The Nature of Love in the Philosophy of Kierkegaard - Term Paper Example

?The Nature of Love in the Philosophy of Kierkegaard Introduction Philosophy of Kierkegaard is a great value for all people. It opens our eyes on thegreatest feeling of the world, on Love. Kierkegaard interprets this powerful phenomenon, describes its aspects and issues and correlates its forms. Romantic, dutiful and Christian forms of love are discussed further on. Kierkegaard’s discussion about love looks like the philosopher’s going up the spiral stairs. Romantic love is at the bottom, dutiful love is the next stage and Christian love is on the top. Nevertheless, an accumulator of romantic and dutiful forms of love is Christian love. The way Kierkegaard develops his vision of different forms of love is illustrated by his quotations. Providing an in-depth analysis of the quotes, we’ll make an attempt to penetrate into the depth of the nature of love, following one of the greatest philosophers of the nineteenth century, Soren Kierkegaard. Romantic love The basis for discussion about romantic love was found by Kierkegaard in Plato’s Symposium. Plato presents mainly a male perspective on love, because there is more letters by Johannes to Cordelia. There are only three of them written by Cordelia to him in the preamble to “The Seducer’s Diary” under the male pseudonym “A” (Collins, 1953). An interesting character of the reflective seducer shows to the readers, that it is much more interesting to live and perceive love in possibility and not in actuality. This man is involved into interesting modeling of reflections and different modes of action. He likes his aesthetic searching of truths of love. There is an interesting myriad of psychological states and having travelled across different moods it is only possible to perceive one or another thing or phenomenon. Thus, this character is an intermediary taster of different forms and aspects of love. He cannot experience it to the fullest extent, because of his unachieved selfhood, but on the other hand he cannot perceive all aspects of Christian love, because this form of love is too elevated for him. In this work Kierkegaard differentiates romantic love from Christian love. In his further work this differentiation remains, but there can be seen transformations and correlations between these types of love, which will be presented further on (Collins, 1953). Thus, it is surely claimed in this work that Christian and erotic love is incompatible. There is no sensuousness in Christian love [Sandseligheden], which is the integrative part of erotic love (Kierkegaard SV1 I 44; KW III 61 cited from Collins, 1953). In other words, erotic love is selfish and Christian love is selfless. The oppositions between Christian and romantic love is shown on two different levels: the aesthetic and the ethical ones. There is a perfect example illustrating the way Kierkegaard differs between ethic and aesthetical aspects in marriage and in one’s individuality. Wilhelm claims that: the ethical is a restricted civic virtue restricted and it is not a divine goodness. Eros and divine virtue are two parallels, which can never meet. Kierkegaard clearly differentiates between aesthetic and ethical issues: aesthetic reflections are selfish and individual, while reflections of ethical concerns are open for community, is full of transparency. An aestheticist is prevented from love perception to the fullest extent. He is a selfish individual and love is ad ipsum (or “for himself”). Further reflection of aesthetic perspective on romantic love can be seen in the central claim that romantic love is immediate and it is nothing more than an instantaneous desire. Moreover, love is not natural necessity or a result of reflective action or thoughts; beauty, instantaneous emotions are triggers of romantic love. In such a way, we can see that Kierkegaard focuses our attention on not very deep nature of romantic low. It is hollow and momentous. It is the first stair of the spiral stairs (Collins, 1953). Dutiful love There is a difference also between love in marriage and romantic love. People, who are getting married, should think not about instantaneous moments of pleasant emotions, but about deeper feelings. Basic values of romantic love are missed in marriage, but instead of them something immoral and more respectable occurs. Conjugal love can save love in time. It is not limited by sensuous instantaneous moments. In marriage love is based not only on a desire. In accordance with Kierkegaard: “Marriage is the transfiguration of first [romantic] love…it is its friend, not its enemy” (Kierkegaard, p. 88). A character of A’s is complaining about love in marriage. There is a certain duty in marriage: “Conjugal love conceals in itself something quite different. It seems so mild and heartfelt and tender, but as soon as the door is closed behind the married pair, then before you can say Jack Robinson out comes the word duty’” (Kierkegaard, 94). Therefore, dutiful love exists by itself, beyond romantic love. It is a transformed form of romantic love. There is a secret, some special features, uniqueness and many other factors influencing on dutiful love existence. It is not a bad form of love. It is another form of love. Married couple manage to save their love (at first, romantic love and then, dutiful love) and thus duty saves love. Obligations and duty are helpful in carrying life across. There is a stroke of clock in a conjugal love; there is certain monotony: “the total lack of events, its everlasting vacuity, which is death, and worse than death’” (Kierkegaard, p. 93). In these words it may seem that romantic love is deeper and more about love, than conjugal love. There is more aesthetic in romantic love. It is more selfish and concerns pleasure of an individual, but in conjugal love there is duty and obligations and thus it is more ethical. There are two passages comparing and contrasting conjugal and romantic love: “The faithful romantic lover waits, let us say, for fifteen years – then comes the instant which rewards him…It hastens on, then, to the moment” (Kierkegaard, p. 88). Therefore, Kierkegaard claims that in the course of time there are many seductions, but a truly devoted and dutiful spouse obtains his faithfulness having rejected all those sedutions. Moreover, in marriage a man is struggling with the most scaring enemy, with time. He does not have a precious value of instantaneous pleasure, which can be pleasant only for a moment. There is not aspect of time in romantic love. Dutiful love is ethical. It is not selfish love. Kierkegaard introduces a more profound nature of dutiful love. It is the second stair of the wired stairs. Christian love Christian love is the central issue propagating agape. In the Works of Love Kierkegaard claims that god is love. Love for the neighbor is of great importance for Christians. God’s represents love and propagates love to our neighbors. Thus, Christian love cannot be identified with romantic love, parental love etc. The love to neighbor is love not to abstraction, but to every individual I meet. “There is a conflict between natural love and Christian love” (Hall, 2011). Christian love cannot be added as another kind of love, it is a peculiar kind of love. It is a supreme love for neighbor. In accordance with Kierkegaard, when an individual experience Christian love, he is purified, gets rid of his selfishness: “Just as this commandment [to love your neighbor as yourself] will teach everyone how to love oneself, so it will also teach erotic love and friendship genuine love: in loving yourself, preserve love for the neighbor; in erotic love and friendship, preserve love for the neighbor” (Kierkegaard, cited by Hall, 2002, pp. 61-62). Thus, Kierkegaard correlates romantic and Christian love not to the fullest extent, but traces some common features between them. By means of Christian love, an individual has a perfect option to feel love, which is one of a crucial factor of self existence. He claims that human nature requires a condition of love; a person needs to feel and experience it. Christian love, like romantic or dutiful love, is another option to nourish inner power of the self. In order an individual was happy, he needs to develop his inner self, to extend the limits of his soul and to accept within his heart his neighbors, or God, or his spouse. An object of love does not matter. A power of love matters. Transformed kinds of love do not matter as well, it is much important to take necessary seeds of love from any kind of love to nourish us. Christian love goes further, because there is more forgiveness than in any other form of love. Kierkegaard claims: “ A man rests in the forgiveness of sins when the thought of God does not remind him of the sin but that it is forgiven, when the past is not a memory of how much he trespassed but of how much he has been forgiven" (Kierkegaard, cited by Hall, 2002). On the one hand, there are two possible trajectories of man’s transformation along the Christian path: the first one is a man’s transgression and his previous guilt; the second path is an absolute forgiveness of sins. Beyond forgiveness of sins is forgetting of sins. Therefore, Kierkegaard shows to us endless horizon of Christian love. Absolute forgiveness of God allows forgives all sins to a man to the extent that he can even forget about his sins. That is the highest degree of Christian love: it is capable of erasing sinful reminiscences or deeds from a memory of a man, who turns from a guilt person into a forgiven one. Forgiveness takes away sins from a man. God is a creator and forgiver. God transforms our sins into nothing. Our sins are forgiven and we forget them. God’s forgiveness results in our forgiveness and forgetting of sins. It is a perfect reflection of Kierkegaard’s correlation between love and sin. In other words, by means of sin forgiveness and forgetting, Kierkegaard shows an immense power of Christian love. Gog’s forgiveness should be reiterated by beloved persons. In case one of them has committed a sin, another one should forgive and forget it. On the background of sin, it is clearly seen the way Kierkegaard positions and compares romantic and Christian love. It is the last stair of the wired stairs. The height of Love is finally revealed by Kierkegaard. Conclusion Kierkegaard did not make an attempt to show “bad” or “good” forms of love. He wanted to interpret different stages of love. All of them are unique and contribute much to a person’s formation. We may conclude that Christian love is the highest degree of Love. Kierkegaard introduces a form of an intermixed type of love: the essence of love is equal for romantic, dutiful or Christian love. Romantic and dutiful love should be forgiving and great; Christian love IS forgiving and great. Therefore, Christian love is an ideal for romantic and dutiful love to follow. Works cited 1. Collins, James. The Mind of Kierkegaard. Chicago: Henry Regnery, 1953. Questia. Web. 15 Aug. 2011. 2. Dupre, Louis. Kierkegaard as Theologian: The Dialectic of Christian Existence. New York: Sheed and Ward, 1963. Questia. Web. 15 Aug. 2011. 3. Goicoechea, David. "The Moment of Responsibility ." Philosophy Today 43.3 (1999): 211+. Questia. Web. 15 Aug. 2011. 4. Hall, Amy Laura. Kierkegaard and the Treachery of Love. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 2002. Questia. Web. 15 Aug. 2011. 5. Kierkegaard, Soren. Either/Or: Part 1 Kierkegaard's Writings. Princeton University Press, 1988. Read More