Kierkegard has many beliefs and ideas. One of them is that truth is subjectivity. The truth of subjectivity can be defined in many ways in our eyes. For example, truth as subjectivity (and reality) is his definition of faith. Kierkegaard's definition of truth is: “An objective uncertainty maintained in a process of appropriation of the most passionate interiority is truth, the highest truth that the individual can achieve. » Which we can agree with because all Kierkegard is trying to say and deny is the objectivity of truth. But what he means by this is that, essentially, truth is not just a matter of discovering objective facts. Additionally, the truth can be expressed in different ways, such as finding a statistic or determining your final grade, these are all truths but they are not subjective and it is not simply about discovering objective facts. People may think that when they hear the truth, it is only to hear objective facts. Kierkegard also states that the objective thinker is interested in objective truth, while the subjective thinker is interested in subjective truth. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay Objective truth includes historical truth and philosophical truth. Subjective truth includes religious truth. But the difference between subjective truth and objective truth is that subjective truth is not confirmed by science and is highly dependent on opinions and beliefs, but it can be true or false. Meanwhile, the goal is confirmed by science but universally accepted by all. For example, scientists and historians study the objective world, trying to discover the truth of nature – or perhaps the truth of history. However, in this way, scientists and historians hope to predict and understand how the future will unfold according to these laws. When it comes to the historical aspect, by studying and focusing on the past, the individual can perhaps understand the laws that determine how events will unfold. In this way, the individual can predict the future more accurately and hopefully take control of the events that, in their case, might occur. the past seemed to escape human control. Subjectivity (as we said before) is what the individual – and no one else – possesses. But you might be wondering, what does it mean to have something like this? This cannot be understood in the same way as owning a car or a bank account. It means being someone who becomes someone, it means being a person with a past, a present and a future. No one can have the past, present or future of an individual. Different people experience them in different ways – these experiences are unique and don't belong to anyone else. Having a past, present, and future means that a person is an existing individual – that a person can find meaning in time and in existing. Individuals do not think they exist, they are born. But once born and past a certain age, the individual begins to make choices in life; from now on, these choices can be his own, those of his parents, those of society, etc. The important point is that in order to exist, the individual must make choices – the individual must decide what to do in the next moment and in the future. What and how the individual chooses will define who and what they are – to themselves and to others. According to Socrates, the purpose of lifeis to know yourself (know yourself and know who you really are). To know yourself is to be aware of who you are, what you can be and what you cannot be. Kierkegaard uses the same idea that Socrates used in his own writings. In terms of subjectivity, this manifests itself and is accompanied by an awareness of myself as a self. It encompasses the emotional and intellectual resources with which the individual is born. Subjectivity is what the individual is as a human being. Now the problem of subjectivity is to decide and determine how to choose which rules or models are the most appropriate. Will the individual use to make the right choices? What are the right choices? Who defines good? To truly be an individual, to be true to himself, his actions must somehow be expressed in a way that describes who and what he is to himself and to others. The problem, according to Kierkegaard, is that we must choose who and what we will be based on subjective interests – the individual must make choices that will mean something to him as a reasoning and feeling being. Kierkegaard decided to ascend to the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil for himself, replacing Adam, and made his choice in the presence of God, where no one was there to accuse or judge him apart from his Creator. This is what he made Abraham do in Fear and Trembling. This is how Kierkegaard thought self-learning happened. It is here that the individual learns what guilt and innocence are. His book, The Concept of Anxiety, makes it clear that Adam had knowledge when he made his choice and that it was the knowledge of freedom. The ban was there, but so was freedom and Eve and Adam decided to use it. In Kierkegaard's sense, purely theological statements are subjective truths and they cannot be verified or invalidated either by science or by objective knowledge. For him, choosing whether one is for or against a certain subjective truth is a purely arbitrary choice. He calls the move from objective knowledge to religious faith an act of faith, because it means that subjectively accepting statements cannot be rationally justified. For him, the Christian faith is the result of the trajectory initiated by such choices, which do not and cannot have a rational basis (that is, reason is neither for nor against such choices). Objectively considered, purely theological statements are neither true nor false. Although Kierkergard's truth is that subjectivity is interpreted in different ways, such as those we discussed above. Unfortunately, it can also be easily misinterpreted, because you can believe whatever you want to believe. But this is not what Kierkergard seeks and means. He tries to express that selecting beliefs for convenience is a superficial and consumerist way of living. Which leaves and leads people to justify their beliefs by saying “this works for me” or “this is my truth”. The main difference between “it works for me” and “I work to make it true” is the idea of ​​a personal commitment to the truth. Which leads Kierkegaard to say that “most people are subjective to themselves and objective to everyone else, terribly objective at times, but the task is precisely to be objective to oneself and subjective to everyone else. » Which does not display the image of a convenient subjectivity that supports the comfort of avoiding any type of change. It can be described as a subjectivity that requires self-reorientation and the acceptance of a commitment that involves personal demands. The sentence of,.