There continues to be much to learn from Kierkegaard, a man who not only arrived at a radical and
dialectical understanding of faith, but who did so in the context of the advent of a world that is totally profane.
So likewise Kierkegaard's
dialectical understanding of faith establishes the subjective truth of faith as a consequence of the negation of objectivity, and the passion and inwardness of faith is established only by virtue of the absurdity of its objective meaning or ground.
Not exact matches
Hence authentic human existence could be
understood as culminating in
faith, the movement
of faith could be limited to the negation
of «objectivity,» and no occasion need arise for the necessity
of a
dialectical coincidence
of the opposites.
Indeed, I believe the greatest challenge before us is one
of understanding the integral and mutual relationship between apocalyptic
faith and a
dialectical mode
of thinking and vision.
So far our comments have been largely a contrast
of stances toward human existence: a plea for a more truly
dialectical, less dualistic
understanding of the relation between form and energy, a plea for a similar openness toward the past, a question about the future to the effect that the incompleteness
of the present ought not to frustrate Dr. Altizer into insisting that the total reversal promised by the glimpsed eschatological future be the only standard or norm
of faith.
It is my persuasion that the thinker who has most truly
understood the revolutionary and
dialectical meaning
of faith is Hegel, and that we must ever return to Hegel for a theoretical
understanding of the meaning
of a movement
of dialectical negation.
But I must resist the judgment that such a quest entails a dualistic rather than a
dialectical form
of faith and
understanding.