Kierkegaard - Concluding Unscientific Postscript to Philosophical Fragments

CONCLUDING UNSCIENTIFIC POSTSCRIPT TO PHILOSOPHICAL FRAGMENTS

VOLUME I

KIERKEGAARDS WRITINGS, XII. 1

by Sren Kierkegaard

VOLUME I: TEXT

Edited and Translated
with Introduction and Notes by

Howard V. Hong and
Edna H. Hong

Copyright 1992 by Howard V. Hong

Published by Princeton University Press,
41 William Street, Princeton, New Jersey 08540
In the United Kingdom: Princeton University Press, Oxford

All Rights Reserved

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Kierkegaard, Sren, 1813-1855.
[Afsluttende uvidenskabelig efterskrift English]
Concluding unscientific postscript to Philosophical fragments / by Sren Kierkegaard ; edited and translated with introduction and notes by Howard V. Hong and Edna H. Hong.
p cm.(Kierkegaards writings ; 12)
Translation of: Afsluttende uvidenskabelig efterskrift
Includes index.

ISBN 0-691-07395-3 (v. 1 . alk. paper)ISBN 0-691-02081-7 (pbk. v. 1)
ISBN 0-691-07395-3 (v. 2 : alk. paper)ISBN 0-691-02081-7 (pbk : v. 2)
1. ChristianityPhilosophy. 2. Apologetics19th century.
I. Hong, Howard Vincent, 1912- II. Hong, Edna Hatlestad, 1913- III. Title
IV. Series Kierkegaard, Sren, 1813-1855. Works.
English. 1978; 12.
B4373.A472E5 1992
201dc20 91-4093

Preparation of this volume has been made possible in part by a grant from
the Division of Research Programs of the National Endowment
for the Humanities, an independent federal agency

Princeton University Press books are printed
on acid-free paper and meet the guidelines for permanence and durability
of the Committee on Production Guidelines for Book Longevity
of the Council on Library Resources

Designed by Frank Mahood

Printed in the United States of America by Princeton
University Press, Princeton, New Jersey

1357910 8642

Part One
THE OBJECTIVE ISSUE OF THE TRUTH OF CHRISTIANITY

CHAPTER I
The Historical Point of View

CHAPTER II
The Speculative Point of View

Part Two
THE SUBJECTIVE ISSUE, THE SUBJECTIVE INDIVIDUALS RELATION TO THE TRUTH OF CHRISTIANITY, OR BECOMING A CHRISTIAN

Section I
SOMETHING ABOUT LESSING

CHAPTER I
An Expression of Gratitude to Lessing

CHAPTER II
Possible and Actual Theses by Lessing

Section II
THE SUBJECTIVE ISSUE, OR HOW SUBJECTIVITY MUST BE CONSTITUTED IN ORDER THAT THE ISSUE CAN BE MANIFEST TO IT

CHAPTER I
Becoming Subjective
What ethics would have to judge if becoming subjective were not the highest task assigned to a human being; what must be disregarded in a closer understanding of this task; examples of thinking oriented to becoming subjective

CHAPTER II
Subjective Truth, Inwardness; Truth Is Subjectivity

APPENDIX
A Glance at a Contemporary Effort in Danish Literature

CHAPTER III
Actual Subjectivity, Ethical Subjectivity; the Subjective Thinker

CHAPTER IV
The Issue in Fragments: How Can an Eternal Happiness Be Built on Historical Knowledge?

DIVISION 1
For Orientation in the Plan of Fragments

DIVISION 2
The Issue Itself
The individuals eternal happiness is decided in time through a relation to something historical that furthermore is historical in such a way that its composition includes that which according to its nature cannot become historical and consequently must become that by virtue of the absurd

A
PATHOS

B
THE DIALECTICAL

APPENDIX TO B
The Retroactive Effect of the Dialectical on Pathos Leading to a Sharpened Pathos, and the Contemporaneous Elements of This Pathos

CHAPTER V
Conclusion

APPENDIX
An Understanding with the Reader

CONCLUDING UNSCIENTIFIC POSTSCRIPT
TO PHILOSOPHICAL FRAGMENTS

A MIMICAL-PATHETICAL-DIALECTICAL COMPILATION AN EXISTENTIAL CONTRIBUTION

by
JOHANNES CLIMACUS

Edited by
S. Kierkegaard

A , , ; , ,

[But I must ask you, Socrates, what do you suppose is the upshot of all this? As I said a little while ago, it is the scrapings and shavings of argument, cut up into little bits].

Greater Hippias, 304 a

Rarely, perhaps, has a literary undertaking been so favored by fate in accord with the authors wishes as has my Philosophical Fragments. Doubtful and reticent as I am with regard to every private opinion and self-appraisal, I do without any doubt dare to say truthfully one thing concerning the fate of the little pamphlet:a mistake is always possible.[VII vi] Literary mistakes of that kind belong to the order of the day.

Fate be praised, therefore, that it did not happen. Without any commotion whatever, without the shedding of blood and ink, the pamphlet has remained unnoticedit has not been reviewed, not mentioned, anywhere; no literary clangor about it has increased the ferment; no scholarly outcry has led the expectant host astray; no shouting about it from the outpost One comes to owe them everything, yet without even being able to pay off this debt with a new book, because the importance of the new book, if it comes to have any, will in turn be due to the art and help of these benefactors.

Encouraged by this favor of fate, I now intend to proceed. Without being hampered by anything or any hasty connection with the demands of the times, solely following my inner promptings, I continue, as it were, to knead my thoughts until, to my notion, the dough is good.[VII vii] Somewhere Aristotle states that people in his day set up the ludicrous rule for the narrative that it must move fast, and, he continues, Here the answer applies that was given to the one kneading dough when he asked whether he was to make the dough stiff or soft: What, isnt it possible to make the dough just right? is precisely illiberal.

What is offered here is again a pamphlet proprio marte, proprio stipendio, propriis auspiciis [by ones own hand, at ones own expense, on ones own behalf].

J. C.

You will perhaps recall, my dear reader, that there was a remark at the end of Philosophical Fragments (p. 162), something that might look like the promise of a sequel. Regarded as a promise [Lfte], that remark (if I ever do write a second section) was certainly as casual as possible, as far as possible from a solemn pledge [Tro-Lovelse]. Therefore I have not felt bound by that promise, even though from the beginning it was my intent to fulfill it and the prerequisites were already on hand concurrently with the promise. Accordingly, the promise could very well have been made with great formality, in optima forma [in the best form], but it would have been inconsistent to publish a pamphlet so constituted that it was not able, and did not want, to cause a sensation and then in it to make a formal promise that, if nothing else, is bound to cause a sensation and certainly would have caused an enormous sensation. You know how these things happen. An author publishes a very sizable book; it has been out scarcely a week when by chance he falls into conversation with a reader who, in a glow of longing, courteously and congenially asks if he will not write a new book soon. The author is enthralledto have a reader who so quickly works his way through a big book and, despite the labor, retains a keen desire. Alas, the poor deceived author! In the course of the conversation, that sympathetically interested reader of the book, who so ardently looks forward to the new book, admits, yes, he admits that he has not even read it and probably never will find the time to do so, but at a social gathering he had attended he had heard [VII 2] mention of a new book by the same author, and to make certain of this matter is of extraordinary concern to him.