Fear and Trembling (Penguin Classics)
by Soren Kierkegaard
|
List Price: Our Price: $5.78 You Save: $8.22 (59%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $0.86 (click here) Category: Book See more book details and other editions |
|---|
Book Reviews of Fear and Trembling (Penguin Classics)
Book Review: true faith is not completely reliant on logic
Summary: 5 Stars
The value of this work is that it correctly argues that faith is ultimately a choice that cannot be completely supported by logic or rational proof. It was Kierkegaard's experience of losing the chance to be with the person he loved that forced him to confront the absurd nature of faith. Although believers in many religions will argue that their faith is logical and rational, Kierkegaard fully grasped that if conviction is based fully on logic, it does not need faith to support it.
Perhaps the best metaphor can be found in the New Testament passage where Christ invites Peter to walk on water -- Peter takes a step with faith and does not sink, but then looks down, and begins to evaluate the situation using his rational mind, and begins to sink. True faith walks on water. Only true faith could be sufficient to base a life on the conviction that a dead guy in Jerusalem 2,000 years ago came back from the dead and has his own kingdom where his followers will live forever in eternal bliss. On the other hand, this conviction has become so entrenched in the popular culture of the last 2,000 years that it has just become an unremarkable backdrop to the modern world and is considered a socially acceptable belief.
The challenge for a modern christian is to find true faith when they mistakenly believe that the story of Jesus Christ is completely supported by logic and rational thinking. The mere act of mentally assenting to what has been accepted in popular culture, a broad and shallow idea that God and Jesus exist, is not faith at all; just an unexamined conclusion of a lazy mind that has not yet questioned its own surroundings. True faith is a radical departure from the status quo, a renewal of personal conviction despite all contradictions and a recognition of UNCERTAINTY. Without a recognition of uncertainty, faith has no meaning. The strength of true faith is that it acknowledges that uncertainty exists, and yet still forges on in spite of the uncertainty, willingly accepting and embracing the consequences of conviction in the face of uncertainty. There is not fear that the conviction may be misled and flinching because of the uncertainty, there is a recognition that this lack of absolute rational proof and certainty is what gives faith its supreme virtue. This is what makes faith courageous and is something that only mortal humans can do, since angels are blessed with absolute knowledge whereas humans are blessed with uncertainty, which is the only way that true freedom can exist. Without this freedom, the choice of "faith" would not be possible, would not be courageous, and would not make mortals eligible for the reward of heaven.
The believer who claims that all faith is logical has not yet come to the moment of testing, like Abraham, like Kierkegaard, where the object of the soul's deepest longing and only happiness is seen, but yet out of reach. For Kierkegaard it was the girl he loved, that he could never be with, but yet he retained hope and transformed that hope into a lifetime of faith. The personal pain of such an experience leads a person to exclaim "it doesn't make sense!" Only when one reaches the point where it just doesn't make sense can the ultimate nature of real and profound faith be experienced and put into action. Anything else is a shallow beginning, and not yet a sufficient faith to walk on water, just as Peter found when he was invited to take that step...
This book is full of such profound insight because Kierkegaard understood this and knew that faith was not a shallow, cheap or easy achievement:
"In those old days it was different. For then faith was a task for a whole lifetime, not a skill thought to be acquired in either days or weeks. When the old campaigner approached the end, had fought the good fight, and kept his faith, his heart was still young enough not to have forgotten the fear and trembling that disciplined his youth...." (p.42)
Book Review: FAITH IS A MEME
Summary: 4 Stars
Not to be seen as making an Ad Hominem attack (a judgment based on the writer, or, in this case, the reviewer, as opposed to his or her argument), it should be quite obvious that at least one critic of this book does so on the basis of his own, personal "faith" in the Christian concept of God and all the rest of the residue that this belief provides. Now, I realize that I, being a confirmed atheist, bring my own intellectual baggage to this review. For that reason alone, some will dismiss my critique as one of a heathen, a pagan, an infidel, or something even worse (like, perhaps, a Jew). Well, my critique has nothing to do with my belief or disbelief in any god. I approach this from the standpoint of memetics, a fledgling science first introduced by Richard Dawkins in his tour-de-force of a book, The Selfish Gene. A "meme", basically, shares some, though certainly not all, of the characteristics of a gene, except for one important difference. A meme is the smallest unit of CULTURAL transmission, as opposed to a gene, which is a unit of biological transmission. A meme could be, say, the song "Happy Birthday to You", or rap music, or the obsession with anything made by Marc Jacobs. One obvious consequence of cultural verses biological transmission is that genes are transmitted vertically - from parents to offspring - while memes are transmitted horizontally, like viruses. In fact, the epidemiological model frequently invokes memes as being "viruses of the mind". Now, what does any of this have to do with Kierkegaard? So, it has to do with his concept of faith. Groups of memes, called memeplexes by some, tend to employ whatever strategies are most likely to spread themselves. Well, Christianity, like most religions, has some serious flaws in its logic, ranging from the transubstantiation of Christ, to the bodily resurrection of the faithful (there's that word again), to the existence of more than a single god. Basically, the religion is absurd, and anyone who questions it will see that in a second. But there's a catch, and that's the addition of the "faith meme". It could be said that the more outrageously absurd the religion, the more necessary the faith meme, and the stronger the faith meme needs to be in order to insure continued belief in the religion. For most, or many, of the faithful, faith is indeed the component that allows them to accept everything, such as Jesus' resurrection from the dead, or belief in a five-thousand-year old earth. So, what does all this have to do with Kierkegaard? Could it be that he wanted desperately to believe, to have faith, in his religion, but he was too smart to buy it? The faith meme wasn't working on him as it did/does on so many others of lower intellect, just plain gullibility, or such fear of death in this world that they create another. Perhaps this is a simplistic way of interpreting Kierkegaard, but I have faith that it's at least accurate. For all those who are intrigued, or, better yet, offended, by this review, I would recommend picking up (investing in) a copy of Susan Blackmore's "The Meme Machine", as well as Richard Dawkins's recent best-seller, "The God Delusion". I, by the way, am no philosopher or philosophy student, so you can dismiss this easily with the old Ad Hominem attack - he has no credentials so why should we listen to him; better to listen to Jesus, at least he could walk on water. Well, if you want to believe that, then God bless you, you have more faith than I do. - dsbBook Review: ABRAHAM TOOK THE LEAP OF FAITH
Summary: 4 Stars
Fear and Trembling:
A Dialectical Lyric
by Johannes de silentio (Søren Kierkegaard)
translated by Alastair Hannay
(London, UK: Penguin Books, 1985)
(ISBN: 0-14-044449-1; paperback)
(Library of Congress call number: BR100.K52 1985)
The title of this book comes from Paul:
"You must work out your own salvation in fear and trembling."
Kierkegaard selects Abraham as his paradigm of faith.
This is an interesting choice, since Abraham was not a Christian,
having lived thousands of years
before the emergence of Christian faith.
Fear and Trembling is a book of "indirect communication",
rich with obscurities and ambiguities.
Perhaps, it can only be understood
by persons who already know Grace from the inside.
Most readers will spin their wheels in intellectual puzzlement,
getting lost in the concepts Kierkegaard uses
for his indirect communication.
Kierkegaard's philosophy of religion describes
three levels of existence:
(1) the esthetic--the life of immediate enjoyment;
(2) the ethical--the life of duty and responsibility; &
(3) the religious--living within Grace or Existential Freedom.
Fear and Trembling focuses on the process of making the leap
from the ethical existence to the religious orientation.
Abraham becomes the father of faith by being willing to sacrifice
his only son, Isaac--in whom all his hopes and dreams reside.
Abraham is a knight of faith because he believes God will restore
Isaac--in some way that Abraham cannot foresee.
Writing as his pseudonym Johannes de silentio--John the silent--
Kierkegaard asks "Who can understand Abraham?"
We might ask "Who can understand Kierkegaard?"
Søren Kierkegaard has written a book so full of difficulties
that most readers miss the basic meaning
--as is illustrated by most academic discussion
of Fear and Trembling.
But those who already have the faith of Abraham will understand.
People still living on the esthetic level of existence
will only understand Abraham's desire to keep his son alive.
People living on the ethical level will understand
that Abraham has an ethical duty to protect his son--not kill him.
But faith goes far beyond both
immediate desires and the demands of ethics.
Living in Grace provides a completely new basis for making decisions.
The tragic hero gives up something he loves to serve some higher,
universal principle, such as the good of the whole community.
He is torn between two desires,
but all observers can understand his sacrifice.
The tragic hero still resides on the ethical level.
In contrast, the knight of faith gives up what all can understand
--love and duty toward a child--for reasons no one can understand.
Abraham's inwardness cannot be made intelligible to others.
Grace or Existential Freedom can only be understood from the inside.
Only those who follow in the footsteps of Abraham
might eventually understand his complete re-orientation of being.
If this school of thought interests you, search the Internet for:
"Books on Existential Spirituality".
James Leonard Park, seeker on the path of existential spirituality.
Book Review: Fear and Trembling in Copenhaagen: Philosphy Meets Faith
Summary: 4 Stars
Still in Infinite Resignation:
Kierkegaard's most famous work "Fear and Trembling" is a book I have struggled with for my entire adult life. I have found reading the work interesting but extrapolating the value of the argument is truly difficult. It may be that I am attempting to read far too much into it but it seems to me that there is something deeper behind Kierkegaard's definition and deconstruction of faith. Using the example of Abraham and his son Isaac, whom God commands Abraham to kill, which is nearly universally known in the west as a parable for man's faith in God, Kierkegaard sets up his romantic argument of what is faith. The work is well thought out but something piques my sense of absolute irony and tells me that maybe even the author isn't wholly convinced of his argument.
The work opens up with a very romantic episode after episode approach to Abraham's possible actions when hearing God commandment to kill his son in his honor. If nothing else this breaks down the reader's inculcated acceptance for the Old Testament story. If more it fills the reader with a true sense of awe for the struggle that Abraham had to face. Of course, the question of killing raises the ethical issue over murder which Kierkegaard thickens his argument with the Teleological Suspension of Ethics. Yes, it is unethical to kill by the 10 commandments given by God, but is it ethical to perform God's will even if it goes against the Law and finally could God ever deny the laws he created (go against himself). The final decision is a relatively logical argument in which he says that to act by God's direct will is grounds to suspend ethics and yes since god is infinite he can defy his own law. Of course this wouldn't really hold up in modern courts but it does have an affect upon the reader.
So, dear friend Kierkegaard: how do we get faith? Shattering the Hegelian view that faith can be overcome by philosophy, Kierkegaard says that because faith cannot be attained intellectually all of the philosophical systems cannot transcend faith. This of course makes getting faith a near impossibility which in words must stem from the idea of "infinite resignation" that event "a" cannot happen. To believe passionately that event "a" can happen though intellectually resigned to the fact that it can't is to have faith. In spite of all of this I still don't understand how Kierkegaard says that faith can be inspired - instilled.
I will say that the Penguin Classics version is a great translation of the work and is certainly the version to buy. Overall, I am not exactly sure how current the philosophical argument is but it is set up in a convincing way. From a theological standpoint the book is certainly current and is a definite read for those interested in theology. I really enjoy reading "Fear and Trembling" and yet, I can't wholly accept the author's arguments for faith. It seems to me that by dividing the mind into the passionate and the intellectual and diving groups of men into the Aesthetic, the religious and the ethical he is trapped under the weight of Aristotle. All that said, this is a great work to explore and at least glean something of Kierkegaard's pensive religious style. If you like this one go strait to "Sickness Unto Death".
-- Ted Murena
Book Review: Fear and Trembling. One Jewish interpretation
Summary: 5 Stars
I am sure I do not understand Kierkegaard fully .But what I will try to do in this brief review is recall what I do understand and compare it to an interpretation of the very same event , the Akedah, the Binding and Sacrifice of Isaac from the Jewish point- of- view.
As I understand it Kierkegaard sees Abraham as an exemplar of the ' teleological suspension of the ethical' Already in Either- Or Kierkegaard spoke of these three realms, the aesthetic, the ethical and the religious. This is a heirarchy . Abraham in effect transcends the second realm, transcends the ethical ( which would of course mandate against ' murder' and especially against the murder of one's own beloved child) and gives himself wholly to the ' religious' By this is meant he places his absolute trust in God . And his obedience to God, his absolute trust in God transcends any human committment even the highest ethical one. Thus the absurdity of his action is on the ethical level, but not on the level in which he totally commits himself to God. Obedience to God is faith in God is the highest way for the ideal religious figure that Abraham represents.
Yet Abraham is not permitted to carry out the sacrifice. ( Did he inwardly intuit that he would not be permitted to? And was this the sign of his far deeper trust in G-d?
Instead Abraham is prevented from continuing in the pagan tradition of child sacrifice and induced to set out on a new higher ethical way for mankind. (The path of ethical monotheism) in which each and every human life is sacred. And such sacrifice is forbidden because it violates the divine commandment against taking a human life, (And this when the human being is created in the image of G-d ) thus meaning the human is forbidden from sacrificing the divine in the human for the Divine.
Paradoxically in the Jewish tradition the whole completed action which is not simply Abraham's willingness to sacrifice but G-d's forbidding of this sacrifice is to affirm a higher ethical path. This I would venture is one Jewish interpretation of the Akedah, of a new dawn a higher way for mankind where human life is more sacred than before.
May the readers of this review forgive me for not resting with Kierkegaard's interpretation .We are all after all made in the image of G-d, and each one of us may and perhaps must have his own interpretation to give.