Preliminary Investigation into the Relationship Between Kierkegaard and St John Klimakos (original) (raw)
Related papers
Kierkegaard in Process, 2019
Interpreting the thought of Søren Kierkegaard is a notoriously difficult task. One reason for this is that some of his best-known works are written under enigmatic pseudonyms. Of interest here is Kierkegaard’s decision that two of his pseudonyms—Johannes Climacus and Johannes de Silentio—be named after early medieval saints John Climacus (579-649) and John the Silent (454-558). Historically, these figures not only lived in adjourning centuries and geographical areas, but also displayed similar preferences for long periods of monastic prayer and silence. Within Kierkegaard’s literary corpus, Johannes Climacus is first attributed to Philosophical Fragments (1844), while Johannes de Silentio is the authorial voice in Fear and Trembling (1843). This article will focus on the latter. Through an examination of concepts and motifs in Fear and Trembling and Philosophical Fragments, as well as with Kierkegaard’s self-authored Discourses, this article will suggest that Kierkegaard’s choice of medieval guises for his works may not be incidental; rather, just as the historical John Climacus and John the Silent share some poignant biographical similarities—chief among which are extensive silence and prayer before God—so too the works of their Kierkegaardian namesakes share a common message of doxological silence and divine incarnational love.
Understanding Kierkegaard’s Johannes Climacus in the Postscript
Kierkegaard Studies Yearbook, 2007
In this paper I take issue with James Conant's claim that Johannes Climacus seeks to engage his reader in the Postscript by himself enacting the confusions to which he thinks his reader is prone. I contend that Conant's way of reading the Postscript fosters a hermeneutic of suspicion that leads him (and those who follows his approach) to be unduly suspicious of some of Climacus' philosophical activity. I argue that instead of serving as a mirror of his reader's faults, Climacus is better conceived of as a Socratic figure whose own philosophical activity represents a positive alternative to the Hegel ian style of doing philosophy that is under attack in the Postscript. I close the paper by arguing that Climacus adopts two very different experimental stances in his two books: while in Fragments Climacus adopts the stance of someone who has "forgotten" about Christianity, in the Postscript he openly declares that he is not a Christian and then proceeds to investigate the question, appropriately cast in the first person, "How do I, Johannes Climacus, become a Christian?" I maintain that we will not be in a position to appreciate what makes the Postscript a profound work of philosophy until we obtain a better understanding of the various respects in which Climacus is a Socratic figure.
2016
This project presents a comparative philosophical approach to understanding key elements in the philosophy of Søren Kierkegaard by juxtaposing his works with the philosophy and theology of the Eastern Orthodox Church.. The primary aim of the project is to look at three key areas of Kierkegaard’s philosophy that have been either underrepresented or misunderstood in the literature. These three areas are: Kierkegaard’s views on sin and salvation, Kierkegaard’s epistemology, and Kierkegaard’s philosophy of personhood. The dissertation ends with an epilogue that briefly explores a further area where this comparative approach might provide fruitful results, namely Kierkegaard’s views on collective worship. I argue that the revolutionary nature of Kierkegaard’s break with prevalent views in the Western Christian traditions (Protestantism and Roman Catholicism) have not always been fully appreciated due to the fact that he is most often read through the lens of either Western Christianity o...