Model Answer
0 min readIntroduction
Søren Kierkegaard, a 19th-century Danish philosopher, is widely considered the father of existentialism. He vehemently opposed the Hegelian emphasis on a rational, objective system of truth, arguing instead for the primacy of subjective experience. Kierkegaard’s philosophy centers around the individual’s lived experience, particularly their relationship to faith and existence. He believed that genuine truth isn’t discovered through detached reasoning, but through passionate, personal commitment. This question asks us to explore how Kierkegaard defines truth in terms of subjectivity and to critically evaluate this perspective, acknowledging its strengths and potential weaknesses.
Kierkegaard’s Concept of Subjectivity
For Kierkegaard, subjectivity is not merely a psychological state, but an ontological condition – a fundamental aspect of what it means to be human. He distinguishes between objective truth, which concerns facts and propositions that can be universally verified, and subjective truth, which concerns how an individual relates to those facts. He argues that objective truth, while important, is ultimately lifeless and meaningless without subjective appropriation.
Kierkegaard outlines three ‘stages on life’s way’ – the aesthetic, the ethical, and the religious. Each stage represents a different mode of existence and a different relationship to truth. The aesthetic stage is characterized by a pursuit of pleasure and avoidance of commitment. The ethical stage involves adherence to universal moral principles. However, Kierkegaard argues that true fulfillment comes only with the religious stage, which requires a ‘leap of faith’ – a passionate, subjective commitment to God that transcends reason and objective evidence.
Truth as Appropriation and Passion
Kierkegaard’s famous dictum, “truth is subjectivity,” doesn’t mean that objective facts are irrelevant. Rather, it means that truth only becomes meaningful when it is appropriated by an individual with passion and commitment. He uses the analogy of owning a house: knowing facts *about* a house is different from *owning* and living in it. Similarly, knowing theological doctrines is different from having a personal, lived relationship with God.
He emphasizes the importance of ‘existence’ – the concrete, lived reality of the individual. Truth isn’t a theoretical concept to be grasped intellectually, but a way of being in the world. This is illustrated in his pseudonymous work, *Either/Or* (1843), where he contrasts the detached, objective perspective of the ‘Judge Wilhelm’ with the passionate, subjective experience of ‘A’, the aesthetic individual.
Critical Analysis: Relativism and Beyond
Kierkegaard’s emphasis on subjectivity has been criticized for potentially leading to relativism – the idea that truth is entirely relative to the individual and that there are no objective standards of truth. If truth is simply what an individual believes, then any belief, no matter how irrational or harmful, could be considered ‘true’ for that individual.
However, Kierkegaard anticipates this criticism. He doesn’t argue that *any* subjective belief is true. Instead, he suggests that genuine subjective truth requires a certain level of intensity, commitment, and self-awareness. The ‘leap of faith’ is not a blind leap, but a conscious and deliberate choice made in the face of uncertainty. Furthermore, Kierkegaard’s focus is not on establishing universal truths, but on understanding the conditions for authentic human existence.
Another critique centers on the potential for solipsism – the belief that only one’s own mind is sure to exist. Kierkegaard’s intense focus on the individual could be interpreted as isolating individuals from one another and from the wider world. However, his emphasis on communication and the importance of relating to others suggests that he doesn’t advocate for complete isolation.
Conclusion
Kierkegaard’s definition of truth as subjectivity represents a radical departure from traditional philosophical approaches. While his views are open to criticism, particularly regarding the potential for relativism, his emphasis on the importance of personal commitment, passionate engagement, and authentic existence remains profoundly influential. He challenges us to move beyond abstract theorizing and to confront the fundamental questions of what it means to be human, urging us to actively *become* the truth rather than merely *knowing* it. His work continues to resonate with those seeking meaning and purpose in a complex and uncertain world.
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.