Fear And Trembling Kierkegaard

The biblical Abraham is a dichotomous figure. His attempt to sacrifice Isaac under God’s command is either lauded as a great act of faith, or the lunacy of a murderer. In Fear and Trembling, Kierkegaard suggests that it is impossible to justify the actions of Abraham from an ethical point of view. From a religious perspective however, Kierkegaard believes that not only is Abraham justified, his decision is also commendable. This argument is prefaced with Kierkegaard’s characterizations of the ethical as the universal and the religious as the individual, of which I will expound upon. I am of the opinion however, that Abraham cannot be justified at all. I will attempt to illustrate this while working within the framework of the universal and …show more content…
While Kierkegaard himself is unsure of how to exactly achieve this faith, he maintains that it is through the religious that Abraham is justified. In the religious, Abraham possesses a direct relationship with the absolute (i.e. God), and is therefore only responsible for completing God’s commands. He can no longer be held accountable for his actions by the ethical, as faith has raised him above the universal. In this way, Abraham appears to be justified by the religious, because he has performed his duty of obeying God’s commands. Yet, as Kierkegaard himself has admitted, Abraham’s justification is a paradox in itself, and while he views this as a part of the nature of faith, I believe that it is proof that Abraham cannot be justified at …show more content…
This does not impede the reality that the rest of the world exists and operates in the ethical. Unless he is able to completely isolate himself from the world, then he is in some way constrained by its rules. In other words, it is doubtful that Abraham is capable of achieving the religious. Kierkegaard might argue that the fact that Abraham is able to refrain from the temptation of doing what is considered ethically sound is proof that he has risen above the universal as an individual. One could argue however that rather than truly obtaining faith, Abraham has simply gone mad. In addition, some might argue that there is a standard for him to be evaluated by in the religious, that being God himself. This risks the same paradox as mentioned above however, since nobody can access the relationship between God and Abraham except themselves. Thus, anyone outside of this immediate relationship will never be told of or become understanding of Abraham’s actions and the reasons behind it. Furthermore, when one travels outside the jurisdiction of religion, then the appeal to the religious loses its validity. If one is convinced that the world only consists of the aesthetic and ethical, then the religious cannot be used to justify Abraham any