Blog 6 -- 2/19/14

Suffice it to say, upon further introspection and consideration of the text, I agree with the audience member who suggested Kierkegaard's Spheres represent a trichotomy into the extremes—wherein no one exists. It is no difficult task to entertain the thought of these encompassing all of humanity insomuch as horoscopes or personality tests, ambiguous as their results may be, tell us exactly who we are. Rather, it is much more likely that these Spheres are not spheres at all, but exist as a continuum (if at all) such that one may fall in between two categories, if not amongst all three, which brings me to my second point: If one is represented, at least to some extent, by multiple categories, is Kierkegaard’s framework of linear transition insufficient? It follows from this logic that an individual could exist in both the Aesthetic and Religious Spheres, but not the Ethical. According to Kierkegaard, however, in addition to these stages existing as discrete (contrary to that which I allude), there is an orderly and predictable flow between them. If, as Thad points out, some readily identifiable features differentiate the Aesthetic from the Ethical (namely rules and duty), then can we also elucidate the features that separate the Aesthetic from the Religious and therefore circumnavigate the Ethical Sphere altogether as we journey to the so-called pinnacle of our being (i.e. if the aesthete comes about accepting rules, duty and sin all at once, could he or she bypass the Ethical Sphere?)? Let’s reconsider—with respect to this question—Kierkegaard’s premise of existing only in one Sphere at a given time. Now, must one still follow the exact order that Kierkegaard offers us, from Aesthetic to Ethical to Religious? Say, for example, one has identified with the Religious Sphere for as long as he can remember, but not long ago experienced a “falling-out” with his faith. Feeling as though he has been deprived of countless luxuries due to the restrictions imposed upon him by his rules, duties, and faith, the man assumes a life of immediate satisfaction and gratification. Has he not just transitioned from Religious to Aesthetic without passage through the Ethical?

Yours Tru.ly