be a system for any existing spirit. System and finality correspond to one another, but

existence is precisely the opposite of finality.”

EXISTENTIALIST CONCEPT

Existentialism isnt much of a school of thought, it can be labeled as an unclear name for

multiple rationalities that state the nature of existence by emphasizing experience of the human

subject as the utmost important subject of the human invidvidual. The quality of being in the
middle of selection, and the individuals reaction to what appears to be an uninterested, foolish all

existence. Untroubled with most common subjects in to do with most important things (separated

from cosmology) and science, existentialism is for the most parthas to do with the individual’s

selections around how he/she wants to be.

• Reason is essence of systemic philosophy whereas existence prefers individual

and gives importance to his faith over reason.

• It means that Kierkegaard as a Father of existentialism does not accept reason as

Universal essence and rejects the essence of systemic philosophy whereas he prefers the
emotions and beliefs of individual over reason.

• He promotes subjectivity over the objectivity

A solid Advocate of the view that serious about religion law decision against wrongdoers

is an act of secret, not reason fideism Kierkegaard made up his philosophical works (under

different nom de long, soft feathers or feathers ordered in some way) as a suggests to lead his

person simply looking about to this see. In his more straight-forwardly serious about religion

works, Kierkegaard makes public as wrongdoing society (the swarm) of making into powder

persons in general, making more feeble their person qualities special to one person, and replacing

them with individuals who have overlooked how to be living a true living.

In other words, they do not keep person in touch with their colored views.They ended up

uninterested, nearly unclear. the religion of Christ, an increase person secret, Kierkegaard claims,

puts together again the person with his colored views.

1. To be a Christian is to say one has had there are no makes certain, to go through a

transformative fight that cannot and have need of not be made arguments for and have need of

not give credit the specially supporting of the Church. To be a Christian is to be had a part in not

with what is taken, but how it is taken.

Relating it with the Concept of faith and reason

Kierkegaard existentialism follows a making forward development from existence to a going

after of pleasure, to a going after of society, and finally a going after of thought, without material
body. In basic words, the existence goes before the being conscious of self. As in

phenomenology, existence goes before the liquid with special qualities of self. Jean-Paul Sartre

took in one's arms (to oneself) this idea of existence in his writings. By getting, coming together

at one point on the person, Kierkegaard was putting the start for future existentialists The

individual, the self, was everything to Kierkegaard in harmony with to Kaufmann Kierkegaard

hoped to make higher the person to a new philosophical level. The self is a number, order, group,

line of possible states; every decision made makes another statement of sense the person. This

idea was further have undergone growth by Sartre. The knowledge that "I" makes certain, clear
the "self" results in "the balance loss of state of being free" and "fear and shaking." It is a great

responsibility to make come into existence a person, yet that is exactly what each to do with man

does -- makes come into existence a self. This self is independent from all other knowledge and

"truths" formed by other beings. one of the Major requirements of Kierkegaard existentialism

was the giving up of G. W. F. Hegel complete idealism. Kierkegaard looked upon Hegel work as

only to do with art values, the sign of an underwent feeble development, not full-grown

individual. Hegel looked for to discover truth through based on reasoning systems, his triads,

while Kierkegaard taken seeming against common sense truths.

In effect, Kierkegaard did not mind, in fact took in one's arms (to oneself), reasoning openings,

nothing in between and "jumps of belief." When a truth was clear to a person, according to

Kierkegaard that was the truth without thought or attention of Evidence to the opposite. truth is a

taken within, inside idea, effected by outside factors but not said words to be taken down in

writing by them. Kierkegaard short stiff-haired at the opinion that a man could make statement of

the sense of words or even discover the tests, reasoning of a system forming material fact. His

theory said nothing that only the one putting into existence could get through knowledge of

material fact, as humans are in an unchanging state of change. To attempt to get an unlimited

material fact was foolish.

Conclusion

I want to conclude all the discussion as agree with both statements of Kierkegaard and what I
believe is:

• For Kierkegaard, God was totally otherworldly, and "an interminable subjective

distinction" isolated God from humanity. While Kierkegaard accepted that God got to be

incarnate, he felt the incarnation did not do much to bridge the hole. Instep, it gives Kierkegaard

with the premise for putting what he calls "ridiculousness" at heart of his definition of faith.

• For him, confidence is not a way of knowing or an act of believe in God's goodness and

adore for us. Instep, it is a conviction and believe within the "quality of the crazy." By

"ridiculous," he implies that which negates reason.

• As Insight makes clear, this goes distant past recognizing that, in things of confidence,

reason can as it were take us so distant. Instep, it's a surrender of reason. All that things for

Kierkegaard is the readiness to require a "jump into confidence.

There is no objective truth in honest to goodness Christianity, agreeing to Kierkegaard since truth

dwells in God. God may be a subject, not a protest. In arrange for an existing person to know the

truth, God incarnate must benevolently self-reveal it to her.

• For Kierkegaard, “every human being is instructed basically as it were by God”. (Press.)

In Kierkegaard’s endeavor to disrobe and reestablish the zones to which theoretical reasoning

had taken veritable Christianity captive, he ousted objectivity presented by Hegelian theoretical

realism that dismissed the subjective component, and enthroned, in its put, subjectivity.

Kierkegaard did not toss objectivity exterior the king’s court. It did have a put. A put where it

was a worker, and not an ace. Reason may be a hireling. Will is the ace.

• For Kierkegaard, “it[reason] leads, because it was, the person up to it, and says: ‘here it

must be, that I ensure; after you adore here, you adore God”.

References

• H. Newton Malony (ed.), A Christian Existential Psychology: The Contributions

of John G. Finch, University Press of America, 1980, p. 168.

• McInerny, Ralph (27 January 1957). "The Teleological Suspension of the

Ethical". The Thomist: A Speculative Quarterly Review. 20 (3): 295–310.

• James E. Ruoff, "Kierkegaard and Shakespeare". Comparative Literature, Vol. 20,

No. 4. (Autumn, 1968), pp. 343–354.

• Jon Bartley Stewart, Kierkegaard and Existentialism, Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.,

2011