A Kierkegaardian Structure to Man's Impetus

I do not agree with Frankl on the driving force of the Kierkegaardian buildings for humans. I do not think that the main driving force of people is to pursue meaning. I also do not admit that his critics proposed alternative "motives" such as power and happiness. I believe that people are not the only one, but have the ability to be moved by many motivating factors. Furthermore, I think these motivations are expressed in a predictable, patterned way. In the three books I read this summer, it is possible to track the evolution of the hero's motive and the state of philosophical consciousness that follows.

For the purpose of discussion, now I am working with me to develop the dynamic life I have developed in this chapter, to at least give me the comprehensibility of self-commitment self-commitment or the concept of ability of Kierkegaardian Either / Or I would like to discuss Model 2. The theory based on the biology of the practical institution presented in Chapter 3 and the incompatible synthetic possibilities I proposed in Chapter 4 provide a complete explanation and metaphysical basis for the truth of deep freedom, self-commitment To do. The reality or the ability of Kierkegaardian Either / Or is included in the institution's broader metaphysical framework - the ability to constitute principle credibility

Reasonable human condition 3, deep freedom and real people: metaphysical research, Section 5.0 - Introduction, and Section 5.1 - Essential structure of deep freedom

My idea is described in detail in chapters 2 to 5 below, together with this metaphysical interpretation of Kierkegaard 's concept and contemporary Kant' s anti - mechanism, free will, and practical institutional concepts. I make what I call a profound will. Otherwise, if I am free, I will be the ultimate source of all my choices and intentional actions. If one of the things I select and do is ultimately caused by a big bang or a partial regional environmental process or the state of the physical world, I become a far-end or near-end decision not free I will. This is also a local incompatibility, it is a combination with a clear image. Again, this is nonlocal compatibility and has been incorporated into scientific images

Reasonable human condition 3, deep freedom and reality people: metaphysical studies, Section 1 2. Freedom of depth and authenticity of principle

The ability to self-commit the choice of life, or true causality of Kierkegaardian Either / Or, and true psychological freedom, spontaneity and ownership is a necessary and sufficient condition for deep freedom. In other words, being deeply free is a necessary condition for the principle of authenticity, but that is not enough condition. It combines deep freedom and creates deep (non) moral responsibility. (Please explain the reason in this chapter as a prerequisite.) Therefore, natural liberalism is only a three part discussion. (I) freedom in life, (ii) incompatible incompatibility is reality, (iii) freely rational human thought Animal organizers essentially include deep freedom of abilities and credibility of principle together and are profound Non) moral responsibility, and natural liberalism is a reality. (Summary, From 1-5 above)

Reasonable human condition 3. Deeply free and reality people: Metaphysical research, Section 1.3 - Center proposition and prediction