Is it simply my human nature that makes me dissatisfied with Kierkegaard's explanation of the limit of our understanding, of the paradox of the unknown? I get it, we want what we can't have, and it's a self-perpetuating cycle, whatever. His account makes attempts to rationally prove God's existence not only foredoomed, but asinine. "You can't get there rationally, deal with it and either jump (leap of faith) or don't," basically doesn't do it for me. And this makes me even angrier because my dissatisfaction seems to almost prove his point. Am I just stuck in the Soren's cycle? Or can I put my reason to good use and get past this limit Kierkegaard imposed, if that's the correct term... I'm not sure my qualms can be settled in class, I just thought I'd voice my frustration.
0 comments:
Post a Comment