Talk:Søren Kierkegaard/Archive 4

Tone

I don't know if this has come up before, but there is a slightly gushy and intimate tone that seems non-encyclopaedic. Easy to fix, but I don't know if others agree. Agent Cooper (talk) 19:10, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

having read only the early life section I would agree with that - it also has effaced , what I thought was accepted , that his father had a very gloomy Christianity, Lutheran, obsessed with theology kind of person, and that this effected K. very much. the section I read reminded me of the bios a TV programme called Blue Peter used to do, perfectly fine and approachable but intended for children. thats how the section seemed to me anyhow. Sayerslle (talk) 12:18, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Translators

noooo and Howard Hong have been left out of the translators section. Their editions of his works seem to be the most widely used in the ethical/existential arena. Also, maybe more detail about the styles of translations is needed since they vary widely and Kierkegaard was given to innuendo. Hence a Christian would read his original text very differently to an Existentialist or 'Absurdist'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.241.134.140 (talk) 05:43, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.nlx.com/collections/73 —useful data regarding the first Indiana U and second Indiana U editions in relation to the Princeton U

including U.S. National Book Award, Translation, 1968 (Hong & Hong, first ed., vol. 1). --P64 (talk) 18:00, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Howard and Edna Hong". Howard V. and Edna H. Hong Kierkegaard Library. St. Olaf College.

I have slightly improved the Translators section, providing references to the official National Book Awards 1969 and these two web pages —without reading this one. --P64 (talk) 19:04, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Help to find the book, please

Hello! Please give an online link to the English translation of the book of Kierkegaard "Stages of the life course". It is a poor user of Russia. Need translation. I would be very grateful. Kirill-Hod (talk) 17:04, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Thorn in the flesh".

What about adding a section on Kierkegaard's "Thorn in the flesh"? I edited a quotation here, but there is still much to say on this subject: from The Thorn in the Flesh on wikiquote to all these books: 1 & 2. And so on: [1] & [2]. --Mauro Lanari (talk) 08:06, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fields and levels of a Christian in Philosophy of S. Kierkegaard

1.1.Kierkegaard, Sōren said something like the level of human life. Normally the man in the flesh is most outstanding in the world and he is the first level of existence. Then as a person formed primarily emotional lives and only then, later, comes the spiritual level, it may not be strictly defined at all.

They do not go one after the other, a Christian, normal perceive that as a distinct but related fields of reality. As for ethics,it does not come out sooner rather than religiosity and springs only, otherw12:56, 27 October 2012 (UTC)93.136.51.137 (talk)ise it would by itself have greatly changed the ethics of man, the world, and this is not the case. The case is that the human component of religiosity and the beginning of his, he's very easy to be called ethics, not knowing that ethics is not a product of effective implementation of the work of a variety of ethical ideals. And then, in religion, in the Holy Spirit and the love of the Father and of the Son, the only gifts flourish and human conscience is ripe for confession of sin. It often occurs in old age, but there are lots of examples and against such claims. However, we see a world that is growing up, it seems that much the world needs to age a bit and even then,not every man will be taken on the Re-entry.

It can be seen that the speech is not secularized, secularization is what Paul speaks of the proclamation of the language that is understandable to the one that listen the God's word.

Assessment: Lower from B to C

I agree with previous editors who posted that this article is an incomprehensible, gushy, idiosyncratic mess that is cluttered with numerous quotes, some large enough to engulf a small village. It seems to have been taken on as a personal project by one or more editors, who need to learn that clarity and restraint are precious gifts to the reader. • Serviceable†Villain 09:32, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Most of the quotes from this article could be abandoned, especially the huge one in the middle. Geez. Icarus of old (talk) 01:52, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I came across this article a couple of days ago and couldn't plow through it because of all the quotes and digressions. Admittedly, I'm not a fan of philosophy, but I suspect this article (despite the good intro) would drive away most potential fans. OK, I like history, and was amused to note near the article's beginning that Kierkegaard didn't like historical works. Frankly, that seems the article's viewpoint too--I had trouble locating even the basic historical outline of his relatively short life. Other articles about philosophers and theologians generally start with a historical background, then explanations of the person's contributions to a particular area of expertise. Not here. The digressions really started in the Journals subsection of the Early Years section (which inclusion in that supposedly life-history area makes no sense). The huge text inclusions in the next subsection, about Regine Olsen, who has a separate article herself, really lost me. So maybe Kierkegard himself drove me away from exploring his philosophy or theology.... Still, I tried skimming, both a couple of days ago and again this morning. I still couldn't find the basics, only got distracted by the article's pervasive wordiness and passive constructions -- then annoyed enough to write here on the talk page.Jweaver28 (talk) 13:15, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Some of it borders on the bizarre. --Agent Cooper (talk) 01:40, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Honored by Google

I have removed this reference from the lead as I think it is inappropriate. In any case, I could not find trace on Google itself of the doodle mentioned either in the English or Danish search pages.--Ipigott (talk) 21:00, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's not the 5th of May here yet (at least not for the next 7 minutes). It will probably show up then, but at any rate it shouldn't be mentioned before the event. --Saddhiyama (talk) 21:54, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Google doodle is now showing on Google.dk. --Saddhiyama (talk) 22:06, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to see it's been moved to a more appropriate place. The doodle should at any rate ensure that many more people look at the Wikipedia articles on Kierkegaard in various languages.--Ipigott (talk) 07:35, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

First long quote in section 5

Hi. There's a mistake somewhere in the text or background for the first of the long quotes in section 5. The latin quote de te narrator fabula is either wrong in the source or has been wrongly transcribed from the source, and the translation given is wrong however this might be. As written, the quote reads of you the storyteller the fable. In my opinion, it is likely that the original quote should be (literally) of you is told (the) fable, the correct form of the latin verb being narratur, which is the present tense 3. person singular passive. As I see it, this also makes the following parts of the long quote easier to understand, as the formal subject is included in the tale of the statistics. However, as I don't have the original source at hand, I'm unable to do the source-checking myself. Whether the error has been made by Swenson or the WP editor has consequences for the action to be taken. If the error is present in the source, it should be noted in the quote, at least with a [sic], but preferably, to reach a wider audience, with a comment in WP's voice along the lines of "Sic. The quote is wrongly translated in the source. The correct translation reads the fable is told of you." As an alternative "(Sic. see comment below)," with the full comment alongside the bibliographical comment at the end of the quote box, could be considered.

Best regards, benjamil ^talk/_edits 07:47, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relevance of 'young seducer'

I came here solely as a reader, knowing very little about SK .... However I wonder what is the relevance of Peder Ludvig Møller, a young "seducer", the link merely leads to an Amazon cover, with no review : (Henrik Stangerup wrote a book called Seducer which identified Moller as a seducer; see this review of his book from Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Seducer-Henrik-Stangerup/dp/0714529869).

If Møller having been identified as a seducer is NOT relevant to the Corsair affair, it doesn't seem to belong here. The effect on me as a reader was to assume that his being a seducer was in some way relevant to his altercation with SK, which it doesn't seem to be. If I am wrong, perhaps the article should make clearer the relevance, otherwise it just seems like 'tittle-tattle' from someone who APPEARS to be a writer of fiction.Pincrete (talk) 19:10, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've just removed the 'seducer' reference, as the source is a novel (I had to go to Danish wikipedia to find that out) and the information seems anyway irrelevant to the Corsair affair.Pincrete (talk) 18:06, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

None English Title on English Wikipedia

Resolved

Curious why there are letters here that are not English? Especially in the Title page? Please fix.Presidentbalut (talk) 02:43, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Because the majority of reliable English language sources spell it that way. Please see substantially identical topic at Talk:René_Auberjonois#Name_spelling_illegal. - SummerPhD (talk) 03:52, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing to fix. - SummerPhD (talk) 13:59, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Philosophical criticism: Adorno

So, what's his critique? Only a critique of his critique (that's why he is in the Philosophical Criticism section, I suppose?) is mentioned in the article. --88.78.37.16 (talk) 14:00, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Soren Kierkegaard

I am interested in learning a bit more about Soren Kierkegaard just by looking and reading through the Wikipedia page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.253.7.138 (talk) 18:59, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This article deserves congratulations

Since Kierkeagaard must have the record for being the philosopher with the most frequently mispronounced surname, this article deserves congratulations for putting a "listen" feature which pronounce his name properly. It could, however, give clearer indication of pronunciation of his surname using Latin letters - how about "keer - ke - gawr"?Vorbee (talk) 17:28, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kierkegaard and Hegel

 This article mentions Hegel at quite an early stage in the article. Perhaps it could mention, as the Macmillan one-volume encyclopaedia says, that while Kierkegaard was critical of Hegel, he remained under Hegel's influence. Vorbee (talk) 19:47, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Søren Kierkegaard. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111125160840/http://www.english.upenn.edu/~mgamer/Etexts/kant.html to http://www.english.upenn.edu/~mgamer/Etexts/kant.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:20, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Søren Kierkegaard. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:51, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Regine Olsen

Should the section on Regine Olsen also add that Kierkegaard is alleged to have said "It is better to be inspired by a woman than to live with her"? The section could also add that Regine Olsen, unlike Kierkegaard himself, did later on get married. Vorbee (talk) 15:33, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The influence of Christianity upon SK

Forgive my ignorance, fellow Wikipedians:

Generally, my contributions are limited to adding to the lists of "influences" or "influenced," especially to Kierkegaard, one of the few individuals about which I feel semi-competent. Once or twice, I have added "Jesus" as an influence, only to have this reverted due to "writings, teachings and traditions about Jesus may have influenced Kierkegaard, but not Jesus himself." I objected to this by wondering if it is impossible to be influenced by Socrates but only by his commentators, that is, if to be considered a verifiable influence a body of written work is required? Most recently, I added the "New Testament," figuring that as a body of writing pervading not only SK's outlook (opinion, non-verifiable, I realize) but also containing discrete references, chapter and verse, throughout the Hong translations, that this as clear and evident, from whatever methodology, an influence as possibly be ascertained. This too was reverted, and a consensus asked for. What's the consensus? Thanks!

--Riseabove2 (talk) 02:45, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The New Testament is more like a foundation than an influence. The Influences section is for people who influenced thinking about foundational ideas. Adding the New Testament as an influence seems unnecessary; check Thomas Aquinas, Meister Eckhart or any other Christian writer or theologian, the New Testament is not listed as an influence, only those who influenced their thinking about theology are listed. - Epinoia (talk) 04:09, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Penguin classics

When available should we use penguin classics or the original covers. DMT biscuit (talk) 20:15, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This page's layout is an unwieldy mess

There are far too many pictures adding little to no value (why so many first pages of books???), mammoth quotations taking up dozens of lines, and text squeezed between two pieces of media repeatedly. I am thinking about excising a lot of this myself but wondering if any other talk page watchers want to collaborate with me on this. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:54, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Danish pronunciation

There is a very detailed Danish IPA pronunciation given for the name, with no sources. There is Danish audio (which can be considered original research). Basing our IPA pronunciation on it is clearly original research though and not acceptable due to WP:OR. I asked for a citation, but that was reverted. Adding this note here to justify my asking for a reasonable reference, considering I've been hearing anecdotal evidence about different pronunciation in Danish. roozbeh (talk) 22:05, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Roozbeh: Could you please be more specific? Danish phonology is quite predictable: Help:IPA/Danish. What alternative pronunciations do you have in mind? --Omnipaedista (talk) 23:46, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The German WP says it's [ˈsœːɔn ˈkʰiɔ̯g̊əˌg̊ɔːˀ]. This article claims it's [ˈsœːɐn ˈkʰiɐ̯kəˌkɒˀ]. They both have the same audio file, which is useless for users due to the confusing addition of the middle name. --Espoo (talk) 07:50, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Quote about a woman

The section on Regine Olsen could point out that Kierkegaard said "It is better to be inspired by a woman than it is to live with her", if any one can find a source for this quotations. Rollo August (talk) 21:05, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

35. Portrait of Wittgenstein.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:38, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kierkegaard's influences image contains duplicate of Plato

For the image https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Kierkegaard_influences.jpg, The caption says "From left to right: Wolff, Holberg, Hamann, Lessing, Plato and Socrates", but the last image is another bust of Plato, not of Socrates. Annoyingly, this isn't a very simple fix and there isn't a good way to discuss it in Wikimedia commons. Kit Cloudkicker (talk) 19:59, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Søren Kierkegaard quote re quote against comparison

This quote cannot be found in the named citation, nor can I find it anywhere in The Essential Kierkegaard Kierkegaard, Søren, author.; Hong, Edna H., editor.; Hong, Howard V., editor. Course Book; Princeton, NJ : Princeton University Press; 2013

The Essential Kierkegaard

Kierkegaard, Søren, author.; Hong, Edna H., editor.; Hong, Howard V., editor. Course Book; Princeton, NJ : Princeton University Press; 2013

Can anyone help me with this checking this source and if it really cannot be found, should it be removed? Imagination56 (talk) 03:09, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just an impression

This book about a philosopher is rather short. Nikolay Komarov (talk) 20:54, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kierkegaard should not be psychologically associated with Lutheranism.

The Lutheran denomination, and other self-claimed Christian denominations, would be wise to refrain from claiming unaffiliated philosophers in their attempts to increase their REIT-backed profit-margins. RagtimeRebel (talk) 19:58, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]