Soren Kierkegaard: 4th Sphere of Life?

A'hoy hoy,

Kierkegaard paved the road for existentialism with his sphere's of life. Incase you are unfamiliar with these sphere's, here's a quick recap:

Esthetic - A life devouted to seeking pleasure or an ultimate goal that will ascertain "happiness". There are a large majority of the world that live thinking that if they attain X (degree, job, spouse, etc.) that they will be happy and live a life free from worries. However, this will bring attention to the constant disappoints and impossibility of such - life will never be solved and there will always be complications that you will have to endure. So, what we have, in contrast to a self-fulfilling prophecy, is a self-disappointing prophecy. Those living by an esthetic life will find themselves constantly disappointed and remaining living a life of dread.

Ethic - A life devouted to obligation and responsiblity. Typically accepting ones place in a job, in a hierarchy, a role in a system. Kierkegaard believed this path to be the right one for a long time. He believed that living an ethic life would lead to prosperity and happiness - rewards. However, this is not true. This life makes an individual become "another brick in the wall", another number, etc. They lose autonomy and individuality. Living a life of submission leads to the loss of a sense of purpose and unique character.

Religious - Kierkegaard often elucidated this sphere of life with the tale of Abraham and Isaac. Abraham was asked by God to sacrifice his son to prove his love for God. In doing so, Abraham abolished all rational thinking and ethical reasoning. However, felt embraced by God's reciprocal love. Also, living a life of religion offers sanctity from the fear of death and mortality.

My reason for creating this thread is this: could there be a fourth sphere? I think so; a life of empricism. Of science.

There are many people who live a life of rationale and reasoning all of lifes problems with science. The problem with this life is that we loose our sense of spirituality. I think this contributes to the idea of existentialism because living a life of empiricism leads to the individual feeling insiginificant. Also, living a life where all your actions and decisions can be displaced to the fundamental physical laws in which everything abides to.

What are you thoughts?

My apologies if my explanation was a little complicated.

After revision - I believe empricism is essentially a life of ethic.

*Shakes fist at all the lazy-asses who clicked but didn't read/respond* :angry:

You do know there is an edit button right?

I feel my actions effect the course of life. Everyone's actions does. There is a web and you are one one chain connected to every atom and if you move you move the atoms in a certain way and create changes in your life.

I believe that you have to find a balance in spirituality and science. I combine Judaism and Darwinism. What does it get me? Happiness.

Yeah I think that a scientific sphere is definatly possible. I think that sometimes the religious sphere and the scientific sphere would come in contact in conflicting ways. Like Yume said, it is definatly possible to explain/ experience life from a combination of both views. But I personally believe that the scientific view could invalidate the relgious one. I am sure a believer in religious doctrine would say the same for religion invalidating science or logic. In the end it depends on where you stand, your perspective, and the logic you apply to a situation. Obviously applying scientific logic to religious experience will create problems and vice versa... it is a very introspective thing. But yes a scientific sphere is possible.

PS: Kierkagaard is a sexy sexy bitch.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Yume
You do know there is an edit button right?

---

Yes.. however, I wished to leave my thoughts for feedback such as yours.

What would be your responses to the relation that a life of ethic is similar to a scientific sphere of life in the methodology that a life of ethic follows rules where science follows more rules than any, even religion (law of gravity, thermodynamics, e=mc2, etc.)??

This essential point made me change my mind. Also, it's not completely thought through - hence me posting it.

Thanks for your feedback.