Notes on Kierkegaard
The other night, I was in the middle of trying to fall asleep and being unable to sleep. Knowing how much sleep affects my mood and productivity the next day, I attempted to fall asleep by thinking about theories and more ways to improve the "meat" of my thesis. But as I delved deeper, the more I knew that although my eyes were closed, the more my mind was becoming acutely aware of ideas. And all of sudden, an epiphany! KIERKEGAARD! If my sister had not been fast asleep, I might have scared her with my sudden resemblance of Dracula waking and thirsting for blood. But this time I was thirsting for something else, a lead and a deeper insight for my study.
Yes, Kierkegaard. Soren Kierkegaard... we took him up in our History of Ideas class last year. But with the scope of study and the brief time we had to study philosophers and their ideological contributions, we only had the opportunity to study Kierkegaard at a distance. In a way, only with the interest of finding out what his contribution to Philosophy was and the key words he would contribute to our disinterested knowledge.
By the time that my epiphany had launched me out of bed and I had began searching for my philosophy notebook, I realized that this was what I wanted to do all along. Although the question would now revolve on HOW I could actually tie literature and philosophy together, I knew that this was going to be something which posed more interesting insight than merely studying isolating as a theme in itself.
Imagine, I've been spending a year reading through books and trying to modify my topic. And now that somehow my topic has been narrowed down and I'm in the middle of my third chapter, I'm facing this new path. And with the progress I've been having with my original work, it was as if I was presented the option of ramming myself into a brick wall, or to take this new path.
And now, allow me to attempt to summarize what I have found out so far about the philosopher and why I want to connect his ideas to my literary study. Originally, I had been studying the stories of Gregorio Brillantes, trying to find the commonality in them and hopefully trying to establish some sense and order by applying the theory which I thought would serve most promising-- structuralism. However, the more that I studied structuralism, the clearer it became to me that if I would pursue this theory as my organizing principle, the less life I can extract from the stories. In the end, instead of wanting to portray the depth of thoughts about life, God and love within the work, I end up studying it superficially and according to the "grand scheme" of literature which should apparently give it its meaning. I did not want this, but because I was facing the reality of a deadline, the more that it seemed I should carry on with the superficiality despite my lack of emotion or enjoyment in it.
And then here comes the epiphany, a couple of days after I have faced the prospect of not being able to finish on time at all. At this point, I have personally accepted my failure to meet the deadlines and have learned to accept the possibility. And so you can just imagine how, after a lifeless study on structure and trying to make it all logically meet, this new prospect of a marriage between two subjects I love-- literature and philsophy-- poses as the consolation of a tardy graduation. This is actually tempting me to extend and, I must add, I think I am losing my mind.
But what is this that is so worth extending my studies for? Isolation. Kierkegaard posits that there are three phases in an individual's life: the aesthetic, the ethical and the religious. Rather than understanding these phases as consequential of each other, one must understand them as separate. Meaning, they do not naturally lead to one another, but if an individual seeks to make the most of his existence and to find fulfillment in his life, he must go through all three stages. IN a nutshell (which seems to be anathema in philosophy, pardon me), Kierkegaard presents that existence can only be actualized if one actually embodies his beliefs, if he "lives" what he thinks, if he learns how to "choose" for himself. And, at the end of this journey of self-actualization, he would find that it would only be by affirming his faith in God that he truly finds his individuality.
Interestingly, Gregorio Brillantes's selected stories present isolation. And these characters face complex conflicts which cannot be resolved by any one else but themselves.
See? I am beginning to see the clear reflections of a gem under a load of coal. Now the question is, how to I grab this gem without completely dirtying my hands? And how to I acquire it without having to spend too much time wiping off the dirt from pushing aside the lumps of coal?
Isn't this something one can relate more to than having to read about ISOLATION per se and try to see the almost-mathematical structure that binds it together?
Yes, Kierkegaard. Soren Kierkegaard... we took him up in our History of Ideas class last year. But with the scope of study and the brief time we had to study philosophers and their ideological contributions, we only had the opportunity to study Kierkegaard at a distance. In a way, only with the interest of finding out what his contribution to Philosophy was and the key words he would contribute to our disinterested knowledge.
By the time that my epiphany had launched me out of bed and I had began searching for my philosophy notebook, I realized that this was what I wanted to do all along. Although the question would now revolve on HOW I could actually tie literature and philosophy together, I knew that this was going to be something which posed more interesting insight than merely studying isolating as a theme in itself.
Imagine, I've been spending a year reading through books and trying to modify my topic. And now that somehow my topic has been narrowed down and I'm in the middle of my third chapter, I'm facing this new path. And with the progress I've been having with my original work, it was as if I was presented the option of ramming myself into a brick wall, or to take this new path.
And now, allow me to attempt to summarize what I have found out so far about the philosopher and why I want to connect his ideas to my literary study. Originally, I had been studying the stories of Gregorio Brillantes, trying to find the commonality in them and hopefully trying to establish some sense and order by applying the theory which I thought would serve most promising-- structuralism. However, the more that I studied structuralism, the clearer it became to me that if I would pursue this theory as my organizing principle, the less life I can extract from the stories. In the end, instead of wanting to portray the depth of thoughts about life, God and love within the work, I end up studying it superficially and according to the "grand scheme" of literature which should apparently give it its meaning. I did not want this, but because I was facing the reality of a deadline, the more that it seemed I should carry on with the superficiality despite my lack of emotion or enjoyment in it.
And then here comes the epiphany, a couple of days after I have faced the prospect of not being able to finish on time at all. At this point, I have personally accepted my failure to meet the deadlines and have learned to accept the possibility. And so you can just imagine how, after a lifeless study on structure and trying to make it all logically meet, this new prospect of a marriage between two subjects I love-- literature and philsophy-- poses as the consolation of a tardy graduation. This is actually tempting me to extend and, I must add, I think I am losing my mind.
But what is this that is so worth extending my studies for? Isolation. Kierkegaard posits that there are three phases in an individual's life: the aesthetic, the ethical and the religious. Rather than understanding these phases as consequential of each other, one must understand them as separate. Meaning, they do not naturally lead to one another, but if an individual seeks to make the most of his existence and to find fulfillment in his life, he must go through all three stages. IN a nutshell (which seems to be anathema in philosophy, pardon me), Kierkegaard presents that existence can only be actualized if one actually embodies his beliefs, if he "lives" what he thinks, if he learns how to "choose" for himself. And, at the end of this journey of self-actualization, he would find that it would only be by affirming his faith in God that he truly finds his individuality.
Interestingly, Gregorio Brillantes's selected stories present isolation. And these characters face complex conflicts which cannot be resolved by any one else but themselves.
See? I am beginning to see the clear reflections of a gem under a load of coal. Now the question is, how to I grab this gem without completely dirtying my hands? And how to I acquire it without having to spend too much time wiping off the dirt from pushing aside the lumps of coal?
Isn't this something one can relate more to than having to read about ISOLATION per se and try to see the almost-mathematical structure that binds it together?