Model Answer
0 min readIntroduction
Søren Kierkegaard, a 19th-century Danish philosopher, is widely regarded as the father of existentialism. Central to his philosophy is the concept of ‘subjectivity as truth’ and the profound significance of individual choice. For Kierkegaard, existence precedes essence, meaning individuals are not born with a predetermined purpose but create their own through the choices they make. These choices aren’t merely intellectual exercises but passionate commitments that define the self. Understanding Kierkegaard’s notion of choice is crucial for grasping the core tenets of existentialism, and contrasting it with the approaches to choice within metaethics and normative ethics reveals fundamental differences in how moral philosophy understands the nature of morality itself.
Kierkegaard’s Concept of Choice
Kierkegaard’s understanding of choice is deeply rooted in his religious and existential concerns. He rejects the Hegelian notion of a rational, objective system of ethics. For Kierkegaard, choice is not about selecting the objectively ‘best’ option, but about passionately committing to a particular way of being. This commitment is inherently subjective and involves a ‘leap of faith’ – a decision made despite the absence of absolute certainty.
- Subjectivity and Truth: Kierkegaard argued that truth is not an objective reality to be discovered, but a subjective experience to be lived. Choice, therefore, is not about finding the ‘true’ moral path, but about creating a meaningful existence through passionate commitment.
- The Three Stages on Life’s Way: Kierkegaard outlined three stages of existence – the aesthetic, the ethical, and the religious. Each stage represents a different way of relating to the self and to the world, and each involves a crucial choice. The aesthetic life is characterized by pleasure-seeking, the ethical by duty and social norms, and the religious by a direct, personal relationship with God.
- Anxiety and Despair: Choice is accompanied by anxiety, stemming from the awareness of freedom and the responsibility that comes with it. Failure to make a genuine choice, or choosing inauthentically, leads to despair – a state of alienation from oneself.
- The Individual and Responsibility: Kierkegaard emphasizes the individual’s absolute responsibility for their choices. There are no external authorities or objective standards to justify or excuse one’s actions.
Metaethics vs. Normative Ethics
To understand how Kierkegaard’s concept of choice differs, it’s essential to distinguish between metaethics and normative ethics.
Normative Ethics
Normative ethics concerns itself with establishing moral standards and principles to guide right action. It attempts to answer questions like “What should I do?” and “What is morally good?” Different normative ethical theories, such as utilitarianism, deontology, and virtue ethics, offer different frameworks for determining moral obligations. Choice, within this framework, is typically understood as the application of these principles to specific situations. The focus is on identifying the morally correct choice based on pre-defined standards.
Metaethics
Metaethics, on the other hand, steps back from the question of what is right or wrong and asks questions about the nature of moral judgments themselves. It explores the meaning of moral terms like ‘good’ and ‘bad’, the objectivity or subjectivity of moral truths, and the foundations of moral knowledge. Metaethics doesn’t tell you what to do; it investigates what it *means* to talk about morality.
Choice in Metaethics and Normative Ethics: A Comparison
| Feature | Normative Ethics | Metaethics | Kierkegaard’s View |
|---|---|---|---|
| Focus | Determining moral standards | Understanding the nature of morality | Subjective, passionate commitment |
| Role of Choice | Applying moral principles | Analyzing the meaning of moral judgments | Defining the self through commitment |
| Objectivity | Often seeks objective moral truths | Questions the possibility of objective moral truths | Rejects objective morality; emphasizes subjectivity |
| Rationality | Emphasizes rational deliberation | Examines the role of reason in morality | Highlights the role of faith and passion |
Within metaethics, choice is often examined in terms of moral motivation, free will, and the possibility of moral realism or anti-realism. For example, a moral realist might argue that our choices reflect our beliefs about objective moral truths, while a moral anti-realist might argue that our choices are based on subjective preferences or cultural norms. Kierkegaard’s view diverges significantly from both. He doesn’t seek to justify morality through reason or objective standards; instead, he sees choice as a fundamental aspect of human existence that creates meaning and defines the self. His emphasis on the ‘leap of faith’ suggests that choice often transcends rational justification.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Kierkegaard’s concept of choice is a radical departure from traditional ethical frameworks. While normative ethics focuses on identifying the ‘right’ choice based on pre-defined principles, and metaethics investigates the nature of moral judgments, Kierkegaard emphasizes the subjective, passionate, and self-defining nature of choice. His philosophy highlights the individual’s responsibility for creating meaning in a world devoid of inherent purpose, and underscores the importance of authentic existence through committed action. This existentialist perspective continues to resonate in contemporary ethical debates, challenging us to confront the fundamental questions of freedom, responsibility, and the meaning of life.
Answer Length
This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.