Reading: Kierkegaard’s Critique of Modernity: An Existential Challenge from a Christian Perspective

Kierkegaard’s Critique of Modernity: An Existential Challenge from a Christian Perspective

Søren Kierkegaard (1813–1855), often regarded as the father of existentialism, was a profound critic of modernity. Like Friedrich Nietzsche, Kierkegaard was concerned with the failures of modern Western philosophy, but his critique was rooted in his deeply Christian perspective. Kierkegaard believed that the Enlightenment's emphasis on reason, systematization, and objective truth neglected the core of human existence: the individual’s subjective experience, particularly in relation to faith. His work revolves around the tension between reason and faith, the existential anxieties that define human life, and the need for personal authenticity in the face of modernity's impersonal, rational systems.

Kierkegaard’s critique of modernity focuses on the individual’s relationship with God and the profound anxiety that arises from confronting the paradoxes of existence. He offers a distinct response to the Enlightenment's faith in reason by centering his philosophy on the lived experience of faith, despair, and choice.

a. Critique of the Enlightenment and Hegelianism

Kierkegaard’s critique of modernity begins with his rejection of the Enlightenment's emphasis on reason and systematization, particularly as manifested in the philosophy of G.W.F. Hegel. Hegel's grand metaphysical system sought to explain all aspects of existence through the lens of rationality and universal truth. For Hegel, the individual was subsumed into the larger historical and metaphysical narrative of "absolute spirit," where all contradictions would eventually resolve in a higher synthesis.

Kierkegaard vehemently opposed this Hegelian vision. He believed that Hegel’s system reduced individuals to mere parts of a grand scheme, denying the subjective, personal dimension of human life. To Kierkegaard, Hegel's system was an abstraction that ignored the real struggles of existence, particularly the existential dilemmas faced by individuals in their pursuit of faith, meaning, and ethical action. In contrast, Kierkegaard argued that human existence could not be neatly explained by rational systems or universal truths. Instead, it was characterized by uncertainty, contradiction, and the need for personal choice.

Kierkegaard wrote:

"Life can only be understood backwards, but it must be lived forwards."
(Journals, 1843)

This statement reflects Kierkegaard's belief that existence is not something that can be fully comprehended or systematized. Life is lived in the moment, full of choices and anxieties, and cannot be reduced to an abstract system. Kierkegaard's rejection of Hegelianism is part of his broader critique of modernity, which he saw as overly reliant on reason and neglectful of the individual’s subjective reality.

b. The Leap of Faith and Subjectivity

One of Kierkegaard’s most enduring contributions to philosophy is his concept of the leap of faith. He argued that true religious faith requires a leap—an irrational, non-rational act of commitment that goes beyond what reason or evidence can justify. This leap of faith stands in stark contrast to modernity’s emphasis on rational belief systems and its assumption that truth can be reached through reason alone.

For Kierkegaard, faith is not something that can be proven or logically defended. It is a deeply personal, subjective experience that involves a paradoxical relationship with the infinite and the divine. The leap of faith is necessary because the relationship between human beings and God is fundamentally irrational and cannot be fully grasped by the human mind. Kierkegaard’s famous example of this is the biblical story of Abraham, who was commanded by God to sacrifice his son Isaac. Abraham's willingness to obey, despite the lack of any rational justification for this command, exemplifies the leap of faith.

Kierkegaard also famously proclaimed that truth is subjectivity. By this, he did not mean that all truths are relative, but rather that the most important truths—particularly those concerning faith and ethics—are deeply personal and cannot be derived from abstract reasoning. Truth, for Kierkegaard, is not found in universal systems but in the lived experience of the individual, especially in their relationship with God.

He wrote:

"Subjectivity is truth, subjectivity is reality."
(Concluding Unscientific Postscript, 1846)

In Kierkegaard’s view, objective knowledge can never grasp the full depth of human experience. Faith, love, and ethical responsibility are matters of subjective truth that require personal commitment, not detached observation. This focus on subjectivity and the leap of faith represents a fundamental challenge to the rationalist assumptions of modernity.

c. Despair, Anxiety, and Authenticity

Kierkegaard’s exploration of despair and anxiety forms a central part of his critique of modernity. He believed that modern life, with its focus on reason and universal systems, led individuals away from their true, authentic selves. Instead of confronting the uncertainties and contradictions of existence, modernity offered false comforts in the form of rational explanations and social conventions. Kierkegaard saw this as a recipe for despair.

In The Sickness Unto Death (1849), Kierkegaard described despair as a condition in which individuals fail to fully realize or embrace their true selves. Despair arises when people conform to societal norms or attempt to escape the existential demands of life by losing themselves in distractions. According to Kierkegaard, true selfhood can only be achieved through a relationship with God, a relationship that requires confronting the self in all its weakness and limitations.

Kierkegaard also introduced the concept of anxiety (or angst) as a fundamental aspect of human existence. Anxiety, for Kierkegaard, is the result of human freedom—the awareness that we have the power to choose and that our choices define who we are. This freedom brings with it a sense of profound responsibility and uncertainty, which leads to existential anxiety. Unlike the modern ideal of progress and certainty, Kierkegaard saw life as fundamentally uncertain, and this uncertainty could not be resolved through rational thought.

He wrote:

"Anxiety is the dizziness of freedom."
(The Concept of Anxiety, 1844)

For Kierkegaard, anxiety is not something to be overcome or avoided but is an essential part of what it means to be human. It is through confronting this anxiety—through making choices in the face of uncertainty—that individuals can achieve authenticity and become true selves.

d. Kierkegaard’s Influence on Existentialism and Modern Theology

Kierkegaard’s emphasis on subjectivity, anxiety, and the leap of faith had a profound influence on later existentialist thinkers. Philosophers like Martin Heidegger and Jean-Paul Sartre drew on Kierkegaard’s exploration of the absurdity of existence and the need for personal authenticity. While Sartre and Heidegger developed a more secular existentialism, Kierkegaard’s insights into human freedom, anxiety, and the necessity of confronting the meaning of existence remain central themes in existentialist thought.

Heidegger, for instance, expanded on Kierkegaard’s analysis of anxiety, arguing that anxiety reveals the nothingness that lies at the heart of existence. Sartre, meanwhile, developed Kierkegaard’s ideas about freedom and responsibility, arguing that humans are condemned to be free and that they must create their own meaning in an indifferent universe.

Kierkegaard’s influence also extended to modern Christian theology. 20th-century theologians like Karl Barth and Paul Tillich were deeply impacted by Kierkegaard’s critique of institutionalized Christianity and his focus on the individual’s relationship with God. Barth, in particular, reexamined the role of faith in Christian theology, arguing that faith is not a matter of rational assent but a personal, existential encounter with God. Tillich, similarly, explored the role of existential anxiety in religious experience, drawing on Kierkegaard’s insights into the tension between faith and reason.

Religious Ground Motive Critique: Kierkegaard through the Lens of Roy Clouser

From the perspective of Roy Clouser’s religious ground motive framework, Kierkegaard’s critique of modernity reflects a deep commitment to the Christian ground motive of creation-fall-redemption. Clouser argues that all philosophical thought is shaped by underlying religious commitments or ground motives, whether or not they are explicitly acknowledged. In Kierkegaard’s case, his entire philosophy is rooted in the belief that human beings are fundamentally dependent on God and that true selfhood can only be achieved through faith.

Kierkegaard’s rejection of Hegelianism and Enlightenment rationalism can be understood as a rejection of the modern ground motive of nature-autonomy. Modern philosophy, in Kierkegaard’s view, had become obsessed with the idea that human reason could fully explain reality and that individuals could achieve self-sufficiency through rationality. Kierkegaard’s emphasis on subjectivity, faith, and anxiety represents a return to the Christian ground motive, where human existence is seen as a deeply personal, dependent relationship with the Creator.

Clouser’s framework highlights the tension in Kierkegaard’s thought between the individual’s autonomy (expressed through freedom and choice) and their dependence on God (expressed through faith). For Clouser, this tension is central to the Christian worldview, where humans are free moral agents but are also creatures who are ultimately dependent on God for their existence and salvation. Kierkegaard’s philosophy, with its focus on the leap of faith and the existential struggles of the individual, encapsulates this tension and critiques modernity’s failure to acknowledge it.

In Clouser’s terms, Kierkegaard’s critique of modernity can be seen as a defense of the Christian ground motive against the secular ground motive of nature-autonomy. By emphasizing faith, subjectivity, and the limits of reason, Kierkegaard challenges the modern assumption that human beings can find meaning, truth, and selfhood apart from God.

Conclusion: Kierkegaard’s Christian Critique of Modernity

Søren Kierkegaard’s critique of modernity offers a profound challenge to the rationalist and universalist assumptions of Enlightenment philosophy. Through his emphasis on subjectivity, faith, anxiety, and despair, Kierkegaard calls individuals to confront the deepest questions of existence—questions that cannot be answered by reason alone. His rejection of Hegelianism and his critique of modern systems of thought reflect his belief that human life is not a matter of abstract reasoning but of lived experience, particularly in relation to God.

Through the lens of Roy Clouser’s religious ground motive framework, Kierkegaard’s philosophy can be understood as a defense of the Christian worldview against modernity’s secular assumptions. Kierkegaard’s call for the leap of faith and his exploration of existential anxiety remind us that true selfhood and meaning can only be found in a relationship with God, a relationship that transcends the limits of human reason