![]() ![]() Thus, this competing state of autonomy (having own space) and connectedness (as a couple) is dialectics.Example History of Relational Dialectics Theory #DIALECTIC RELATION PROFESSIONAL#But they also understand the need to have their own space and be their own person since they also have a professional relationship to look after. The couple understands that for the betterment of their relationship, they have to stay close to each other. New York from CS.Suppose Joe and Hailie are in a relationship and Hailie is also employed at Joe’s company. See Ethics Part Five- On Human Freedom- Propositions 35-36-37, (Elwes trans. ![]() ![]() Spinoza's involves becoming intuitively capable of understanding 'the path to salvation' and 'mens aquascientia' or total acquiescence of the 'mind couched in the intellectual love of god'. I asked this question because in my area of specialization, Spinoza, there exists another type of 'tension'. This 'fear' which haunts us comes as we have an inkling of understanding that in order to fulfill a 'new' destiny we must surrender to the spiritual part of our nature in order to become this 'synthesis' between animal and spirit. He attributed this gnawing fear that accompanies many people through the day and night as an intuitional yet faint yet haunting recognition that each of us is not just an evolutionary 'animal' fumbling our way through a micro-evolutionary stage of development, but that there is 'something' inside of us which comprises some type of 'spirit' or, at least, a spiritual component. I believe the answer to this question, which Kierkegaard responds to later in the text, comes when he defines 'angst' as 'the fear which arises at refusing to become yourself'. At this point, as with a Zen koan, you are simply supposed to meditate a while on the paradox.Ĭoincidentally, I asked this same question earlier this week. Therefore man cannot be self, yet we already demonstrated that man is self. So man is a relationship, but not the relationship that defines self. Man, on the other hand, is a synthesis between incommensurable opposites, the infinite and the finite. Self, as you notice, is defined recursively, it is a single thing in relationship with itself a closed loop a stable identity. The first part is just a transitive syllogism, man is spirit, spirit is self, therefore man is self -very logical and Hegelian.īut from here it all goes haywire. With that said, the paradox or opposition here is that man is and is not a self. #DIALECTIC RELATION SERIES#Like Lao Tzu, he's a philosopher of paradox, and you gain an apprehension of the grand sweep of his ideas by considering his series of oppositions in context, not by focusing in on the individual details. It can be difficult and misleading to try to comprehend Kierkegaard line by line. It's dialectical, almost definitely, but it doesn't sound like the parts of Hegel I've read on consciousness and the will-the intro to Philosophy of Right.Īnyway, I stopped reading there and decided to ask for help. And I'm not sure why man is not yet a self when regarded in this way. But "a relation which relates itself to its own self" is a little harder to grasp. When he's talking about how man is a synthesis, he means between spirit and body. So far I think I've figured out what he means by some of the last stuff. (The bracketed bits were bracketed in the text.) A synthesis is a relation between two factors. Man is a synthesis of the infinite and the finite, of the temporal and the eternal, of freedom and necessity, in short it is a synthesis. But what is the self? The self is a relation which relates itself to its own self, or it is that in the relation that the relation relates itself to its own self the self is not the relation but that the relation relates itself to its own self. At the beginning of the first chapter of The Sickness Unto Death we find the paragraph ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |