Søren Kierkegaard's Existentialist Theory

Maybe the ability to think through abstract ideas differentiates us from other animals and allows us to act in very intelligent ways, but it also puts us in a position of vulnerability. Being aware of ourselves makes us face existential questions without a clear answer, and that uncertainty is capable of leaving us immobile, trapped in our own lives without knowing to do.

Søren Kierkegaard's thinking is an attempt to offer a philosophical framework through which to address questions such as "who am I?" "What do I live for?" or "what should I do?" It is a form of philosophy that focuses on human subjectivity.

In this article we will go over the basics of Kierkegaard's existentialist theory.

• Maybe you are interested: "How are Psychology and Philosophy alike?

Who was Søren Kierkegaard?

The philosopher Søren Kierkegaard was born in Copenhagen on May 5, 1813 into a wealthy family. He studied theology in his hometown, and also trained in philosophy, a field to which he ended up dedicating his life.

Melancholy was one of the elements that marked the history of Søren Kierkegaard, a highly emotional person who, in turn, permeated his philosophy of with this characteristic. He, in turn, harshly criticized both the Church and Hegelian philosophy, which was hegemonic in Europe for much of the 19th century, since the latter spoke about absolutes and left subjectivity aside.

Kierkegaard died in Copenhagen in 1855 after suffering a crisis and spending several weeks in hospital.

• Related article: "Types of philosophy and main currents of thought"

Kierkegaard's Existentialist Theory

Next we will see what were the most remarkable aspects of Kierkegaard's philosophy, in its most existentialist facet.

1. Freedom of choice defines life

Kierkegaard believed that life is fundamentally about choosing. It is through elections that we develop our existence, what talks about who we are and what stories we have left behind us.

2. Choices are inevitable

Whatever we do, we must constantly decide, since doing nothing is also an option that we have chosen when we find ourselves at a crossroads of possible actions to take.

3. Morality also starts from freedom

Decisions are not limited to observable actions; there are also some that they have a marked moral character. That is why we must choose between what is fair and what gives us pleasure.

However, for Søren Kierkegaard the conditions in which we choose depend solely on us, and not on anyone else or the context. Everything is our responsibility, since for this philosopher we must assume that we choose starting from scratch.

The foregoing implies, for example, that neither our past nor the history of our family or neighborhood has an influence.

4. Anguish fills us

As we constantly move from one choice to another, we experience anguish to a lesser or greater extent. We would rather live without having to constantly choose, and the past times, which we see through the illusion that they were not based on decisions, seem more attractive to us than the present.

5. Vertigo

We constantly feel the weight of freedom, which makes let's feel existential vertigo before the idea that there is nothing that separates us from the void. Uncertainty makes it seem like everything can be spoiled.

• You may be interested: "Utilitarianism: a philosophy centered on happiness"

Criticisms of Kierkegaard's philosophy

The ideas of this Danish thinker are not without criticism. For example, it is usual accuse Kierkegaard of being too individualistic, since part of the philosophical questions that have to do with the person alone and not with the person in society. It is as if the outside world does not exist and social phenomena have a negligible impact on our lives.

On the other hand, he is also criticized for not taking into account history, what makes a culture whatever it is. In this way, he shows that decisions depend on you, and that neither our past nor the past of our family line influences any of that. This is something that later existentialists tried to correct to get out of that individualism, the price of adopting a philosophy centered on the subjective.