Skip to main content

Lund University Publications

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Exceptions (to exceptions) and decisions (about decisions) in Kierkegaard’s Fear and Trembling and Schmitt’s Political Theology

Goldman, Aaron James LU (2024) His­tor­ical, Philo­soph­ical and Theo­lo­gical Per­spect­ives on Polit­ical Vi­ol­ence conference In Helsinki Yearbook of Intellectual History 4.
Abstract
This piece investigates a contested intersection between the decisionisms of Carl Schmitt and Søren Kierkegaard. In his Political theology (1922), Schmitt quotes from Kierkegaard’s Repetition (1843) to support his claims about sovereignty, decision, and exception. However, as I argue, it is more likely an implicit (mis)interpretation of Fear and trembling’s (1843) articulation of faith – particularly the book’s infamous idea of a “teleological suspension of the ethical” – that Schmitt wields to advance his account of sovereignty. As Fear and trembling’s Abraham stands outside the ethical (det Ethiske), so the sovereign grounds legality from the outside, each in the position to make a pure decision about how to act— or so Schmitt’s... (More)
This piece investigates a contested intersection between the decisionisms of Carl Schmitt and Søren Kierkegaard. In his Political theology (1922), Schmitt quotes from Kierkegaard’s Repetition (1843) to support his claims about sovereignty, decision, and exception. However, as I argue, it is more likely an implicit (mis)interpretation of Fear and trembling’s (1843) articulation of faith – particularly the book’s infamous idea of a “teleological suspension of the ethical” – that Schmitt wields to advance his account of sovereignty. As Fear and trembling’s Abraham stands outside the ethical (det Ethiske), so the sovereign grounds legality from the outside, each in the position to make a pure decision about how to act— or so Schmitt’s interpretation seems to go. Yet here Fear and trembling’s portrayal of faith issues a preemptive challenge to Schmitt, capturing Schmitt’s political theology with its accounts of tragic heroes, whom Kierkegaard juxtaposes with the knight of faith in order to critique the former and praise the latter. Accordingly, Kierkegaardian faith does not stand outside morality or legality altogether; faith refuses the conclusion that such an exception is necessary. I conclude by arguing that Fear and trembling’s depiction of faith nonetheless implies a form of decisionism, but one very different than Schmitt’s: the single individual decides whether social living requires a Schmittian decision or not. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding
publication status
epub
subject
keywords
Kierkegaard, Schmitt, political theology, faith, Christianity, idealism, realism, decisionism, exception
host publication
Political violence : Historical, philosophical and theological perspectives - Historical, philosophical and theological perspectives
series title
Helsinki Yearbook of Intellectual History
editor
Pöykkö, Panu-Matti ; Slotte, Pamela and Salo, Viljami
volume
4
publisher
De Gruyter Oldenbourg
conference name
His­tor­ical, Philo­soph­ical and Theo­lo­gical Per­spect­ives on Polit­ical Vi­ol­ence conference
conference location
Helsinki, Finland
conference dates
2022-03-31 - 2022-04-02
ISSN
2698-6213
2698-6205
ISBN
9783110999884
9783110990645
project
Kierkegaard, Modernity & Critique
Christianity and nationalism
Rethinking the Religious and the Secular with Kierkegaard’s Philosophical Fragments
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
88dac54e-5be7-4487-93cd-5618d78b58d8
date added to LUP
2023-04-03 09:54:03
date last changed
2024-02-26 08:22:15
@inbook{88dac54e-5be7-4487-93cd-5618d78b58d8,
  abstract     = {{This piece investigates a contested intersection between the decisionisms of Carl Schmitt and Søren Kierkegaard. In his Political theology (1922), Schmitt quotes from Kierkegaard’s Repetition (1843) to support his claims about sovereignty, decision, and exception. However, as I argue, it is more likely an implicit (mis)interpretation of Fear and trembling’s (1843) articulation of faith – particularly the book’s infamous idea of a “teleological suspension of the ethical” – that Schmitt wields to advance his account of sovereignty. As Fear and trembling’s Abraham stands outside the ethical (det Ethiske), so the sovereign grounds legality from the outside, each in the position to make a pure decision about how to act— or so Schmitt’s interpretation seems to go. Yet here Fear and trembling’s portrayal of faith issues a preemptive challenge to Schmitt, capturing Schmitt’s political theology with its accounts of tragic heroes, whom Kierkegaard juxtaposes with the knight of faith in order to critique the former and praise the latter. Accordingly, Kierkegaardian faith does not stand outside morality or legality altogether; faith refuses the conclusion that such an exception is necessary. I conclude by arguing that Fear and trembling’s depiction of faith nonetheless implies a form of decisionism, but one very different than Schmitt’s: the single individual decides whether social living requires a Schmittian decision or not.}},
  author       = {{Goldman, Aaron James}},
  booktitle    = {{Political violence : Historical, philosophical and theological perspectives}},
  editor       = {{Pöykkö, Panu-Matti and Slotte, Pamela and Salo, Viljami}},
  isbn         = {{9783110999884}},
  issn         = {{2698-6213}},
  keywords     = {{Kierkegaard; Schmitt; political theology; faith; Christianity; idealism; realism; decisionism; exception}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  publisher    = {{De Gruyter Oldenbourg}},
  series       = {{Helsinki Yearbook of Intellectual History}},
  title        = {{Exceptions (to exceptions) and decisions (about decisions) in Kierkegaard’s Fear and Trembling and Schmitt’s Political Theology}},
  volume       = {{4}},
  year         = {{2024}},
}