Talk:Leap of faith
|WikiProject Philosophy||(Rated Start-class)|
Søren Kierkegaard and Leap of Faith
The Søren Kierkegaard article is peppered with attributions giving him credit for coining the term "leapoffaith". This article dismisses the claim. Can anyone reconcile these? --Talinus 02:20, 25 April 2006 (UTC) This article is erroneous. Camus coined the to describe Kierkegaard's reaction to the absurd. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 06:19, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
We live forward but we understand backward
From Putnam's "A Reconsideration of Dewey Democracy": "James quotes [in Pragmatism, 105] an aphorism of Kierkegaard's (whom he could not have read, since Kierkegaard had not been translated into any language James read) to the effect that "We live forward but we understand backward."" Where, in Kierkegaard, do we find this aphorism? And how might James discovered it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 06:40, 3 April 2007 (UTC).
- The aphorism comes from the Journals. William James found the aphorism in the works of Harald Høffding. Høffding incorporated some of the works of Kierkegaard into his survey of philosophy, and that's probably one of the few ways James, and other American philosophers pre-1920s, knows about Kierkegaard. Poor Yorick 02:43, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Moved from main article
2. Marcus Dahle  (1402). Died by punishment for blasfemi. [Marcus stood for that the only god there was; should be mankind and no "holy power" never to be seen or heard from. The church could have that so they ordered that he should pay the price for blasfemi. Marcus used this sentence and said: "No god will ever smite me; They only one to serve punishments is the people. And it is exactly what happends. It isn't god that punish me; It is the priests and the church!"
Interpretation of Kierkegaard
I added a NPOV tag. The neo-orthodox interpretation of Kierkegaard is one among many (liberal, postmodern, existentialist). There are internationally respected scholars that would disagree with the content of this article, particularly the last paragraph.
i haven't looked over the edit history of this article in detail, but somewhere along the line it appears that somebody simply cut the opening and pasted it further down in the body, without making any amendments. this meant that the new opening sentence read "The phrase is commonly attributed to . . . ", which is obviously not the way to open an article. i have tried to fix this by merely cutting the two sentences that were originally the FIRST two from the body and moving them back to the start. this may disrupt the flow of that part of the body somewhat, but at least the article now has an introduction at the start as opposed to 1/8 of the way down . . . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 07:02, 29 November 2012 (UTC)