The Limits of Kierkegaard's Philosophy and the Transcendence of the Ethics of Anxious Existence

Soyo Ethics of Existence

Despair and Hope, and the Ethics of Conscience

Philosophy Beginning with Despair

Philosophy always begins with pain and doubt. Humans encounter incomprehensible suffering and despair on life's journey. Within possessions, honor, relationships, partings, death, and social conditions, humans experience their own powerlessness and incompleteness. These experiences are not mere misfortune or unhappiness. For philosophers, they were the very window revealing the essence of human existence.

The 19th-century Danish philosopher Kierkegaard defined human existence as a “being in despair.” For him, despair was a state where humans did not know themselves and were simultaneously severed from their relationship with God. His conclusion was that through despair, humans confront their own existence, and only at its end can they leap toward God.

However, the 21st-century philosopher Soyo does not stop at this interpretation. Soyo probes the despair of human existence more deeply. Why must humans inevitably despair? What is the fundamental reason for despair? And is that despair merely a wall humans must overcome, or is it a door leading to the flame of greater transcendence? Within these questions, Soyo's existential ethics presents a new path beyond Kierkegaard's existential philosophy.

Kierkegaard's Despair and Its Limits

In "The Sickness unto Death", Kierkegaard analyzed despair as the fundamental structure of human existence. He defined despair not as a mere psychological state, but as an existential split experienced by humans between themselves and God. Humans strive to understand themselves yet cannot fully know themselves, and this incompleteness manifests as despair.

However, Kierkegaard's analysis has clear limitations. He explains despair solely within the internal structure of the human being. He presents despair as an inevitable condition inherent in human existence, suggesting that the only way beyond it is to take a 'leap of faith' toward God.

Yet he does not ask why despair is given. He fails to deeply illuminate the background of despair: the fact that humans are not self-created beings, that is, that human existence is grounded in divine love and creation. Ultimately, his philosophy confines despair solely to an 'existential barrier to be overcome', failing to address the eternity and evidence of love that despair possesses.

Soya's Ethical Response to Existence: The Reason for Despair and Its Transcendence

Soyo views despair differently. Despair does not merely reveal human limitations or imperfections. Despair is an event where the ethics of conscience, given by God's love, poses a question to humanity.

Humans cannot create ethics on their own.

The human interior is too complex and fragmented. Humans can harmonize reason and emotion, but their fundamental roots are not self-established. Therefore, humans cannot invent or create the ethics of conscience themselves.

The ethics of conscience are a gift from God.

Humans choose through free will, but that freedom itself is given by God. Every time humans collapse in despair, the ethics of conscience silently question: "What will you choose through this despair? Hope or frustration?" This question is the trace of God planted within human conscience.

Despair is a pathway to transcendence.

Despair exists not to destroy humanity, but as a pathway calling us to choose hope and truth. Amidst pain and tears, social oppression, and the ideologies of civilization, humanity advances beyond despair to the land of hope only when it holds fast to the ethics of conscience.

The Clash of Civilization and Philosophy, Control and Freedom

The turmoil emphasizes that the human journey is not merely an internal struggle but a process of colliding with the structures of civilization.

Humans live colliding with various mechanisms: religion, society, education, ideology. Yet these structures impose invisible control rather than liberating humans. If humans only gaze upon this reality, they inevitably fall into frustration and despair.

Philosophy emerges precisely at this juncture. It is the sole arena revealing the “clash between control and freedom” humans confront. Despair and hope connect upon philosophy, and upon that bridge, humans freely choose.

Transcendence of Despair, the Flame of Truth

The Ethics of Existence defines the path of human existence thus:

Humanity has been granted the freedom to choose hope even within despair. This freedom functions rightly only upon the ethics of conscience. Life transcending despair is not mere overcoming, but the path of transcendence that gazes beyond suffering toward the land of life.

There, despair, destruction, and sorrow no longer exist. Only the flame of truth illuminates human existence, and that flame never dies within God's love. Therefore, despair is not the end, but the most intense proof that one can choose hope.

The Philosopher of Despair and the Witness of Hope

To summarize, Kierkegaard analyzed despair as the core of existence and found the path beyond despair in the leap of faith. He was thoroughly the philosopher of despair. 'The Walk' questions the very reason for despair. Humans did not create themselves, nor can they create ethics on their own. Despair is not destruction but a divine event questioning the ethics of conscience. Therefore, despair itself becomes the very place that bears witness to hope.

If Kierkegaard is the “philosopher of despair,” Soyo is the “witness of hope.” Soyo's existential ethics is the philosophy that, gazing upon the flame of truth beyond despair, testifies that human existence is already placed within God's love and eternity.

逍遙 – The Witness to the Confession of Existence and the Philosophy of Truth

This article was first published on the official website of 逍遙 (Soyo), founder of ‘Soyo Existential Ethics’: soyophilosophy.kr / soyophilosophy.com.Reproduction, quotation, duplication, summarization, translation, creation of derivative works, AI training and data crawling, or use of content aggregation platforms for the entire text or any part thereof is strictly prohibited without prior written consent.