Get help now

Teleological Suspension Of The Ethical Research

  • Pages 7
  • Words 1524
  • Views 382
  • dovnload



  • Pages 7
  • Words 1524
  • Views 382
  • Academic anxiety?

    Get original paper in 3 hours and nail the task

    Get your paper price

    124 experts online

    Teleological Suspension Of The Ethical Essay, Research Paper

    A clear apprehension of what Soren Kierkegaard ( 1813-1855 ) meant by the

    `suspension of the ethical ’ can be achieved upon careful survey of his wider

    doctrines on phases or facets of an single ’ s life. In this short text I

    will analyze these doctrines, researching what Kierkegaard meant by each one.

    I ’ ll so put into context these phases of life by looking at them in relation

    to that which Kierkegaard ’ s text `Fear and Trembling ’ ( in which he introduces

    the construct of a teleological suspension of the ethical ) is based on: that being

    the scriptural narrative of Abraham and Isaac. Finally, I ’ ll analyze the jobs of

    his theory and research some of the givens and pre-requisites it


    First I find it necessary to understand the context in which Kierkegaard wrote

    and believed the doctrines we now explore. Kierkegaard ’ s Hagiographas were non

    without a intent or docket. His ain life was the beginning by which he inside informations his

    wider more abstract theories on life in general. He is per se linked to

    the Christian religion, and he writes with that in the head of his head.

    Indeed, `Fear and Trembling ’ itself is based upon a transition of Bible which

    Kierkegaard examines and bases his points upon. The point Kierkegaard is doing

    finally is that he believes that the `religious ’ phase of life ( one of three

    he feels he has discovered ) is the 1 that means the most and should be

    desired. Kierkegaard identifies an experiential patterned advance between these phases

    which is, on initial survey, contradicted by the transition of Bible he tackles.

    It is by analyzing these phases that the reply to the inquiry set can be


    The first of these phases is the aesthetic. For Kierkegaard, this is the lowest

    signifier of being. For a peculiar homo being to take an aesthetic being would

    necessitate him to indulge strictly in sensuous pleasances. The deduction in the

    aesthetic is that merely the external provides value. However, Kierkegaard ’ s

    suggestion is that this degree of being deficiencies anything outside of itself. Its

    value, he submits, is null of significance and way and those who inhabit this

    being merely base on balls from one meaningless satisfaction of the senses to the

    following with no existent intent.

    There is, harmonizing to Kierkegaard, a patterned advance of kinds to a higher phase of

    life. A passage to a degree being in which the specific is subsumed, that is

    transported and incorporated by, the following in the degree of being, the

    ethical. At this phase, an person is populating in conformity with what he

    describes as the `universal good ’ and in this the ethical is mindless. What I

    mean by that is that the ethical requires the stepping down of the person in

    conformity with the cosmopolitan good. Yet the ethical can non be without the

    single to give it organize. The single turns inward and considers the purpose of

    life in regard to himself. In one sense it empowers the aesthetic with value

    and significance, therefore the satisfaction of the senses can go the grasp of

    beauty. However, Kierkegaard regards the spiritual phase of life non merely to be

    the highest, but besides imperative in giving the ethical significance and way.

    By `religious life ’ Kierkegaard is mentioning to the encountering and credence

    of his, the Christian, God. It isn ’ t clear if the `religious ’ is confined merely

    to his God, or whether differing personal beliefs have a topographic point within

    Kierkegaard ’ s definition of this degree of being. The `religious ’ makes sense of

    the ethical, harmonizing to Kierkegaard. Apparently deducing that making good for

    the interest of good is nonmeaningful and closer to an egocentric sense of aesthetic

    satisfaction so meaningful being, Kierkegaard looks to the spiritual to

    give life way and telos, that is purpose.

    For the benefit of `Fear and Trembling ’ , Abraham is this `religious ’ adult male. In the

    scriptural narrative, Abraham is required by God to premeditate the forfeit of his

    boy as a mark of his religion to God. This presents Kierkegaard with a job, as

    although the `religious ’ life is a distinguishable and separate degree of being from the

    `ethical ’ , the passage is a minor premise. That is, the spiritual provides the

    ethical with an extra deepness instead so a complete reversal of values. It

    appears that there is a contradiction here, as in what is universally good ( that

    being, in this instance,

    non killing your ain kid ) is abandoned by the really

    faith or God that provides it with significance and intent.

    To supply for this contradiction, Kierkegaard identifies the telos of God. In

    this state of affairs, God requires a mark from Abraham that he is faithful to him.

    That is God ’ s aim in inquiring this of Abraham. The ethical, far from being

    removed from Kierkegaard ’ s equation, is simply suspended so that the intent ;

    the terminal consequence ; the telos of God, can be achieved. This is what Kierkegaard

    agencies when he refers to the `teleological suspension of the ethical ’ .

    There are a figure of jobs with this though. The first is the seemingly

    complete differentiation between the `religious ’ and `morality ’ . The nature of the

    goodness of God can certainly be called into inquiry if a teleological suspension

    of what is morally good is required, even for merely a fraction of clip, in order

    to follow the will of God. Further more, if God ’ s aim involves a suspension

    of the cosmopolitan good, so Kierkegaard ’ s theories earnestly falter. For how can

    the ethical be defined, as Kierkegaard defines it, as an alliance with the

    universal good, if that good can be suspended on history of a `higher good ’ ,

    that is the telos of God? Is Kierkegaard proposing that there are two degrees of

    good, possibly, and that when one reaches the `religious ’ it is on juncture

    necessary to move in conformity with the higher good and deny the good by which

    those life by the `ethical ’ live their lives? Kierkegaard seems short on

    replies when one considers the inevitable confrontation between these to

    conflicting beginnings of `goodness ’ , which lead to an evident potency

    contradiction of the `highest good ’ which Kierkegaard has identified.

    Of class, in the illustration of Abraham and Isaac, the suspension of the ethical

    for the intents of the spiritual did non ensue in this struggle between

    goodness ( dismissing the forethought involved in the head of Abraham ) for God

    stopped Abraham before he ended his kid ’ s life. Therefore in this instance the

    deduction is that the telos of God was to detect a presentation of obeisance

    in Abraham and non to kill Isaac. However in the very suspension of the ethical,

    God contradicts himself and the doctrine of Kierkegaard in this regard

    requires farther account. For God must be the changeless in order for the

    phases of life to work. It is impossible for God to overrule himself yet that is

    seemingly what has happened here – God has contradicted himself in order for

    his intents to be fulfilled.

    The lone manner God could non hold contradicted himself is if there was no

    suspension of the ethical, which is a existent possibility. For if it was non a

    bid of God to Abraham to give Isaac, and it was simply a trial of

    Abraham ’ s fidelity, so God did non overrule his ain bids and nature,

    as there was no commandment that Isaac should decease. In this sense, in every bit much as

    there was no bid, there was besides no suspension of the ethical.

    In decision, to propose that there is any sort of suspension of the ethical,

    in every bit far as Kierkegaard describes the ethical, is to deny the very impression of

    the spiritual and its topographic point within taking a good life. For the ethical is the

    attunement of life to the cosmopolitan good. And for God to suspend this good in

    order to carry through a intent which by logic would non include the good it normally

    would is to deny the very impression that this good was genuinely `good ’ in the first

    topographic point. The thought that God would utilize the unethical – put into action a sequence of

    events that is contrary to the cosmopolitan good – to allow his intent non

    merely calls into inquiry the value of God, or of the cosmopolitan good, but besides

    leads to misunderstandings of God whose manifestations are force and wars.

    The lone sensible account, if God is to be upheld and Kierkegaard ’ s

    doctrines are to be believed, is that there was no suspension of the ethical

    at all ; that God remained consistent and his suggestion to Abraham that he kill

    his ain boy was a trial of Abraham ’ s obeisance and nil more. Further

    inquiries sing the morality of a God that would utilize such seemingly horrid

    ways to `test ’ his worshippers besides lead us to name into inquiry the `good ’ that

    one empowers this figure with, all taking to the decision I make the these

    phases Kierkegaard present us with, in connexion with this transition of

    Bible, require farther attending.

    This essay was written by a fellow student. You may use it as a guide or sample for writing your own paper, but remember to cite it correctly. Don’t submit it as your own as it will be considered plagiarism.

    Need a custom essay sample written specially to meet your requirements?

    Choose skilled expert on your subject and get original paper with free plagiarism report

    Order custom paper Without paying upfront

    Teleological Suspension Of The Ethical Research. (2017, Jul 17). Retrieved from

    Hi, my name is Amy 👋

    In case you can't find a relevant example, our professional writers are ready to help you write a unique paper. Just talk to our smart assistant Amy and she'll connect you with the best match.

    Get help with your paper
    We use cookies to give you the best experience possible. By continuing we’ll assume you’re on board with our cookie policy