Kierkegaard’s Strong Anti-Rationalism: Offense as a Propaedeutic to Faith

IF 0.2 0 PHILOSOPHY
R. Kemp, Frank Della Torre
{"title":"Kierkegaard’s Strong Anti-Rationalism: Offense as a Propaedeutic to Faith","authors":"R. Kemp, Frank Della Torre","doi":"10.1515/kierke-2022-0010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In a now classic paper, Karen Carr argues that Kierkegaard is a religious “anti-rationalist”: He holds that reason and religious truth exist in necessary tension with one another. Carr maintains that this antagonism is not a matter of the logical incoherence of Christianity, but rather the fact that genuine submission to Christ precludes approaching him through demonstration. In this essay, we argue that while Kierkegaard is in fact an anti-rationalist, the literature has failed to appreciate the full strength of his position. It is not just that reason and obedience are in tension; rather, Kierkegaard holds the stronger view that reason is actively offended by Christianity’s primary claims. Not only is reason incapable of generating any positive evidence for the truth of Christianity, more radically, it provides evidence against it. In order to make this case, we offer a close reading of Practice in Christianity, developing a typology of Kierkegaard’s account of Christ’s “offense.” Finally, having motivated Kierkegaard’s strong anti-rationalism, we consider why, on his account, anyone would want to be a Christian.","PeriodicalId":53174,"journal":{"name":"Kierkegaard Studies Yearbook","volume":"12 1","pages":"193 - 214"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kierkegaard Studies Yearbook","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/kierke-2022-0010","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract In a now classic paper, Karen Carr argues that Kierkegaard is a religious “anti-rationalist”: He holds that reason and religious truth exist in necessary tension with one another. Carr maintains that this antagonism is not a matter of the logical incoherence of Christianity, but rather the fact that genuine submission to Christ precludes approaching him through demonstration. In this essay, we argue that while Kierkegaard is in fact an anti-rationalist, the literature has failed to appreciate the full strength of his position. It is not just that reason and obedience are in tension; rather, Kierkegaard holds the stronger view that reason is actively offended by Christianity’s primary claims. Not only is reason incapable of generating any positive evidence for the truth of Christianity, more radically, it provides evidence against it. In order to make this case, we offer a close reading of Practice in Christianity, developing a typology of Kierkegaard’s account of Christ’s “offense.” Finally, having motivated Kierkegaard’s strong anti-rationalism, we consider why, on his account, anyone would want to be a Christian.
克尔凯郭尔强烈的反理性主义:作为信仰启蒙者的进攻
在一篇经典的论文中,卡伦·卡尔认为克尔凯郭尔是一个宗教上的“反理性主义者”:他认为理性和宗教真理存在于必然的紧张关系中。卡尔坚持认为,这种对立不是基督教逻辑不连贯的问题,而是对基督的真正服从排除了通过示范接近他的事实。在本文中,我们认为,虽然克尔凯郭尔实际上是一个反理性主义者,但文献未能充分认识到他的立场的力量。这不仅仅是因为理性和服从处于紧张状态;相反,克尔凯郭尔持有更强烈的观点,即理性被基督教的主要主张所积极冒犯。理性不仅不能为基督教的真理提供任何积极的证据,更根本的是,它还提供了反对它的证据。为了证明这一点,我们对《基督教的实践》进行了仔细的阅读,发展了克尔凯郭尔对基督“冒犯”的描述的类型学。最后,在激发了克尔凯郭尔强烈的反理性主义之后,我们将考虑为什么,根据他的解释,任何人都想成为基督徒。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信