Scholarlink

<p>A longstanding interpretative problem for readers of <i>Fear and Trembling</i> concerns faith’s apparent paradoxicality. Interestingly, interpreters have yet to reach a consensus about where to locate the paradox. Proceeding from recent efforts to dissolve the apparent paradoxicality of Kierkegaard’s ‘faith’ by showing that it does not entail inconsistent epistemic commitments, I argue that faith exhibits a linear, developmental path, despite arguments to the contrary. This developmental path, I show, is a function of <i>silence</i>. By foregrounding the role silence plays in the development of Kierkegaard’s ‘faith,’ I demonstrate that its paradoxicality is not engendered by the consistency of one’s epistemic outlook or a linear development from ‘The Aesthetic’ through ‘The Ethical’ to ‘Faith’. Rather, the paradox concerns a substantive sense of freedom. This freedom, which becomes thematic for us in experiences of silence and despair, clarifies the paradoxicality of faith, its linear development, and suggests a substantive difference between wisdom and faith that some interpreters overlook.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

The Paradoxicality of ‘Faith’ in Kierkegaard’s Fear and Trembling

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年1月24日

查看全文
  • Alexei Procyshyn

摘要

A longstanding interpretative problem for readers of Fear and Trembling concerns faith’s apparent paradoxicality. Interestingly, interpreters have yet to reach a consensus about where to locate the paradox. Proceeding from recent efforts to dissolve the apparent paradoxicality of Kierkegaard’s ‘faith’ by showing that it does not entail inconsistent epistemic commitments, I argue that faith exhibits a linear, developmental path, despite arguments to the contrary. This developmental path, I show, is a function of silence. By foregrounding the role silence plays in the development of Kierkegaard’s ‘faith,’ I demonstrate that its paradoxicality is not engendered by the consistency of one’s epistemic outlook or a linear development from ‘The Aesthetic’ through ‘The Ethical’ to ‘Faith’. Rather, the paradox concerns a substantive sense of freedom. This freedom, which becomes thematic for us in experiences of silence and despair, clarifies the paradoxicality of faith, its linear development, and suggests a substantive difference between wisdom and faith that some interpreters overlook.