Kierkegaard, the father of existentialism, equates the human responsibility of achieving self-hood (subjectivity) with truth. Kierkegaard’s notion of self is the union of acts that relate between dualities such as finite/infinite, necessity/possibility, and temporal/timeless. This is a negative space of the Hegelian synthesis of duals that moves from descriptive to prescriptive ethics. Truth or the realization of the self is known through the active choice of relating between duals without identifying too closely with either poles (failure results in forms of despair). An important case concerns the religious duality between sin/faith which is powered by the tension between Christianity’s paradox to reason and the necessity of a leap to faith. Although Kierkegaard’s process of individuation (achieving selfhood) occurred predominantly along religious lines, he introduced a number of general concepts that speaks to the human condition.
The responsibility of achieving selfhood compels one to make conscious choices at every moment. Each moment entails a great number of choices, and their multiplicity of consequences to consider lead the subject to experience a “dizziness of freedom” or angst/dread. This paralysis by analysis, or the anticipation of consequences render one immobile and unable to make a choice for fear of sin. Conversely, it is the experience of anxiety that allows one to move away from unconscious ignorance and into one’s potential for action, self-recognition, and identity.
Kierkegaard posits three existential stages of life along the way of becoming a true self:
- The aesthetic (the hedonist) lives for sensory experience and pleasure as a way to combat boredom; Boredom is characterized as “the root of all evil-the despairing refusal to be oneself” as it is an undifferentiated or an undirected state of consciousness. The aesthetes who avoid boredom through the pursuit of novelty also avoids commitments as it requires repetition. Common techniques to suspend boredom is through anticipation which delays gratification, and the so-called “rotation method” where one cycles between activities so that no one activity’s novelty is exhausted. However, the mode of living is self-serving and ultimately meaningless as it ignores the dimension of other individuals or society.
- The ethical is the antithesis of the aesthetic where one lives a life according to well-defined rules for the good of society rather than for the self. In the process acting according to higher principles, new pleasures may be realized that could not by the aesthetic. For example, while the novelty of marriage wears off, the act of giving to your spouse and children is rewarding.
- The religious is the final stage of the true self which requires a commitment to the moral absolutes of God. Such absolutes are communicated not through social institutions such as the church, but through a personal relation or revelation of God. Such absolutes require a “teleological suspension of the ethical” as they may contradict that of social norms; one may have to sacrifice pleasures of both the aesthetic and the ethical to reach this. Thus, one can consider revelation (disclosure of divine moral absolutes) as the synthesis of the pursuit of novelty (now the spiritual sphere) and the repetition of commitment (now in the subjective sphere).
Kierkegaard describes the experience along these stages of life in terms of despair that arise from an unbalanced identification with poles of duals (lack of finitude/infinitude, necessity/possibility). Three levels are given:
- The lowest level is the ignorance of one being in despair or of having a self (unconscious of self). One may be unable to realize one’s potential in life as he/she is fully in pursuit of novelty or of sensuous dichotomies of agreeable/disagreeable. He/she imagines himself happy but is actually dependent on the various objects of pleasure (materialist). Conversely, the system-builder who lives inside abstractions is divorced from experience. The system is merely a scaffold over an abyss from which the self’s relation to the concrete is hidden.
- The next level is conscious despair where one understands the condition of having to relate to duals but not the specific causes. One may despair against becoming oneself and run away by becoming someone else; he/she may refuse to become a self through feelings of unworthiness. The person may even be able to identify his weaknesses but become identified with the weaknesses themselves and refuse help by God.
- The final level is demonic despair against the eternal itself where one is hardened by suffering and so defies any help; the person identifies with despair itself as suffering lifts him/her in uniqueness above everyone else.
Nietzsche is the natural successor of Schopenhauer where the former turned the latter’s conclusions upside down; in World as Will and Representation, Schopenhauer observes that it is the “will-to-live” that is responsible for our drives, moods, and individuation. However, the will-to-live is aimless beyond basic desires, absent of good & evil/without morality, and wholly irrational; his ethical conclusion however is the abnegation of life (will as evil) as such striving by the will can only result in the suffering by the ego. Schopenhauer quotes, “Man can indeed do what he wants, but he cannot will what he wants”; much of later Psychoanalysis that began in the latter half of the 19th century will redress this problem as the denial of life itself would result in the very extinction of the human species! No doubt, psychoanalytic concepts such as the Freudian libido and the unconscious were influenced by these ideas. Prior to this, the first to radically address Schopenhauer’s solution (asceticism as “will-to-nothingness”) was Nietzsche; the problem of nihilism is posed where the Western man is at a loss of values/meaning (another definition derives from the non-distinction of dualistic extremes).
Nietzsche’s answer to nihilism originates with Greek tragedy where art, emerged from the tension between the Apollonian-Dionysian (order-chaos) dichotomy, transforms human suffering into a passionate affirmation of life. Subjectivity collapses back into the will-to-life (“Primordial unity”, Dionysian) and exaggerates it (frenzy); order re-emerges (Apollonian) to give the energy form (art). Such an act of destruction-creation (creative-destruction) puts man into the continual state of flux/becoming, of joy-sorrow, and of gain-loss. To affirm life is to recognize such a duality best summarized by amor fati or to love fate.
The procreative tendencies of affirming life produces conflicting power centers that are in conflict. The Apollonian impulse to organize these centers produces a higher-order of complexity that in man, emerges as consciousness (Ego) for ordering the power-struggle; observation of this phenomenon by the ego is dubbed Will-to-power. Nietzsche uses this concept to explain his moral theory, or rather the rejection of normative ethics on the grounds that individuals of different will-to-power are sufficiently different (degrees of power constitutes standards for value). Master-morality is the morality of the strong-willed where man experiences himself as determining his values (he is creator of values); his view is consequentialist in sense that what is harmful/helpful for me is bad/good in itself. This is in contrast to slave-morality which reevaluates the values created by the masters. His view accords right/wrong by intention rather than consequences; value is accorded according to the greatest utility for the whole community. It is no surprise that Nietzsche criticizes Christianity as it preaches universal brotherhood or egalitarianism.
At the far extremes, the master who acquires the power to overcome nihilism whilst avoiding the trappings of both other-worldliness and asceticism is the Ubermensch. Moreover, the Ubermensch is able to will the “eternal recurrence”, the nihilist extreme that all that has happened before will happen again ad infinitum (non-uniqueness of events itself!). Such a figure is the posited as a goal for humanity to strive towards (human as a bridge between animal and the Ubermensch) and represents Nietzsche’s answer to nihilism. Unfortunately, history’s reaction to this answer was disastrous (two world-wars to boot); this remains the ongoing problem for modern man that all later philosophers will have to address.
The power the papacy grows and reaches its apex due to removal of older reigimes. Barbarian powers such as Lombards supplanted older emperors and took on different roles w.r.t. culture and faith. In the vicissitudes of state powers exchanged, the Church grew its authorities on faith as it took opportune moments assert its independence. However, authority wasn’t simply the command of the word but also a militaristic one (“Just war”) in the so-called defense of the institution. Ultimately, the great schism between east and western churches was the refusal of the former to submit to such an authority.
The scholastic philosophy that dominated this era (West) was the extension of Aristotle’s metaphysics and logic/dialectic. Western Christianity readily adopted the language and terms set established by their ancestors to define the nature of God. One of the earliest ontological arguments for existence of God was established by Saint Anselm; Russell quotes,
“We define God as the greatest possible object of thought. Now if an object of thought does not exist, another, exactly like it, which does exist, is greater.Therefore the greatest of all objects of thought must exist, since, otherwise, another, still greater,would be possible. Therefore God exists.”
The argument is a play on language where existence is used as a predicate.
Scholasticism culminated with the works of Saint Thomas Aquinas whose beliefs on the nature of God followed the metaphysics of Aristotle. God as actus puras (pure act) is identical with his essence which necessitates his existence; this is analogous to fusing both the Aristolean form and matter in their relation of potentiality and actuality. The existence of God follows from Aristotle’s “unmoved mover” or prime mover / first cause. Last, Thomas asserts that truth is derived from two sources: Natural reason or the logic of man from first principles is the first source. Divine reason or revelation by the grace of God is the second source. Moreover, the two bodies of knowledge derived from these sources can coexist (non-contradictory); this protected the many creeds issued by the Church in a retroactive sense.
Outside of issue of papal authority, the great schism between Eastern and Western churches disagreed on the nature of the trinity of God. From the works of Aquinas, the Western church’s holy trinity (father, son, holy-spirit) belong to the essence of God and are all inter-related but impersonal; each Person is not an treated as an individual per-se but are distinguished via relations with one another. I liken the Father to the universal form of all ideas, the Son as God’s awareness of the forms (self-knowledge) through will/intellect, and the Holy-spirit as an archetypal conscience that is derived from a tension between universals and particulars. The Eastern church disagrees as they center the God head on the Father (personal) as the sole originator of both the Son and the Holy-spirit.
The end of the middle ages is marked by the rejection of universals and the regularization of concepts. William Ockham was a major proponent of this Nominalist movement by asserting that universals didn’t exist but are abstractions via intellect (bottom-up organization); universals are merely words. Ockham’s razor posited that entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity which is to say that solutions or explanations should be parsimonious or as simple as possible. Such a constraint will have a power effect on the enlightenment period where older assumptions are discarded/culled away and the scientific method for acquiring knowledge on nature can advance (in increments).
The moral history of Christianity (The Elect, predestined for salvation at birth) is derived from the Jewish covenant with God (Chosen people, Jewish nation); the monotheist aspects are derived from Platonic/Orphic elements. The psychology of Jewish state can be viewed as a purification through collective punishment; hostilities (by others) are sublimated into even greater faith towards virtuous actions. Although the Christians did not adopt such a broad concept (a nation of religion), they did place their elect on pedestals which produced a transitional object (the institution of the church) that circumvented the problem of original sin; descendants of Adam and Eve are all fallen and could only be saved by the grace of God which was predestined (arbitrary). The church, being a non-human, is exempt from such sin and would serve as a conduit/bridge to carry out the authority of God. Such authority was eventually recognized by the state for several reasons: The lack of a Christian nation made man’s direct relation with God the rationale for suffering, which during the declining years of the Roman states, siphoned away much of faith in material to a faith in the spiritual. Man’s soul was not ready the fall of the Godhead (freedom), and so a third object (Church institution) emerged to buffer the regression into the self. Hints of man’s growing subjectivism can be seen in Saint Augustine’s theory of time (memory, present, expectation). A consequence of such faith in the afterlife is a fear-mongering campaign against eternal hell-fire; those who weren’t baptized (converted) would suffer eternal damnation, a fate much worse than the squalid conditions faced on Earth.
The power of the papacy over the state over the coming centuries was aided by efforts of theologians such as Saint Augustine (provided theoretical grounds for the supremacy of the Church) and other figures such as Saint Benedict (monk), Saint Gregory the Great (statesman) for controlling education/teachings (monastic life) and courting both the Emperors of Rome and the Barbarian warlords. Augustine’s City of God juxtaposed punishment in life for eternal punishment in the afterlife, raised virtue in mind over action, and authorized the Church in its own righteous defense of itself (just-war). The Church’s outreach (monastic order), via almsgiving and the education of its own beliefs/practices (miracles, preserved knowledge through dark-ages), converted the masses toward the faith.