Search

Copyright of Agora (0211-6642) is the property of Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, Servicio de Publicaciones and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Kierkegaard Studies Yearbook is the property of De Gruyter and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Kierkegaard Studies Yearbook is the property of De Gruyter and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In 1843, Adolph Peter Adler, a pastor of the Danish Church, claimed that he had received a supernatural revelation in which Christ spoke to him. The event triggered a religious controversy. In this article, I would like to offer an analysis of the episode of Adler's alleged revelation by taking as a frame of reference the philosophical and theological debates of the time, the reaction of the ecclesiastical authorities to the incident, and Søren Kierkegaard's own proposed diagnosis of the case. Such an analysis will allow us to reach a conclusion regarding the discussion of the time surrounding Adler's episode, namely, that a contemporary revelation seems to present insurmountable difficulties within the margin of the orthodoxy defended by the Danish Church in the first half of the nineteenth century. A rationalist view, such as that adopted by the Danish Church in this period, holds that any discussion of Christian doctrine and its sources must be rationally explicable. The Scriptures, from this point of view, can and should be interpreted from the free, rational, and scientific perspective of the professional theologian. That said, if by "revelation" is meant a supernatural and subjective phenomenon, it follows that there can be no rational reflection on such a revelation. Therefore, it seems that a revelation - especially a contemporary revelation - cannot coexist with a rationalist theology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cassirer proposed as Philosophical responsibility to take care that the totality of symbols operate according to their individual form. Particularly, the author considers that, due to the evocative power of myth and its pre-logical structure, it constituted a fertile field of foundation for political systems such as Nazism and Fascism, two systems characterized by the abandonment and neglect of inclusive anthropological foundations. The aim of the present paper is to reconstruct the critique adduced by the Neo-Kantian to the emergence and emergence of political myth. As a result, it will be shown how a critique of culture, in the terms proposed in the Philosophy of Symbolic Forms and in The Myth of the State, offers new interpretative resources for the construction of model of political care whose purpose is the construction of a culture of peace. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article offers an overview of Søren Kierkegaard’s use in his early journals of a fictional figure called the Master-Thief [Mestertyven], a modern reinterpretation of the late medieval legend of Robin Hood. I would like to argue that this early treatment of medieval folklore in the Dane’s Nachlass can be used as a point of departure or foundation upon which we might get a better appreciation of the crucial role played by myth in Kierkegaard’s philosophy. An analysis of the figure of the Master-Thief will also reveal the way in which a myth from the Middle Ages was reinterpreted and integrated into a modern worldview. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses issues associated with myth. it is stated that the myth is a story and occurs primarily through literary transformation and the narrative identity of myth is constituted by a reaction to history. It is noted that the myth is present in history as an event of language and the distance between the mythical mode and historical explanation, in contrast, marks the former's proximity to the religious explanation.

In the years 1834 and1835, Kierkegaard, still a 21-year-old student at the University of Copenhagen, became interested in the mythical character known as the master-thief. He then decided to work on a drama about this character and his struggle against the established order. With this in mind, the paper has two main objectives. First, to offer a complete account of the so-called master-thief project. Kierkegaard's notes on the master-thief have remained in a relative obscurity. This paper aims at exposing this little-known work of the Danish thinker to the Spanish-speaking reader. Second, to analyze the philosophical question raised in the master thief project, that is, the issue about the relationship of the rebel and marginalized individual with the established order. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]