Kierkegaard; From Abraham to Modern Society

Kierkegaard; From Abraham to Modern Society

Abraham and Isaac, Ferdinand Olivier, 1817, The National Gallery, London

Abraham in Kierkegaard

 Abraham realized that he had to sacrifice his son, Isaac, for the altar of faith, holding a ceremony in which he firmly determined his mind to kill the son. The moment holding the knife and being about to killing him, Abraham hears the voice from sky; “Do not lay a hand on the boy,” he said. “Do not do anything to him. Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son.”(Genesis 22:12)

 This story of Abraham and Isaac from Genesis in bible has as its conclusion the awe to God accompanied by trembling and fear. Then what is the meaning of this ‘superhuman’ ritual, which is if it is the word of God, one should and can be willing to kill one’s son?

 

 The act of Abraham is done in the middle of severe anxiety, but also with strong will. The father who has to kill his son by himself is filled with anguish of course, but meanwhile firm in his faith without hesitating. However at the moment he listens to the voice of God, Abraham becomes not an individual attempting murder, but a holy performer of the ritual obeying the word of God. This Holy Family realizes the God’s world through trembling and fear and that it consists of the absolute, transcendent and infinite authority. For God, all should be given up. To be more precise, at the minute Abraham kills his precious son, the relationship becomes absolutized between the solitary individual and the transcendental being, God. This is the moment, Kierkegaard insisted, being relieved from despair as Abraham, or the knight of faith does, like determining and carrying out his demonstration of faith.

 

 According to Kierkegaard, the human being is free being having reason and rational ability. But the freedom is paradoxically restraint at the same time. Because what human should choose is the absolute obligation for the Absolute. Still, human could choose not to obey God, because we are free being. Kierkegaard calls this situation ‘despair’ and asserts that becoming far from God is death. Therefore, true happiness is pursuing the eternal value of God, getting over secular value. Like this, the conclusion of Kierkegaard focuses on the matter of individual in religious and internal way.

 

The suspect of this horrible murder case

A modern version of Abraham?

 Meanwhile, there was horrible and tragic news in Korea in this year, which is a man in his 40s killed his wife and two daughters. This accident was especially shocking in that the suspect has lived being regarded as a typical type of successful middle class, such as elite university, studying abroad, executive in major company, luxurious apartment and so on. At least, in Korea, it is really hard to believe that this ‘icon of success’ committed this tragedy. He explained that this was a trial for committing suicide together, due to his anxiety and despair of future followed by sudden unemployment and failure to investment. And this accident seems a bit similar with the case of Abraham ostensibly at least in the point that the father killed his children. Then how could it be interpreted through Kierkegaard’s view?

 

Totally...

“Not at all!”, say Kierkegaard

 According to his theory, human being feels anxiety out of ignorance. Thus for an authentic existence, we have to make relations with others through three levels, which are aesthetic-ethical-religious levels. Among them, the aesthetic stage stay at the level of sensual pleasure. However human being never fulfill its own pleasure fully. Rather the more human being pursues it, the more material desire becomes maximized, therefore consequently brings about despair. In this point, Kierkegaard emphasizes imperfection of aesthetic level. Likewise the suspect murdering its own family is connected to this kind of despair. His motive committing the crime is totally different from, even opposite to Abraham’s. Kierkegaard argue we be able to saved when depending on and turning to the perfect, God, through religious process.

 

 In other words, Kierkegaard believes human being should be situated in relation with the absolute whatever the form is. Still though, his conclusion seems too optimistic in the case of murder in Korea. I mean, did the case occur only due to the failure to proceed toward religious faith? Definitely it sounds too naive to be applied, just reducing all parts of matter to the individual’s dimension. As Kafka’s novel, <Metamorphosis> reveals that the essence of modern life is much of existence such as bug through allegory, this murder accident shows us that the modern existence –not just inside Korea, but extended to universal- is like walking along thin ice, which could be easily collapsed into deep despair. Definitely this should be considered deeply with the social and structural context. No matter how one is qualified, well-adopting to it’s society, and is seen as ‘successful’, one can fall headlong to the ground even just because of only one step precarious in this structure of society.

A personal setback; and then?

 It is very abstract and insufficient to conclude the accident as consequence of not reaching the proper religious state. That is, this causes this following doubt; In the existential theory of Kierkegaard, how can we explain social, structural anxiety and thread? His explanation as a solution to overcome despair could be even used to rationalize the social reality. Isn’t it blaming only each individual for all the despair, getting people absorbed into recognizing only their own personal despair?

 What do you guy think about this? How do we handle the very realistic, political despair? I’m wondering which connection could be set between the approach to individual’s existence and the approach to macroscopic dimension.