Abstract

Perhaps more than any other concept in Kierkegaard's authorship, the absolute paradox is the one for which he is most famous. Whereas much of the body of philosophical literature on Kierkegaard's writings is often centered around this key idea, there is remarkably little consensus on its precise meaning and significance. This lack of consensus is due partly to the fact that few philosophers have given a careful, analytical study into the conceptual commitments that Kierkegaard makes when he talks about this crucial concept. Since it is under the pseudonym Johannes Climacus that the absolute paradox is fleshed out most clearly with regard to its significance for the Christian faith, it is no accident that the Climacean works have been the focus of philosophers of religion. In this dissertation, I argue that in order to arrive at a coherent conception of the absolute paradox one must properly conceive of the conceptual relationship between it and the eternal [det Evige]. In the course of my argument, I explain why it is so difficult to render a concise definition of the absolute paradox. The largest part of that explanation involves the fact that, although Climacus seems to write as though he has a unified conception of the absolute paradox, the textual evidence from Philosophical Fragments and Concluding Unscientific Postscript supports the view that there is discontinuity in his conception of it. I argue that this discontinuity arises on account of a difference in the way in which he conceives of the conceptual role of the eternal. Part of what accounts for the discontinuity in his conception of the eternal is the role that sin plays in his overall view. I give substantial textual evidence which proves that these conceptual discontinuities exist between these two texts, and then show what the philosophical implications of these discontinuities am My dissertation serves both as a corrective to the literature on this specific aspect of Kierkegaard's thought, and also as a contribution to the more general question in the philosophy of religion of whether or not it is logically possible that God be a timeless entity