Scan barcode
A review by joshknape
Kierkegaard in 90 Minutes by Paul Strathern
2.0
I have generally found the Philosophers in 90 Minutes series very informative, but this is the first volume in the series that failed for me. Reading it did not aid my understanding of Kierkegaard's philosophy, and I found my other source on Kierkegaard and theistic existentialism (The Universe Next Door, by James Sire) more illuminating.
The only thing I really learned from the book is that like many thinkers, Kierkegaard was tormented by psychological problems (stemming from a difficult relationship with his father, who was also troubled), and Kierkegaard's philosophy is heavily dependent on these psychological problems. Indeed, it appears to be an attempt, conscious or not, to work them out.
...
3/22/17
I strongly suspect that one of the reasons I did not find this book very helpful is because author Paul Strathern does not have a particularly great understanding of Kierkegaard's philosophy or, more generally, theistic existentialism. Just because Strathern is a highly educated mathematics and philosophy professor doesn't necessarily mean he understands every philosophy equally well. Again, I believe James Sire "gets" theistic existentialism (not just Kierkegaard) much better or more thoroughly, with his even shorter evaluation of it. Reviewer John Martindale believes Strathern demonstrates a contempt for theism. I didn't notice that, but if true, it likely explains why I found that Strathern didn't display a deep understanding of Kierkegaard--he's too unable to relate intellectually.
The only thing I really learned from the book is that like many thinkers, Kierkegaard was tormented by psychological problems (stemming from a difficult relationship with his father, who was also troubled), and Kierkegaard's philosophy is heavily dependent on these psychological problems. Indeed, it appears to be an attempt, conscious or not, to work them out.
...
3/22/17
I strongly suspect that one of the reasons I did not find this book very helpful is because author Paul Strathern does not have a particularly great understanding of Kierkegaard's philosophy or, more generally, theistic existentialism. Just because Strathern is a highly educated mathematics and philosophy professor doesn't necessarily mean he understands every philosophy equally well. Again, I believe James Sire "gets" theistic existentialism (not just Kierkegaard) much better or more thoroughly, with his even shorter evaluation of it. Reviewer John Martindale believes Strathern demonstrates a contempt for theism. I didn't notice that, but if true, it likely explains why I found that Strathern didn't display a deep understanding of Kierkegaard--he's too unable to relate intellectually.