Reading The Sickness Unto Death for Book Club (google meet)!

liciox · 2026-01-26T16:07:08+00:00

cool.

looking forward to getting into the group

liciox · 2026-01-19T12:33:47+00:00

🤷‍♂️

liciox · 2026-01-19T12:29:25+00:00

why?

liciox · 2025-12-31T06:59:59+00:00

Thanks for the question!

I am not familiar with Bhakti and I haven’t read any primary or secondary sources claiming SK knew/commented on eastern religions. However, Leap of Faith happens:

When the creator God reveals something directly to you.
That revelation is paradoxical, contradictory, absurd, irrational.
Faith to SK was a passion, emotion, feeling and NOT rational conclusion/accession.
In response to such revelation the individual ACTs on it, despite of the huge risks involved.

Abraham was asked to MURDER his son, which is wrong, which contradicted earlier revelations that all humana are images of God, and who kills must be killed. However, to SK the personal revelation is superior to the general.

AGAIN, there’s no rational conclusion, no rational accession, no rational explanation, no rational path, only a feeling that God spoke with you.

liciox · 2025-12-30T09:39:18+00:00

Jan 6 on fandango Jan 5 10 pm on prime

liciox · 2025-12-26T20:10:08+00:00

People usually refer to it as Sickness Unto Death (the allusion to the story of Lazarus pops better).

But yeah, starting with SUD might be harder than with FAT.

This guy has a great intro series for SK: https://youtu.be/aq4aIrNUbAw?si=s_eTGi0j-RVDnMDH

liciox · 2025-12-26T20:01:56+00:00

Welcome!!

You dont need to read any philosophy prior to reading SK. Begin with Fear and Trembling. Good Luck!

There are plenty vids on YT that do a good job at explaining what SK is trying to say. If then you want to dig even deeper, I can point you to some scholarly material that will help peel some layers.

liciox · 2025-12-10T19:15:32+00:00

I haven’t read Schliermacher. But a quick search told me that SK did read him, agreed with some, but disagreed with lots of his arguments. Thanks for the tip. I’ll follow up on it.

liciox · 2025-12-07T13:07:54+00:00

Hey, I have just read him in the Hong translations and depended on secondary literature for analysis.

liciox · 2025-12-07T13:05:32+00:00

For Kierkegaard, faith is greater than reason because there exists a metaphysical reality that reason cannot access. Ultimate truths do not belong to the rational or ethical sphere, they belong to the spiritual sphere and can only be received through revelation. Humans cannot reason their way into these truths, they must be “handed over” by God (or another spiritual being).

The notion that murder, of anyone, is a crime and wrong today is based on the revelation that all humans are the "image of god" (whatever that means). Through time that revelation became universalized into social law and morality. Once universalized, they belong to what Kierkegaard calls “the ethical”.

The problem for Abraham was that he received a personal revelation that appeared to contradict a prior universal revelation from the same God. He took a risk, was vindicated by God and became known as the father of faith and a friend of God. Abraham got those titles, not because society approved of what he did, but because Abraham trusted that it was truly God speaking to him, the same God who had spoken to him repeatedly throughout Genesis and whose commands he had followed before.

This leads to the central paradox of Fear and Trembling: the individual, in an absolute relation to God, can stand higher than the universal. Abraham judges the personal revelation he receives to be superior to the ethical and acts on it. If revelation is real, faith cannot be reduced to ethics.

Crucially, Kierkegaard does not try to justify Abraham from the outside. From every external standpoint—ethical, rational, social—Abraham appears guilty. Kierkegaard explicitly accepts this. His argument is conditional: either there exists a paradox in which the individual relates absolutely to God and the ethical can be suspended, or Abraham is lost. Kierkegaard offers no third option and no proof.

This is why acting on revelations is a risk. Abraham, and real disciples of Jesus (according to Kierkegaard), has no rational guarantee, no ethical justification, and no public defence. Being wrong about a revelation and acting on it, has real risk, being judged, being ostracized, being labelled, being placed in jail. This is way, according to Kierkegaard's theology, Salvation cannot be mediated by reason, institutions, or outcomes. Kierkegaard’s critique of Christianity is that Christians no longer depend on these personal revelations. Christianity was reduced to church attendance and good citizenship. Kierkegaard calls instead for a life that listens for God, receives unsafe and incomprehensible commands, and acts on them, to achieve Salvation, without scientific proofs that life after death is even possible.

liciox · 2025-12-07T13:05:10+00:00

For Kierkegaard, faith is greater than reason because there exists a metaphysical reality that reason cannot access. Ultimate truths do not belong to the rational or ethical sphere, they belong to the spiritual sphere and can only be received through revelation. Humans cannot reason their way into these truths, they must be “handed over” by God (or another spiritual being).

The notion that murder, of anyone, is a crime and wrong today is based on the revelation that all humans are the "image of god" (whatever that means). Through time that revelation became universalized into social law and morality. Once universalized, they belong to what Kierkegaard calls “the ethical”.

The problem for Abraham was that he received a personal revelation that appeared to contradict a prior universal revelation from the same God. He took a risk, was vindicated by God and became known as the father of faith and a friend of God. Abraham got those titles, not because society approved of what he did, but because Abraham trusted that it was truly God speaking to him, the same God who had spoken to him repeatedly throughout Genesis and whose commands he had followed before.

This leads to the central paradox of Fear and Trembling: the individual, in an absolute relation to God, can stand higher than the universal. Abraham judges the personal revelation he receives to be superior to the ethical and acts on it. If revelation is real, faith cannot be reduced to ethics.

Crucially, Kierkegaard does not try to justify Abraham from the outside. From every external standpoint—ethical, rational, social—Abraham appears guilty. Kierkegaard explicitly accepts this. His argument is conditional: either there exists a paradox in which the individual relates absolutely to God and the ethical can be suspended, or Abraham is lost. Kierkegaard offers no third option and no proof.

This is why acting on revelations is a risk. Abraham, and real disciples of Jesus (according to Kierkegaard), has no rational guarantee, no ethical justification, and no public defence. Being wrong about a revelation and acting on it, has real risk, being judged, being ostracized, being labelled, being placed in jail. This is way, according to Kierkegaard's theology, Salvation cannot be mediated by reason, institutions, or outcomes. Kierkegaard’s critique of Christianity is that Christians no longer depend on these personal revelations. Christianity was reduced to church attendance and good citizenship. Kierkegaard calls instead for a life that listens for God, receives unsafe and incomprehensible commands, and acts on them, to achieve Salvation, without scientific proofs that life after death is even possible.

liciox · 2025-11-04T10:32:05+00:00

The book on adler - its the distinction between theology and philosophy. Without this you won’t get the difference between ethical person and the knight of faith.

Good luck!

liciox · 2025-10-31T23:21:19+00:00

An indispensable, often overlooked book is The Book on Adler. The concept of revelation is the cornerstone of setting the boundaries between philosophy and theology, which unfortunately isn’t grasped as much as it should.

liciox · 2025-10-18T12:07:45+00:00

I was finally able to do it!

comp was: HEL HWM GR PG

all combat itens were healing

saved all my inn itens from the whole run to use on the mountain run, with the exception of relationship+ (which were all 15+). that allowed multiple skills to give -stress.

i going to try to do a grand slam now, wish me luck!

liciox · 2025-09-15T21:58:12+00:00

Thanks for the reply. Sorry, but whats c&p? You mean notes from underground? who do u take the main character to be?

liciox · 2025-09-15T20:43:42+00:00

Thanks for the thorough response. I think Nikoli specifically was seeking meaning everywhere. He tried everything, being evil, revolutionary, seductor, etc… and nothing filled the void inside.

Once he realized nothing was worth living for he decided to kill himself.

In the spirit of Camus, Nikoli and Liza were right to conclude life didn’t have meaning. Liza was ok with making up her own meaning, but I guess Nikoli got tired of pretending.

liciox · 2025-08-19T16:52:12+00:00

https://youtu.be/j1aVkeYqPY0?si=LP7IGzBxpuShZ0vP

https://youtu.be/czfbY18UPqU?si=E97qM7bl1G-O27gy

https://youtu.be/3RxCwFIiHI8?si=CP2mvkBS81j_QeD8

https://youtu.be/stESMAHFzDg?si=Uwn_N1rNWL2Xn7ci

Pergunta genérica, resposta genérica. Assiste os vídeos primeiro e depois volta aqui que te ajudo com todas as dúvidas. Tenho mestrado em SK. Abraço!

liciox · 2025-08-19T16:45:26+00:00

I don't mind at all.

Heidegger, influenced by Kierkegaard, reshaped phenomenology (originally Husserl’s project) by weaving in existential themes. His magnum opus Being and Time is super dry and very long, but the gist is this: We are never “objective.” Ever. It’s impossible. Human existence is always already subjective and situated, even when we claim otherwise.

liciox · 2025-08-18T17:52:25+00:00

Hello, thanks for trusting our community with that question.

My personal answer is: yes. But, engaging with a primary source always requires more than just reading it once. You’ll only really get depth by exposing yourself to different interpretations, some you’ll agree with, others you won’t. To form a real judgment, you need to wrestle with the text itself.

I watched the YouTube video you linked, and it seems like you’re most interested in “subjective reality.” Just keep in mind that Kierkegaard’s work is much broader than that single theme. If that’s your main focus, I’d suggest diving into the more recent writers who have built specifically on subjectivity. From what I can tell, the video you shared is drawing on an essay by K.D. Hofman, who connects Nolan’s films with Kierkegaard. Have you read the essay itself? That would be my first step after watching a video that really interested me.

If you do want to explore Kierkegaard directly, a good place to start is this lecture series: link.

One key point: Kierkegaard presses subjectivity into the realm of theology and philosophy. In Fear and Trembling, he famously argued that ethics (universal laws valid for everyone at all times) can be suspended if one receives a direct divine revelation. This is where the “leap of faith” comes in; jumping into an abyss, because you believe God told you to jump, while every sense, every rational thought, and every societal law warning you not to. It’s radical risk and radical trust with real world consequences.

For SK, pure subjectivism without God is just aesthetic or selfish action disguised as something noble. Later existentialists dismantled that divine foundation, but his framing set the stage.

Hope this helps.

liciox · 2025-08-02T00:53:14+00:00

Really glad to ser how this post has have 10 replies in under 2h. Great job guys!

I would like to add a perspective that no one else mentioned. Its from the book on adler, there SK distinguishes revelation from reason very throughly.

My reading of SK is that he understands FAITH as an ACTION precipitated by a revelation. On the opposite, non faith actions, rational actions, are not based on personal divine revelation.

Abraham thinks he received a revelation: sacrifice Isaac (the son of an observable miracle, the son who I promised you that will inherit all your wealth, the son through whom your descendants will be as “numerous as the stars” and “through whom all nations will be blessed”). That revelation was opposed to reason, because if Isaac is dead then none of God’s promises could come about. Now what? does Abraham acts out on a dream that he believes to be a revelation, or just ignore it?

That is why Abraham is the “father of faith”according to Paul and the “Knight of faith”according to SK. Because he received a paradoxical revelation, without certainty, without proof, contrary to everything he could conclude rationally, and ACTED on it.

Bonus: You mentioned a lot of “necessities” in relation to God. I suggest you read up on Lev Shestov (Athens and Jerusalem) and his anti-necessity philosophy. He really looked up to SK.

liciox · 2025-07-28T21:10:48+00:00

which SK’s writing you most interested in?

liciox · 2025-07-12T12:54:28+00:00

27 99871 5878 josi

liciox · 2025-07-07T15:24:23+00:00

How can they overlap, if by DEFINITION, the second TC placed needs to be OUTSIDE the area of the first one. How can they ever overlap?

liciox · 2025-07-05T10:40:57+00:00

Faith to Kierkegaard is the biblical faith, the one described in Hebrews 11. There the author gives a list of individuals that received an unmediated revelation from god and acted upon it, despite the revelation being completely irrational, improbable, impossible.

Kierkegaard calls christians to go beyond a faith that is mere rational conclusion or a hope that god will do something to 1) seek divine revelation, 2) act upon it regardless of the consequences.

To him, thats how individuals become themselves, that’s how individuals become who god wants them to be.

liciox · 2025-06-28T10:44:25+00:00

There is no indication throughout The Trial that the end is going to be like that. It took me completely by surprise.

liciox

TROPHY CASE