Marquette University e-Publications@Marquette Dissertations (2009 -) Dissertations, Theses, and Professional Projects The aP rable As Mirror: An Examination of the Use of Parables in the Works of Kierkegaard Russell Hamer Marquette University Recommended Citation Hamer, Russell, "The aP rable As Mirror: An Examination of the Use of Parables in the Works of Kierkegaard" (2018). Dissertations (2009 -). 768. https://epublications.marquette.edu/dissertations_mu/768 THE PARABLE AS MIRROR: AN EXAMINATION OF THE USE OF PARABLES IN THE WORKS OF KIERKEGAARD by Russell Hamer A Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School, Marquette University, in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Milwaukee, Wisconsin May 2018 ABSTRACT THE PARABLE AS MIRROR: AN EXAMINATION OF THE USE OF PARABLES IN THE WORKS OF KIERKEGAARD Russell Hamer Marquette University, 2018 This dissertation focuses on an exploration of the use of parables in the works of Soren Kierkegaard. While some work has been done on Kierkegaard’s poetic style, very little attention has been paid to his metaphors, despite their prevalent use in his works. Much of the scholarship instead treats his parables as mere examples of philosophical concepts. In this work, I argue that Kierkegaard’s parables function primarily to cause the reader to see him or herself truly. The parables work like mirrors, reflecting our true selves back onto ourself. In this way, the parables prompt Kierkegaard’s readers to overcome the illusion of Christendom and to instead recognize the requirements that authentic Christianity places upon them. My dissertation begins with an examination of the purpose that Kierkegaard saw for his authorship. By focusing on his later works, I argue that Kierkegaard primarily wanted to bring the religious forward in his readers. He thought that in order to accomplish this he needed to start with works describing the life that he thought most of his readers lived, a life of pleasure seeking, and to slowly move them towards the religious. I then present Kierkegaard’s view of what Christianity essentially consists of, subjectivity, and of the style of communication that is tied to subjectivity. Kierkegaard claims that when communicating subjective truths that we must employ an indirect style. I go on to argue that parables very much fit into this style and that they work to cause tension on the part of the reader. The reader of the parable must choose between various competing interpretations that the parable presents, and in choosing how to interpret the parable, the reader reveals and discloses him or herself. I follow this up with an examination of a number of parables from different works of Kierkegaard, showing how they function in this manner. I end by arguing that Kierkegaard’s parables are designed to function like mirrors, revealing ourselves to us. i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS There are many individuals who have helped and supported me in my endeavor to attain a Ph.D., and I’d like to thank a few of them. I’d first like to thank my parents and my grandparents for always encouraging me, both within and outside of my studies, to pursue my interests and try my hardest. Your collective support has helped to shape me into the person that I am today. Next, I’d like to thank Michael Futch for instilling in me a passion for philosophy and for always pushing me to improve as a thinker. I’d also like to thank Jacob Howland for introducing me to Kierkegaard and engendering my love of his works. I’d like to thank Noel Adams, my advisor, for his insight into Kierkegaard and his help in sharpening my ability to be a good reader of Kierkegaard. I’d also like to thank Javier Ibanez, Stanley Harrison, Theresa Tobin, James South, Susanne Foster, and all the other members of the Marquette Philosophy Department for the time and energy that they’ve invested in me. I’d like to thank Amelia Zurcher for her tireless work on this project. Her ability to transform my ill-formed words into clear, understandable statements has undoubtedly improved this work and has made a lasting impression on my writing. Without her help, this project would never have been completed. Last, I’d like to thank my wife, whose love, support, and ability to pay the bills has made this all possible. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS………………………………………………………………..i ABBREVIATIONS………………………………………………………………………iv CHAPTER INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………...1 I. Kierkegaard the Religious Critic………………………………………………13 1.1 Everyone’s a Christian So No One’s a Christian……..………….16 1.2 With All Your Power, What Would You Do?…………………...34 1.3 Who Gets Saved From Tonight’s Elimination?………………….44 II. Kierkegaard the Illusionist……………………………………………………48 2.1 Is The Earth Not Round?……………………………….………..50 2.2 Speak if You Have Understanding………………………………61 2.3 To Believe or Not To Believe………………………...………….75 III. Kierkegaard the Poet…………………………………………………………92 3.1 Soothesaying Through Poetry………………………………...….94 3.2 Construct Additional Metaphors………………………..………105 3.3 The Power Level of Parables…………………………………...110 3.4 Come Now David, Where Has Uriah Gone?…………………...117 IV. Kierkegaard the Storyteller…………………………………………………124 4.1 Merman. MERMAN!....…………………………………….…..129 4.2 A Cinderella Story….……...……………………………..….....140 4.3 I Obey the Letter of the Law, if Not the Spirit………….…..….148 V. Kierkegaard the Metaphorical Mirror……………………………………….161 iii 5.1 Nobody Expects the Merman Parable!……………………..…..170 5.2 The Man in the Mirror……………………………….…………177 5.3 Through a Mirror, Darkly………………………………...…….186 5.4 Objects in Mirror are Closer Than They Appear………….……189 5.5 “I Deceived Her by Pretending I was a Deceiver”………..……196 BIBLIOGRAPHY……………………………………………………………………....201 iv ABBREVIATIONS Throughout this dissertation, I use a number of abbreviations to refer to Kierkegaard’s works. Unless otherwise noted, the following abbreviations refer to the following works. Further information can be found in my bibliography. CD = Christian Discourses: The Crisis and a Crisis in the life of an Actress CUP = Concluding Unscientific Postscript to Philosophical Fragments E/O = Either/Or FT = Fear and Trembling ; Repetition FSE = For Self Examination ; Judge for Yourselves PF = Philosophical Fragments ; Johannes Climacus PIC = Practice in Christianity SUD = The Sickness Unto Death JP = Journals and Papers POV = The Point of View TD = Three Discourses on Imagined Occasions UDVS = Upbuilding Discourses in Various Spirits WOL = Works of Love 1 Introduction Kierkegaard is often praised for his poetic writing style. Throughout his works, especially his pseudonymous ones, Kierkegaard often breaks from philosophical prose and instead uses extended metaphors, fairy tales, parables, and allegories. This jarring change, which occurs quite often, is rarely explained by the pseudonyms. If these parables are supposed to teach something to the reader, one would expect the teaching to be outlined by the author. My project will examine the place of the parable in Kierkegaard’s pseudonymous works in order to uncover why Kierkegaard uses them in a broad sense, but I will also show how some of the individual parables function within their respective works. In examining this issue, I will put forth an argument explaining why Kierkegaard must remain secretive about the purpose of the parables and how this secrecy plays an important role in Kierkegaard’s authorship. It’s quite common for philosophers to use metaphors or analogies in their works. A good metaphor can help explain a complicated concept by referring the audience to a concept that is already understood. Aristotle’s classic example of Achilles describes him as “rushing like a lion”. This metaphor tells us much about the way that Achilles ran into battle. Though the description of his battle charge would not be complicated to describe without metaphor, the use of the lion metaphor explains the situation to the reader and thus simplifies the problem of understanding. The use of metaphor in this manner is quite commonplace, and indeed much of our language is inherently metaphorical. Yet, in these situations, the metaphor functions as an explanation that seeks to simplify the task of understanding. Metaphors also act as examples quite often. In order to explain a concept, one might refer to a metaphorical example as a way to elucidate the idea. 2 Despite the commonality of metaphors and analogies in philosophical works, parables are a little rarer.1 We see parables in the works of Plato quite a bit, but the parabolic form never quite caught on for philosophy as a discipline. However, Kierkegaard uses parables so prolifically that Oden was able to select the best ones and publish an entire book just consisting of Kierkegaard’s parables. This curiosity alone makes the question of Kierkegaard’s parables worth investigating, but the issue becomes much more pronounced when one examines the problem of indirect communication. Kierkegaard, in many of his writings, was concerned with the way in which certain truths could be communicated. He claimed that there were some things that could not be communicated directly, but instead required indirect communication. Given that he finds this important, and that there are a number of clues throughout his works that he is trying to indirectly communicate with his readers, it is of much importance to recognize the effect and purpose of the parables that Kierkegaard has strewn throughout his works. In order to see how these parables function in Kierkegaard’s corpus, we will also need to examine the purpose that he saw for his authorship. In The Point of View, we see Kierkegaard looking back on his works and describing his goals as an author. He claims that he was trying to turn people into Christians. He doesn’t do this by arguing for the truths of Christianity, but rather by trying to turn individuals inward and to cause each individual reader to seek redemption in Christ.