Talk:Philosophy of Søren Kierkegaard

message: This page needs clean-up? Oh, wonderful--I love it when I can try to fix a bit and learn a helluva lot at the same time. This is what Wikipedia is all about. 
Sorry. I had to squee about it somewhere. Hee, excellent. Tamarkot 05:50, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Clean-up

message: Where is the history portion of the site? I remember it being here before.
--Jmnage 13:29, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: History

message: I'm sorry but this seems like someone worked on this as part of an undergraduate philosophy class.  It does not seem encyclopedic.  And what is with the the pictures of calc books and Groundhog's Day?  Definitely not encyclopeic. --jabin1979 26 April 2006
As is the picture under individuality. "Try not to get lost in the crowd."???
: Some parts of the article need revision, and to also take into acct his pseudonymous points of view. Poor Yorick 04:14, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Unencyclopedic content

message: Shouldn't this be merged with the Kierkegaard article?
:The Kierkegaard article is 49kb, this article is 40kb.  According to Wikipedia:Article Size, articles more than 50k should be divided.  Poor Yorick 05:58, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Мудрая мысль. Только как специалист по Кьеркегору могу сказать одно: слишком много в этой статье ненужной информации, не имеющей никакого отношения к философии датского религиозного мыслителя. Я бы сказал: отсутствие здравого смысла налицо. И никакой логики. Мы ведь, если я понял, ведём речь о философии Кьеркегора, а о постмодернизме, Хайдеггере и прочих реалиях. Их здесь попросту не должно быть. Kordener1855 (talk) 09:12, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge 

message: This analysis of Kierkegaard seems to be based primarily on a Marxist context.  Having read most of Kierkegaard's major works, I have yet to detect the level of proto-Marxist thinking that this article seems to imply.  I would like to see some specific references in regards to these ideas about mass production and abstraction.  Otherwise, I'm going to have to edit the sections that include Marxist interpretations.
The Prodigal 21:33, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello Prodigal. I think the works referred to is Kierkegaard's "Two Ages" or "The Present Age" and "The Moment". 
For secondary resources, I recommend Bruce Kirmmse's Kierkegaard in Golden Age Denmark, where it discusses his politics; and Karl Lowith's From Hegel to Nietzsche for an explicit comparison of Kierkegaard and Marx.
Cheers, Poor Yorick 21:54, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Marxist Bias

message: I edited the sentence concerning the relationship between Kierkegaard and Socrates to read:  "He measured himself against the model of philosophy which he found in Socrates, which aims to draw one's attention not to explanatory systems, but rather to the issue of how one is existing."
Then there was this bit of confusion involving Poor Yorick and edit conflicts.  In the end Poor Yorick ended up putting this in the article: "He measured himself against the model of philosophy which he found in Socrates and preferred a philosophy that was fragmented and made deep insights, without committing to an encompassing all-explaining system."
This is almost, but not quite, identical to what was there before I did my edit.  I'm not sure if that was intentional or not, since there were some edit conflicts involved.  Be that as may, I'm going to go back to my version.  "Deep insights" is decidedly vague.  And I don't know where Kierkegaard praises a fragmented philosophy, or where Socrates says anything about whether philosophy should be fragmented or not, or where Kierkegaard attributes the idea of fragmented philosophy to Socrates.  On the other hand, he does go on about existence and Socrates and the Socratic attention to existence.  This happens in various places, but I can reference the CUP.  (Do we need page numbers?  There's a longish bit about Socrates and existence, as contrasted with speculation, on pp.204-210 in the Hong&Hong edition.)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Flyingricepaddy (talk • contribs) 05:56, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it was a bit distracting to make sure the Two Ages note was in there, while not forgetting your contribution. Keep on editing! Poor Yorick 06:40, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Kierkegaard and Socrates

message: I just expanded the section on despair to include the several types of despair and where one would find them. Feel free to clean it up if my prose seems opaque. Its hard to avoid and still do Kiekegaard justice. - Entity49  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Entity49 (talk • contribs) 05:59, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section on Despair 

message: The section on individuality has a paragraph on Kierkegaard's view of the modern age. However, Kierkegaard wasn't around during the modern age. Comments about "media" and "mass production" are misleading because one gets a sense that it was Kierkegaard who said this. Perhaps, write what Kierkegaard said about the public and then create your own web-page containing your own views of the topic. 
I know too little about Kierkegaard to add his real views, but I get the sense that the views are those of the author and not those of a 19th century philosopher. Maybe quote him to support this argument. 
Cacozelia (talk) 03:01, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Kierkegaard indeed wrote about "media" and "mass production" in his work The Present Age. Here's an excerpt of that work:  Poor Yorick (talk) 04:25, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Individuality 

message: In the "dread" section, a paragraph is spent discussing how original sin was generated when Adam ate the apple...wasn't it his wife who took the mortal munch?
Telos (talk) 21:56, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Nice catch! Except, you know how the men of old exercised a patriarchal attitude towards women (this rib stuff and such), putting the responsibility on the men. Kierkegaard did his best, but that one he missed, obviously... ... said: Rursus (bork²) 21:04, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Forbidden fruit 

message: Text says (section Alienation):
:But humans are not robots or computer programs or amoebae— humans...
Did he really say so? Or should we try to reformulate the text so as to fit Kierkegaards time, in order to not allege thoughts that he never had (or?)? ... said: Rursus (bork²) 11:02, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Computers

message: Besides the above criticism, this article is very good. It treats Kierkegaard philosophy very well, and I would only hope that more theologically oriented articles would treat the topic like this article does. ... said: Rursus (bork²) 21:01, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Good article

message: Isn't the person who put the tag on the article supposed to explain why the tag is there? 11614soup 18:48, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: That is correct. I have removed it. --Saddhiyama (talk) 19:37, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  The neutrality of this article is disputed 

message: I would be interested in seeing some primary source material related to Kierkegaard and the Vedic system of the four aims of life. I think they should be removed. 11614soup  03:08, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vedic system 

message: User:Mattghg has removed an explanation which, although anachronistic, perfectly describes Kierkegaard's take upon objective and subjective truths. Since he did not describe his edit with a summary, I cannot know why he removed the explanation. Although Kierkegaard may not have thought of these very examples, some examples are useful in describing Kierkegaard's thought. I mean he perfectly understood that on certain issues there is a clash between science and religion, although science cannot refute purely theological assertions. So, I want some input about this deletion since imho the examples given, while not rendering Kierkegaard's Zeitgeist, do throw light upon a theme of his thinking. Of course, a reliable source explicitly relating similar examples to Kierkegaard's thought would be better than the examples chosen by me. Tgeorgescu (talk) 00:08, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed explanation