The Sake of Distinguishing Between Resignation and Faith - Essay Example

Running head: Teleogical Suspension of the Ethical. Faith Involves Teleogical Suspension of the Ethical. College: For the sake ofunderstanding the concept of faith as well as its place in the Kierkegaard religious experience the paper has explored his overall understanding of the nature of philosophical reflection. His philosophical concept generally as well as religiosity has been comprehended through appropriate interpretive understanding of faith, religion as well as other associated issues. In an attempt of thematizing the understanding and concept of faith, it is appropriate to introduce his distinction between the subjective and objective ways of thinking as well as the universal popularity and the individual that manifest in his concept of religion and faith. In the book, Kierkegaard explores the 4 Abraham story retelling; he dwells majorly on the ethical and religious. Kierkegaard argues that Isaac being killed is bad and wrong ethically but it is right religiously. Kierkegaard is also seen to apply the Abraham story for the sake of distinguishing between resignation and faith. Abraham is seen to have been tasked to murder Isaac merely due to he had been told by God to abide by as well as he was so much aware that God was right always. Kierkegaard however argues that Abraham never acted basing on the fact that God should be obeyed always but rather basing on the fact that God has no capacity to to what is ethically wrong. Abraham for very much aware that it was ethically wrong when he kills Isaac, but he knew God would spare his son because he had faith. Abraham made a decision of doing something that was wrong ethically due to he had faith in good will of God that was righteously right. Kierkegaard argues that the tension that exists between religion and ethics results to anxiety of Abraham (Kierkegaard et al, 1983). According to Kierkegaard the story of Abraham retellings, it is seen to demonstrate the significance of “teleological suspension of the ethical.” Teleological implies “in relation to the end.”For instance, if someone is hungry and later decides to have some food to get satisfied, then this implies that the person made a decision that is teleological: The action was to eat in order to attain the end of not being hungry. Abraham undertakes a teleological ethical suspension the time he makes a decision of killing Isaac. Abraham is so much aware that it is unethical killing Isaac. Abraham however makes a decision of suspending the ethical, in simpler terms, putting the concerns related to ethical on the back burner due to the faith he has in the end righteousness (or telos) that will be brought by God. The faith of Abraham that God won’t permit an unethical telos enabled him to make a decision that tends to be unethical. Religious concerns was put over ethical concerns by Abraham, hence this proved the faith he had in God (Kierkegaard et al, 1983). Fear and Trembling explores the relationship that exists between religious and ethical in a similar way in which the relationship that exists between aesthetic and ethical has been explore. The ethical and aesthetic aren’t fully opposed. Either are religious and ethical aren’t opposed directly in Fear and Trembling. The tension that exists between religion and ethics results to anxiety. Abraham feels anxiety due to he has an ethical task of sparing Isaac as well as his duty of religious of sacrificing Isaac. Ethics are known to be for the good of the majority, as well as they go beyond the personal aesthetic concerns of an individual, but it has been recognized by Abraham that his relationship that is personal with to God goes beyond his commitment that is social to ethics. If Abraham had the urge of killing Isaac, this might have been seen to be both irreligious and immoral. Abraham however makes a decision of killing Isaac for reasons that are personal aesthetic or for reasons that are social ethical. Abraham made a decision of killing Isaac due to personal faith he had whereby God could not permit Isaac to die (Kierkegaard et al, 1983). Kierkegaard had believes that ethics are of significance to society but in a way that on a person can approach God only through faith. He further claims that the faith of Abraham he had in God was a faith that could not permit God to actually make Abraham murder Isaac. If Abraham never had sufficient faith, he could have failed to kill Isaac his son. The faith of Abraham permitted a teleological ethical suspension. Kierkegaard applies such story in illustrating faith that is strong. The faith of Abraham had to be tested by God, and it is seen that Abraham had to pass the test. In such a case, Kierkegaard tends to distinguish between the blind obedience that is needed by the church and the individual true faith (Kierkegaard et al, 1983). Kierkegaard might claim that if Abraham had a will of only killing Isaac due to the instructions from God, this could have indicated obedience, but not faith. Instead, Abraham will of killing Isaac due to the faith he had in God that never permitted him to really kill Isaac. In this case, it tends to be an inherently situation that is contradictory or paradox. However, paradox brings out the differences that exist between belief and faith. The faith of Abraham never permitted God to make him kill his son, but instead this never implies that he believes it. Believing in something implies being assured of that something; having faith entails the possibility that a person will have to be proven wrong. If Abraham strongly had to believe that God could not make him kill his son, and then the sacrifice couldn’t be a test. However, in this context, he will not be assured that Isaac could be spared. It was a must for him to have faith that his son won’t die, despite he had a belief that he must kill him (Foucault 1973). Kierkegaard is seen to illustrate seeming impossibilities or one of the key paradoxes, of ethics. The system of ethics has rules which have been established to promote the large groups welfare. Sometimes however, the rules really are detrimental to persons, and to follow a rule might be of benefit to one individual but on the other had be harmful to other people. The systems of ethics are generated in order attain a particular ends, but humans have no capacity of seeing into the future. Therefore, it is believed that there is no person who can be certain completely on the way of reaching such desired ends (Foglin et al, 1976). Having faith in god has the answers to such uncertainty due to it eliminates the prediction burden. Faith entails the teleological ethical suspension, whereby, faith permits an individual to have a belief that an unethical act can lead to an end that is appropriate. Human beings don’t have access to such type of information, but only God has the capacity. Therefore, humans are supposed to have trust in God and when doing such it do conflicts with the conflicts with ethical systems of the society. The decision made of doing such generates anxiety due to an individual’s won’t be able to know if they passed the test until the time when the test is done. Kierkegaard takes anxiety to be a feeling that is negative, and yet it might be considered to be a sign that is positive being pursued by someone as the correct relationship towards God (Foglin et al, 1976) It has be highlighted that, in a man, faith is the highest passion and in such a case, there is no generation that has to begin at any other point than the preceding generation, the generations are seen to begin all over again and the subsequent generation goes no further than the foregoing (Kierkegaard et al, 1983). This is seen to have remained faithful to its role and it never left the lurch. In this regard, it must be tiresome whereby the generation might not mention, in fact, for the generation has the responsibility of performing and is not responsible on anything related to the foregoing generation that had the same responsibility, unless the given generation or a specific person within it were sufficiently enough to take up a place that belongs to the Spirit which has powers over the world and is patient enough not to get tired. If the generation starts such kind of a thing, it is the opposite (Kierkegaard et al, 1983). Ethics are known to be for the good of the majority, as well as they go beyond the personal aesthetic concerns of an individual, but it has been recognized by Abraham that his relationship that is personal with to God goes beyond his commitment that is social to ethics. In summary, in an attempt of thematizing the understanding and concept of faith, it was appropriate to introduce his distinction between the subjective and objective ways of thinking as well as the universal popularity and the individual that manifest in his concept of religion and faith. His philosophical concept generally as well as religiosity has been comprehended through appropriate interpretive understanding of faith, religion as well as other associated issues. In the book, Kierkegaard explores the 4 Abraham story retelling; he dwells majorly on the ethical and religious. Kierkegaard argues that Isaac being killed is bad and wrong ethically but it is right religiously. Kierkegaard is also seen to apply the Abraham story for the sake of distinguishing between resignation and faith. Abraham is seen to have been tasked to murder. Fear and Trembling explores the relationship that exists between religious and ethical in a similar way in which the relationship that exists between aesthetic and ethical has been explore. The ethical and aesthetic aren’t fully opposed. Either are religious and ethical aren’t opposed directly in Fear and Trembling. The tension that exists between religion and ethics results to anxiety. Abraham feels anxiety due to he has an ethical task of sparing Isaac as well as his duty of religious of sacrificing Isaac. Having faith in god has the answers to such uncertainty due to it eliminates the prediction burden. Faith entails the teleological ethical suspension, whereby, faith permits an individual to have a belief that an unethical act can lead to an end that is appropriate. Human beings don’t have access to such type of information, but only God has the capacity. Therefore, humans are supposed to have trust in God and when doing such it do conflicts with the conflicts with ethical systems of the society. Bibliography Conant, James. Kierkegaard, Wittgenstein and Nonsense.(1993). Eds. Ted Cohen, Paul Guyer, and Hillary Putnam. College Station, TX: Texas Tech. University, Foglin, Robert J. Wittgenstein(1976): Second Edition. Ed. Ted Hondreich. New York: Routledge, Foucault, Michel. (1973).The Order of Things: An Archeology of Human Sciences. New York: Vintage Books. Kierkegaard, Soren (1983). Fear and Trembling/Repetition. Eds. Howard V. Hong and Edna H. Hong. Princeton: Princeton. Read More