Re: Johannes de Silentio
- Jim R.,
You write: "Any "John" is therefore an aesthetic character of sorts."
I completely disagree. Johannes Climacus is on the borderline between
the sphere of religiousness A and the sphere of religiousness B.
Johannes de silentio has made the movement of infinite resignation.
Both these characters are two levels removed from the aesthete.
- Needed to pay closer attention to the last paragraph of that post:
<<So that means any character engaged in the act of contemplative reflection without decision is engaging in an aesthetic activity. Johannes Climacus--the highest and greatest reflective character of them all--is engaging in a "thought experiment" and I suspect Johannes de Silentio should be understood as his own type of reflective character, perhaps exploring our silences through reflection.>>
I emphasize "engaging in an aesthetic activity" in this paragraph. Yes, Johannes Climacus is an RA character--he says so. But he also says the entire work is a "thought experiment" and says at the end that he wrote it "to be revoked." He's an RA character engaging in a reflective/aesthetic activity; he knows his activity is reflective/aesthetic; so he downplays it, says not to cite him as an authority, says the book is to be revoked, says it is a thought experiment, etc. There's a reason all these characters are named "Johannes."
- Jim R., You seem to be mistaken about what is meant by the passion of
silence. Never any quote to support what on the face seems a total
A tension arises, a lack 0f congruency, between the visible surface
of action and utterance (what we can be seen to do and heard to say),
and their underlying intentions (what we are actually about and what
we mean). There is always this reasoning to an "outside" that is
never given in the passion of silence, and what is passionately
understood as our actual speaking is always outside in the world
without fear of an experiment other thae it be received by another
person. Instead of trying to prevent mistakes, as you fiddle with,
there is the ability to deal with disappointment.
Instead of the abuse of one who believes they are certain before they
speak, because of an exaggerated sense of self-importance, there is a
modesty of unintended consequences.
Silence is not something useful for ourselves, but is found in the
world with everything else, because the horizon in which it is aimed
is also the horizon that does not include it. There is no horizon we
belong to in advance that we are not already underway in it. This is
the only way we could possibly understand one another without resort
to conformity in which we point to the rules that defines what is in
the world. We don't get from A to B by pointing from one to the
other, but by our movement with the speed of the Infinite, or a
withdrawing in which nothing is left behind for there to be the
passion of being underway. Bill
--- In email@example.com, "James Rovira"
> Nice to hear from you, wallacecollect...is this your first post to
> What would qualify as a "deep reason"?
> The name "Johannes" signifies a great deal in the Kierkegaardian
> It all starts out with Don Giovanni -- the great seducer Don Juan --who is
> quite thoroughly explored in E/O 1. Any "John" is therefore anaesthetic
> character of sorts. E/O I, however, defines two types of aestheticseducer,
> characters -- a reflective and an immediate. Don Juan, the great
> is an immediate aesthetic character. He seduces woman after womanwithout
> thinking about what he's doing. Reflective aesthetic charactersare much
> more complicated. They -do- think about what they're doing. Inmany
> cases, all they do is think--reflect. The chief pleasure, whetherthey carry
> out a seduction or not, is in thought. "Diary of a Seducer" is anexample
> of this type of character at work.reflection
> So that means any character engaged in the act of contemplative
> without decision is engaging in an aesthetic activity. Johannes-is
> Climacus--the highest and greatest reflective character of them all-
> engaging in a "thought experiment" and I suspect Johannes deSilentio should
> be understood as his own type of reflective character, perhapsexploring our
> silences through reflection.name in F&T?
> Jim R
> On 10/26/07, wallacecollect <wallacecollect@...> wrote:
> > Why did Kirkegaard choose 'Johannes de silentio' as his pen-
> > Was there a deep reason for this?