‘Taking Notice’: An Introduction
Vasiliki Tsakiri
Abstract
Vasiliki Tsakiri
Abstract
The objective of this book may seem at first sight both ambitious and ambiguous since it concerns the exploration of religious themes such as the Fall, repetition and freedom through Kierkegaard’s aesthetic writings, with references to the writings of St Augustine, Kant and Schelling. The question that arises concerns not only the choice of the so-called aesthetic writings rather than the religious ones, but also the reasons behind the choice of the three other thinkers. In order to give an adequate reply to these questions, Kierkegaard’s view of his oeuvre and the distinction he draws between the aesthetic and the religious writings should be examined first. Kierkegaard’s The Point of View of My Work as an Author: A Report to History will serve as a guide in this brief exploration. Opinions are divided regarding its importance for the interpretation of his work. Arguably, even if one endorses Walter Lowrie’s argument that this book is quite elliptical as a self-evaluation of the author’s oeuvre as a whole, one might still wish to treat this feature of the book as a virtue rather than a vice. Lowrie’s embarrassment – to borrow Nelson’s expression – as to how to characterize this book is obvious in his conviction that Kierkegaard was. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
The objective of this book may seem at first sight both ambitious and ambiguous since it concerns the exploration of religious themes such as the Fall, repetition and freedom through Kierkegaard’s aesthetic writings, with references to the writings of St Augustine, Kant and Schelling. The question that arises concerns not only the choice of the so-called aesthetic writings rather than the religious ones, but also the reasons behind the choice of the three other thinkers. In order to give an adequate reply to these questions, Kierkegaard’s view of his oeuvre and the distinction he draws between the aesthetic and the religious writings should be examined first. Kierkegaard’s The Point of View of My Work as an Author: A Report to History will serve as a guide in this brief exploration. Opinions are divided regarding its importance for the interpretation of his work. Arguably, even if one endorses Walter Lowrie’s argument that this book is quite elliptical as a self-evaluation of the author’s oeuvre as a whole, one might still wish to treat this feature of the book as a virtue rather than a vice. Lowrie’s embarrassment – to borrow Nelson’s expression – as to how to characterize this book is obvious in his conviction that Kierkegaard was. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
Key concepts: Embarrassment, Wish, Interpretation (philosophy), Virtue, Philosophy, Argument (complex analysis), Notice, Conviction