Frygt og Bæven PDF ✓ Frygt og PDF/EPUB or

Frygt og Bæven [EPUB] ✴ Frygt og Bæven By Søren Kierkegaard – In Ti e tre Kierkegaard tenta di rispondere all’angoscioso dilemma della rinuncia il sacrificio richiesto dalla ragione la dimensione del silenzio e dell’assurdo pieno di solitudine e di sofferenz In Ti e tre Kierkegaard tenta di rispondere all’angoscioso dilemma della rinuncia il sacrificio richiesto dalla ragione la dimensione del silenzio e dell’assurdo pieno di solitudine e di sofferenza della fede che «comincia là appunto dove la ragione finisce» Raccontando la storia di Abramo e la paradossalità del sacrificio del figlio Isacco che gli viene chiesto da Dio Kierkegaard mostra la radicalità dell’atteggiamento religioso Una rassegnazione infinita e un credere nell’assurdo che inducono l’autore a porre Frygt og PDF/EPUB or il problema del rapporto dell’individuo con il tempo e la realtà e a sviluppare l’idea dell’unione di necessità e libertà di finito e infinito realizzata nell’io.

10 thoughts on “Frygt og Bæven

  1. Ryan Ryan says:

    dear readeryou don't even read this stuff any do you? i wouldn't if i were you but that's the difference between me and you you have no life are pathetic sit in front of your computer all day stalking your peers on various social networking sites while i go on constantly mocking your efforts through half jest and utter disregard for the values you hold dear to your heartalas perhaps the joke is on me?haha boy do i get ahead of myself sometimes silly me yes that is what i say i say silly me and i sit in the bathtub at night and i make tiny little cuts into the backs of my thighs and the bottom of my feet the pain let's me know i am alive anywho today's book is a classic by the greatly pathetic soren kierkegaard entitled fear and trembling who let the dogs out? ok let's goREVIEWone could easily argue that the central thesis of this book is the idea that faith begins precisely where reason endskierkegaard struggles with faith simultaneously demonstrating that it is impossible to successfully rationalize faith ie give any kind of logical explanation of it just as it is impossible to achieve faith by way of reasonanother highlight is the four alternative retellings of the story of abraham and isaac which are truly a mindfuckVERDICTin my supremely accurate and overwhelmingly insightful opinion this book is most important as a device by which to make people at least recognize and hopefully respect the great personal struggle and triumph that is religious faith too many people in this generation it seems write religion off without even knowing why they do so other than that it doesn't agree with what science dictates kierkegaard here demonstrates the difference and mutual exclusiveness of the two and thus that it is possible to love and respect both lol

  2. Kalliope Kalliope says:

    Many readers come to read this book via the Hegel pathway Or at least realize that a Hegel preamble is reuired And most probably such a preamble is indispensableAlas I came to it through a side door As an attendant of a cycle of lectures given at the Prado Museum on the Bible Old Testament and Art I listened and looked in fascination to the exposé of one of the Speakers He examined the myth of Abraham and the Sacrifice of his beloved son IsaacAfter portraying what he considered an utterly unethical behavior in the part of Abraham he presented Kierkegaard’s ideas as the only way to approach the dreadful myth For it cannot be understoodFor such is the nature of ParadoxAbraham was no Agamemnon There was no heroism in his act Agamemnon was driven by duty; Abraham by faith Agamemnon could hate his own act but overcome his hatred and announce the intended outcome Abraham as the Knight of Faith could not doubt a single instant He had to want to kill his son while loving him dearly because his god had ordered him to do so And this he had to do uietly Abraham was greater than all great by reason of his power whose strength is impotence great by reason of his wisdom whose secret is foolishness great by reason of his hope whose form is madness great by reason of the love which is hatred of oneself And so at the core of Abraham’s act was the AbsurdIn this context of absurdity silence elastic takes its place And opens the door to laughterAnd of the painters Rembrandt the master of capturing the interruption was also the one who represented the force in Abraham’s unrelenting and unvacillating will There is no second guessing god in his Abraham No acting and no hope Rembrandt was the one painter who understood what Kierkegaard stated about two hundred years later Angel had to fight hard to stop Abraham in his unflinching intention to murder Do I need to point out that Beckett read this book? another example of this paternal filicide not mentioned in this book is Emperor Frederick II and his son Henry

  3. Ahmad Sharabiani Ahmad Sharabiani says:

    Frygt og Bæven Fear and Trembling Søren Kierkegaard Fear and Trembling is a philosophical work by Søren Kierkegaard published in 1843 under the pseudonym Johannes de Silentio John of the Silence Kierkegaard wanted to understand the anxiety that must have been present in Abraham when God tested him and said to him take Isaac your only son whom you love and go to the land of Moriah and offer him as a burnt offering on the mountain that I shall show youAbraham had a choice to complete the task or to refuse to comply to God's orders He resigned himself to the three and a half day journey and to the loss of his son He said nothing to Sarah nothing to Eliezer Who after all could understand him for did not the nature of temptation extract from him a pledge of silence? He split the firewood he bound Isaac he lit the fire he drew the knife Because he kept everything to himself and chose not to reveal his feelings he isolated himself as higher than the universal Kierkegaard envisions two types of people in Fear and Trembling and Repetition One lives in hope Abraham the other lives in memory The Young Man and Constantin Constantius تاریخ نخستین خوانش روز پنجم اکتبر سال 1996 میلادیعنوان ترس و لرز غزل دیالکتیکی؛ نویسنده سورن کی یرکگور؛ مترجم محسن فاطمی؛ تهران، سازمان تبلیغات، 1373؛ در 231 ص؛ چاپ دوم 1374؛ چاپ سوم 1376؛ موضوع مسیحیت از نویسندگان دانمارکی سده 20 معنوان ترس و لرز ؛ نویسنده سورن کی یرکگور؛ مترجم عبدالکریم رشیدیان؛ تهران، نشر نی، 1378؛ در 173 ص؛ چاپ دوم 1380؛ شابک 9643124347؛ چاپ پنجم 1385؛ چاپ ششم 1386؛ هفتم 1387؛ هشتم 1388؛ یازدهم 1392؛ عنوان ترس و لرز ؛ نویسنده سورن کی یرکگور؛ مترجم محمدصادق رئیسی؛ تهران، روزگار نو، 1392؛ شابک 9786006867625؛ سورن کی یرکگور یا با نام مستعار «یوهانس دو سیلنتیو»؛ داستان قربانی کردن پسر، و ایمان راسخ و استوار ابراهیم علیه السلام را بنوشته؛ و ایشان را شهسوار ایمان نامیده است ا شربیانی

  4. Tara Tara says:

    “To contend with the whole world is a comfort but to contend with oneself is dreadful” Fear and Trembling is Kierkegaard’s astonishingly dexterous analysis of faith via the Old Testament story of Abraham and Isaac “And it came to pass after these things that God did tempt Abraham and said unto himTake now thy son thine only son Isaac whom thou lovest and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of”       –Genesis 221 According to Kierkegaard Abraham was a true “knight of faith” He didn’t merely resign himself to losing his son but instead believed that Isaac wouldn’t actually be harmed He had faith based on “the strength of the absurd” or in spite of the fact that it made no rational sense to do so Kierkegaard contended that Abraham’s belief in this undeniable absurdity elevated him to the highest plane of faith one can possibly hope to attainKierkegaard then made an apparently simple yet really rather profound point Abraham’s decision to make a leap of faith could not concern itself with the OUTCOME of that leap “Surely anyone with a speck of erectior ingenii nobility of mind cannot become so completely the cold and clammy mollusc as to lose sight altogether in approaching the great of the fact that ever since the Creation it has been accepted practice for the outcome to come last and that if one is really to learn something from the great it is precisely the beginning one must attend to If anyone on the verge of action should judge himself according to the outcome he would never begin Even though the result may gladden the whole world that cannot help the hero; for he knows the result only when the whole thing is over and that is not how he becomes a hero but by virtue of the fact that he began” Kierkegaard concluded this section of the book by stating that faith is fundamentally a paradox and that it goes beyond what reason can comprehend He then proceeded to examine three “problemata” Problema 1 “Is there a teleological suspension of the ethical?” Kierkegaard answered in the affirmative Basically taking care of your fellow human beings is generally your most important ethical concern However since murdering a helpless child doesn’t usually provide much benefit to humanity and yet God commanded Abraham to do so ethical considerations must have been suspended in favor of a higher imperativeProblema 2 “Is there an absolute duty to God?” Short answer Yes Slightly longer explanation Kierkegaard held that “faith’s paradox is this that the single individual is higher than the human race that the single individual determines his relation to the human race through his relation to God” I tinkered with the previous uote in an effort to make it user friendly Kierkegaard was kind of a dweeb with some of his jargon and specialized slang Perhaps also with his coiffureProblema 3 “Was it ethically defensible of Abraham to conceal his purpose from Sarah from Eleazar from Isaac?” Kierkegaard was of the opinion that honesty is usually the best policy In Abraham’s case however since his task was Absurd with a capital A and as such could not possibly be understood he had to grapple with it alone Abraham couldn’t even attempt to relate it to anyone else since trying to explain what is absurd and incomprehensible iswellabsurdKierkegaard wrapped things up by asserting that “the highest passion in a human being is faith” and that this is something each person must wrestle with and ultimately earn for themselvesThus concludes my probably overly detailed summary of the main points presented in the book I’d now like to share a few of Kierkegaard’s brilliant uotes “Someone who has understood life’s horror has grasped Daub’s meaning when he says that a soldier standing guard alone with a loaded gun by a powder magazine on a stormy night gets strange thoughts”“There is greatness in meriting the tears of those who deserve to shed them; great indeed for the poet to dare hold the crowd in check dare discipline people into testing their own worthiness to weep for the hero for the waste water of snivellers is a degradation of the holy”“Aesthetics is the most faithless of all sciences Anyone who has truly loved it will in a way become unhappy; while anyone who has never done so is and will remain a blockhead” Overall Kierkegaard was a phenomenal writer with an often merciless wit His mind was arrestingly complex nimble fluid I can’t claim to fully grasp everything he wrote; at times I got tangled up in the threads of his subtly nuanced logic especially when I was frantically trying to keep up with some of his peculiar terminology That said many of his points were beautifully reasoned some even striking in their clarity I especially appreciated his musings on the suffering that standing alone with your beliefs necessarily entails and the importance of not letting the pain erode your resolve Although the aforementioned merits made this a fascinating read I couldn’t wholly relate to it as I do not count religious faith among the worthwhile pursuits available to us as thinking beings I do agree with him on this “How monstrous a paradox faith is a paradox capable of making a murder into a holy act well pleasing to God a paradox which gives Isaac back to Abraham which no thought can grasp because faith begins precisely where thinking leaves off” I just tend to side with Hitchens as to its rather dubious value

  5. Steven Godin Steven Godin says:

    It is not an exaggeration to say that Fear and Trembling 1843 was a challenging piece for me to to read maybe being someone of no religious faith had something to do with it Kierkegaard Johannes de silentio compounds the essential difficulty that lies within the theme of the work the Akedah through choosing an alternative pseudonym to praise Abraham as a knight of faith and examine his movements That the pseudonym's perspective is shrouded in silence seemingly precludes any clear and straightforward understanding of this work Ultimately whether Kierkegaard's Johannes de silentio is to be read with irony or edification appears as undecidable as whether we should view Abraham as a murderous madman who in contrast to Nietzsche's madman proclaiming the death of god proclaims a living god who has commanded the death of his son and then later a ram or the great father of faith He goes over the story of Abraham and Isaac and can make no sense of it he concludes that 'faith' must be a 'leap in the dark' Take the leap he seems to say and God will catch you Most people do no such thing They are too sensible and do not jump anywhere unless there is a soft landing of a safety net Sadly he has beueathed to the world the idea that Christianity is a religion and belief in god is not rational Generations of Humanists Rationalists and Materialists have taken this up as a stick with which to beat Christians and Christian belief Because he thought God told him to? Will this have you either going to church every Sunday believing it's OK to kill your kids as long as God gives you his blessing or tearing the pages out and throwing the cover across the room screaming and swearing at Kiekegaard for being morally and ethically wrong Like I said as piece of historical philosophy it challenged me something most books I read never do hence the four stars But still left me feeling bemused and dumbfound Definitely reuires a second reading but me doubt will happen It's the sort of book that could fire great debate and war of words I will just sit on the fence though and keep my opinions to myself

  6. Rosemary Rosemary says:

    I was going to write that I still come back to this book even ten years after reading it for the first time But that's not uite true What is true is that this book has never really left me; it has worked itself into my psyche and become an automatic philosophical reference point for my life Kierkegaard's discussion of faith versus resignation is an exhileration to read His unfolding of the concept of the absurd in the universe is sublime Everyone should dive into this work grapple with it and re emerge with some of Kierkegaard's Romantic greatness internalized

  7. Jan-Maat Jan-Maat says:

    It seems to me that after reading Fear and Trembling that all of my thinking on faith lies within Kierkegaard Which isn't to claim that I understand his arguments but that his arguments have come to dominate the way I think about the issuesCuriously although Kierkegaard's voice comes at us from the margins he seems oddly part of a broad current of nineteenth century writing Dostoevsky if he cold have got past the author being a non Russian and a Lutheran would have agreed with the emphasis on faith alone I feel Though then again I can be no adeuate reader of Kierkegaard as he reveals himself only through a nest of alternative identities as though engaging in plausible deniability or hide and seek with the readerI think I read this first and then was brought back to it several times by reading Dostoevsky seriously in my 20s and then by means of David Lodge's novel Therapy although Kierkegaard is of a staging post in his downward path until the central character clings to a desperate ridiculous plan view spoiler returning to his long lost first girlfriend thirty? Forty? years after separating hide spoiler

  8. Greg Watson Greg Watson says:

    Fear and Trembling is an in depth and challenging look at the Old Testament account of Abraham's willingness to sacrifice Isaac to God The story is familiar perhaps all too familiar as Kierkegaard notes Without thinking we jump to the outcome of the story or pass it off as a trial forgetting the time leading up to Abraham's testing in which he was silent In his obedience to God Abraham showed the paradox of faith he loved Isaac enough to be willing to lose him but he had sufficient faith to believe that God would not reuire this of him

  9. Clif Hostetler Clif Hostetler says:

    Fear and Trembling was originally published in 1843 written in Danish and under a pseudonymous name The purpose of the book was two fold First Kierkegaard wanted to describe the nature of true faith using the story of Abraham almost sacrificing Isaac to illustrate the concept Second he wanted to counter the philosophy of Hegel who maintained that reason was the highest form of thought Kierkegaard argued that faith was higher than reasonHowever Kierkegaard's understanding of faith was something different or beyond common understandings of the word in everyday usage To distinguish the faith he's talking about Kierkeaard uses the term Knight of Faith According to him anyone who says they are a Knight of Faith is by definition not a Knight of Faith It is a personal characteristic that can't be shared For that matter it can't be explained understandable or made rational Nevertheless this book attempts to do just that My main problem with the book is that the story of nearly sacrificing a son as told in the story of Abraham and Isaac is abhorrent to my senses I would much rather have faith explained using some other story Ironically the story of a father killing their child for supposedly honorable reasons seems to have been a fairly popular plot line in ancient literature The two prominent examples noted in this book are the AgamemnonIphigenia and the Jephthahdaughter stories These as well as the Abraham story had their origins in the Bronze Age and were probably passed along in the oral tradition many years before they were written down I can see how a story like this would grab the attention of the listenersKierkegaard maintains that Abraham is a true Knight of Faith because he acted only in response to God's reuest and his planned action was known only to himself and God Agamemmon's and Jephthah's actions on the other hand were public and done to maintain personal honor thus they are not true Knights of FaithI'm inclined to believe that Hegel's philosophy makes sense than Kierkegaard until it's pointed out that the Nazis and Communists used Hegel to prove that loyalty to the government was the highest calling By contrast Kierkegaard's message places responsibility of one's action on the individual Viewed that way Kierkegaard makes sense Although the fact that I say Kierkegaard makes sense is an indication that I don't understand him properly because he says faith doesn't make senseI would never read Fear and Trembling on my own initiative It was discussed by Great Books KC group of which I am a part Fortunately members of the group are smarter than me so the discussion went well

  10. Khush Khush says:

    I read this book in translation I was in awe of its author However the book is an easy read and the central situation that Abraham has to sacrifice his only son Issac on God's command around which the whole text revolves is intriguing and exciting too Almost on every second page I would read a line or two and then reflect on what is relayed For instance ''Faith begins where reason stops'' and there are long sentences that one can think about for a long time It is one of those books that has to be read slowly Look at this; ''If there was no eternal consciousness in man and if at the bottom of everything there was only a wildly seething power if beneath everything there lurked a bottomless void never to be filled– what else were life but despair If it were thus and if there were no sacred bonds which knit mankind together if one generation followed upon another like leaves in the forest how hollow and without consolation life would be'' The book has many such amazing passagesI also found the 'Notes' at the end of the book interesting Kierkegaard did not write this book in his own name but he was superbly conscious of its depth and worth In fact he was uite cocky about his achievement In his journals he wrote that this book alone has the strength to immortalize him It is rare that someone knows his writing so well the content and value of his work and can issue such definitive statements I admire him because all such claims finally became true and he knew this all along In the contemporary world especially in the western world we talk a lot about 'culture' 'clash of civilizations' religions– particularly Islam The West also has a very settled tendency to separate itself from the rest and views its tradition and culture in strictly demarcated boundaries of EastWest so famously espoused by Kipling However there is a lot in the Danish philosopher that blurs these rigid binaries One can trace several key concepts of Eastern Philosophy in his works particularly Hinduism The books dwells a lot on the idea of faith and what it means The kind of significance that Kierkegaard assigns to 'Faith' somehow directs one's attention to the various tropes of Islam in the western imagination Of course there is much in the book that is singularly Kierkegaard's –his contribution to the world

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *