Kierkegaard on Subjectivity as Truth
The title: Concluding Unscientific Postscript
Indirect communication plays an integral part in Ks research. His pseudonym is based
on a medieval monk. The text is called postscript, which is ironic because a postscript is
usually short, whereas Ks postscript is dense and enormous. The suggestion taken for
concluding in the title is thought to be a conclusion to his own career because he
intended to retire from academia to becoming a pastor. The title, unscientific, uses this
term in opposition to science in general, but also to refer to the Hegelian system. The
Hegelian system is the most cogent attack on the subjectivity of truth. The idea of a
fragment that is something that is not part of a systematic whole. It simply is a fragment.
Two different Meaning of "Subjective"
For there to be truth, substance must become subject. Truth is subjectivity. On the other
hand, we also do see, and have seen, the subject in hegels sense, the subject is not
you or me, but spirit itself, which we can think of as a collective self, it is the subject of
the human being that Hegel wants to protect from the system.
Subjective and objective thinking: are they reconcilable?
Objective thinking seems to be reflection on some sort of objectivity that can be
expressed in the appropriate word. The other counterpoint to this is the double reflection
of subjective thinking, you have first objective thinking, and then you reflect on yourself,
so that you move from the object, the content of the thought, to the how and the who of
thinking. A final distinction would be that in objective thinking, the results are really what
matters, while in subjective thinking, it's the inwardness and the process of becoming, it
is bow the thought is turned back to the individual. The question you want to ask when
you get the binary distinction, is if we can combine both sides to some sort of higher
level of thinking, can you reconcile both? K says yes, both matter and result matter.
1. This reconciliation subordinates the appropriation to the result, this higher form of
reconciliation. Value both method and result. Once you attain the result with some
certainty, how you get there matters less.
2. That the reconciliation renders the individual indifferent and accidental to the result.
The thing known is unchanged by being known by you. Whether you know two plus two
equals four is indifferent to whether you know it or not. The emphasis on the result,
would be something to which your individuality is indifferent.
3. That your own individuality becomes indifferent to you. You yourself are no longer
concerned with yourself. 4. That once you see yourself indiffer