Possible Explanation of Kierkegaard’s Reasoning :: Essays Papers

Possible Explanation of Kierkegaards ReasoningAs some philosophers suggest, an individual may only manage what he knows through experience. What is sensed equals what is known. Because we extrapolate affaires through our senses, whence what we understand must also be expressed through our senses. We represent that companionship through oral communication. Language is a means of transferring our experiences to a concrete, literal form, so the sensuous can be made known in the psyche. To pick up a snake (itself a linguistic representation of my experience), I efficacy use the word, slimy, thus, I have distinguished one feeling from other feeling. Language also informs our perceptions of an quarry. We h atrial auricle the sound of a word, and our brains conjur an image of the object the word represents. This image is then transferred into our own experience. If I say, slimy, you may cogitate of mud or moreoverter or a kiss, not inescapably a snake. These images atomi c number 18 not right or wrong, but are based on your experiences. You will think of those things until, through my comparison of a snake to other objects and characteristics you do know, you can understand another thing that could possibly represent the word, slimy. What if someone wishes to discuss something outside of sensual or intellectual human experience? Because we cannot escape the use of sensual-psychic speech to apologise experience and knowledge of experience, even an experience beyond the sensual-psychic must be expressed through the common words that is received through the ear and processed through the brain. Jesus knew this full well, choosing to speak in parables kinda than outlining theories and eldritch realities. We listen better to stories with objects and plots we can understand. His audience identified with agriculture, shepherding, wedding ceremony feasts, and inheritances. And although he knew the people could not comprehend the fullness of meaning croup his stories, storytelling was the most effective way to shed any light on the world of the spirit. As Paul Tillich says, once we take literally the language we use to represent ultimate concerns (things of the spirit), then we have made language into an idol ____________. Kierkegaard predated Tillich with his statement that all human language about the spiritual . . . is essentially transferred or metaphorical language(199). To prevent our understanding of language from remaining in the literal or sensuous-psychic state, and thus becoming idolatrous, then we must see it as a symbol, participating in the actual, but not the actual itself __________.