Søren Kierkegaard - Subjectivity, Irony and the Crisis of Modernity

University of Copenhagen

Final Peer Assessed Essay

By: Marcos Gonçalves Almeida

10/25/2021

• What did Kierkegaard learn from his study of Socrates?

• Why is this connection between Socrates and Kierkegaard still relevant in the world today?

From time to time, as history develops, new ways of thinking and scientific discoveries appear, the
stable orientation points of a given period begin to degenerate. Socrates detected one of this changes in
his time, when people became insecure and anxious that they no longer had firm points on which to
base their existence. The belief in traditional institutions and practices was slowly fading away. In this
scenario, Socrates begins to act on people through the figure of the ironist. He spent the day
questioning his fellow citizens, trying to make them realize their ignorance about things, or bringing
them to the state of impasse he called “aporia”.

Starting with Socrates and, in line with the writings of other thinkers, such as Heiberg, Kierkegard
realizes that worldviews in periods of history are transitory and changeable. The reality given at a given
moment is the reality valid for the generation and the individuals of that generation. But then, when
old-world views ceased to be plausible, "this reality must be replaced by another reality, and this must
occur through individuals and generation."

Kierkegaard argues that changes in worldviews occur when individuals fail to believe in the key elements
that sustain a common culture. His aim, therefore, starting from Socrates' view, to understand the use
of irony historically, at times when a given worldview is in crisis. Rather than talking about a worldview
of a specific period or people, Kierkegaard uses the existence and reality of the world to capture this. He
explains the situation of a person using irony at a time when the traditions and values of a culture are
beginning to crumble. In such a situation, "the whole existence became alien to the ironic subject and
the ironic subject, in turn, alien to existence". And as a result, "reality has lost its validity for the ironic
subject."

As in the time of Socrates, as in Kierkergaard’s, as well as today, the world was going through a crisis in
which its customs are very shaken. Thus, those who use irony do so because they feel alienated from
the new traditions and values. The ironist is able to see that these traditions and values are no longer
firmly rooted and no longer credible. If this concerns many different aspects of one's culture, then
suddenly one feels alienated from everything and the reality of their time.

Kierkegaard follows Heiberg on this point, as Heiberg separates the intellectuals of the age from the
common masses, claiming that the great minds of the period are the ones leading the vanguard of
humanity out of the crisis and into the new age. They have some intuition about the new period that will
emerge from the crisis. This is what Kierkegaard describes as the prophetic individual. Heiberg calls
these people educated or cultured people.
Thus, it is possible to conclude the relevance of these understandings today, in a context in which the
speed of change and the decay of secular customs has become increasingly evident, given the
advancement of technologies, especially those linked to communication and information. This scenario
forged a generation alien to old customs and, on the other hand, very confident in their own knowledge
and in what they consider right. People today have many certainties and few doubts, although they are
usually wrong. Socrates' ironist, as well as his connection with Kierkergaard, therefore remain extremely
relevant and should be used to pull people out of their comfortable zone of certainty on all matters.