Possible Explanation of Kierkegaard’s Reasoning

Possible explanations for Kierkegaard's reasoning Some philosophers may know only what you know through experience. Perceived is the same as what is known. Since we understand things through sensation, what we understand must also be expressed through our senses. Express knowledge in words. Language is a means to convert our experience into concrete form sentences, so that sensitivity can be expressed in mind. I might use the word "slimy" to explain the snake (which is a linguistic expression of my experiences), so I distinguish one sentiment from another feeling.

In the 19th century, the Danish philosopher Søren Kierkegaard confirmed the three stages that people can experience in their life, the aesthetic stage, the ethical stage, and the religious stage. Most people only go through the first step, in most cases they go through the second step (not even many people do it). I spent a lot of time at this stage - trying to gather all the excitement and magnificence. I get up late, irir responsibility and live fast. My thought process is completely focused on the present and is completely focused on myself. However, I am not focused on focusing (that is, making me better). I am focusing on personal interests. This is two different things

For Kierkegaard, the highest stage of life that humans can expect is his so-called 'religious' stage. Now, Kierkegaard is a Christian - this is not a secret. However, the "religious" phase basically does not include a specific divine system or religious system. This is not one. Instead, it is about the first two stages of the past life, and deeply pulsating things. The transition from the aesthetic stage to the moral stage shifts from certain things (property, experience, people) to common ones (principle, duty, order, and progress). But after a while, this can start to feel regular. It can be felt that there is no higher purpose other than doing the right thing - fulfilling duty.

Kierkegaard: Author of Exposition and Critique Daphne Hampson is not a fan of Kierkegaard's idea. But probably for this reason she is a more reliable guide. She is a professor at Oxford University of St. Andrews University and an associate professor of theology and religious faculties at Oxford University. She got two doctorates from Oxford University and Harvard Theological Seminary and first met with Kia Keegor in her twenties. An independent study with theological professor Richard Reinhold Niebuhr (nephew of American theologian Reinhold Niebuhr). Hampton spent most of his time at S.K. As an imaginary friend, her book is not just a viewing work, it is not a counted work. Its structure is simple: Each chapter gives a careful reconfiguration before looking at critiques, speaking one of Kierkegaard's main tasks.