Nu talte Kierkegaard godt nok ikke om magt, men om fortvivlelse, og man bliver da næsten også fortvivlet, når man ser den forandring, der er sket med Integrationsminister Birthe Rønn Hornbæk.

I de snart 20 år jeg har interesseret mig for politik, har jeg kendt Birthe Rønn Hornbæk som en gæv forkæmper for retssikkerheden i dette land, også selv om det bragte hende på kollisionskurs med sine egne. Respekteret af politikere i begge sider af salen for netop denne kvalitet.

Hvad er der dog gået galt? Er det virkelig så vigtigt at holde mennesker ude af vores land, at den ene risikere sit ry og rygte, den anden en rigsretssag? – jeg tænker her, naturligvis på tidligere Justitsminister Erik Ninn-Hansen.

You have loved us first, O God, alas!  We speak of it in terms of history as if You have only loved us first but a single time, rather than that without ceasing You have loved us first many times and every day and our whole life through.  When we wake up in the morning and turn our soul toward You - You are the first - You have loved us first; if I rise at dawn and at the same second turn my soul toward You in prayer, You are there ahead of me, You have loved me first.  When I withdraw from the distractions of the day and turn my soul toward You, You are the first and thus forever. And yet we always speak ungratefully as if You have loved us first only once.

Søren Kierkegaard | The Prayers of Kierkegaard

--Søren Kierkegaard, Works of Love, trans. by Howard and Edna Hong (New York: Harper & Row, 1962), 11.

Guided by the motto "learn continuously, live generatively," I investigate, evaluate and translate information into knowledge as a teacher and a student. This duality is fundamental to my belief that being an educator is a different way of being a learner, a concept echoed by Danish philosopher Søren Kierkegaard who wrote "to be a teacher in the right sense is to be a learner. I am not a teacher, only a fellow student.” I therefore consider my students colleagues joining me on a journey of educational exploration.

As their symbolic leader, I guide my students towards generative learning. According to MIT professor Peter Senge, generative learning “enhances our capacity to create.” More than memorization, generative learning links our existing knowledge about a subject with emerging ideas, resulting in a more systemic, personal and meaningful understanding. The key to learning generatively is the individual investment it requires. Therefore, in a classroom setting, a generative learning approach stimulates self-reliance among students who are asked to actively engage material rather than passively listening to lectures.

To help my students learn generatively, I embrace the idea of Pulitzer Prize winning poet Mark Van Doren that "the art of teaching is the art of assisting discovery." However, I give my students a hand up, not a hand out: they must earn their grade. Knowing that relevancy is essential to discovery, I avoid assignments that only require repetition of information in deference to papers, presentations and similar projects that provide my students a platform from which they can address and resolve pressing personal or professional issues.

With this in mind, at the start of each new class I survey my students to determine their knowledge of the topic, the types of assignments they prefer and what they hope to achieve. I then customize the curriculum while making sure it still satisfies established learning outcomes. I monitor my students' progress through the term and make additional changes as needed. Considering Peter Drucker's observation that ”learning is a lifelong process of keeping abreast of change," how can I effectively teach without responding to an environment that will evolve?

Acting as a "guide on the side" and not a "sage on the stage," the comfort and confidence of my students is my top priority. I combine learning with laughter in my classrooms and always encourage students to pursue their individual ideas. Following Goleman's concept of "emotional intelligence," I remain responsive to them at all times. And, having taught students of various ages, ethnicities and socioeconomic backgrounds, I am especially sensitive to the diverse challenges with which my students might be contending.

In keeping with this idea, I believe an educational environment should encourage students to compete with themselves, but not with each other. Learning should create community, not competition. I support the idea of collective individualism: a knowledge management process that leverages the contributions of independent, but interconnected participants to solve a shared problem. In short: when one of us succeeds, all of us succeed.

Interdisciplinary by nature, I teach courses in communication, English, information technology, management and marketing. While each discipline is distinct from the other, I approach them all from the perspective of their shared intersection with humanity, technology and industry. Given my interconnected perception of these disciplines I often include elements of one or more of them in every class, regardless of its primary focus.

I enjoy challenging my students to think evolutionarily in an attempt to shatter preconceptions and create meaningful knowledge. It is because of this potential outcome that I am drawn to teaching. I find that it can be as challenging as it is rewarding, but no other professional experience has allowed me to help shape the future of other people while simultaneously giving my own life greater meaning and purpose.

Citat af Søren Kierkegaard (1813-1853), dansk teolog og filosof.

Klik her for at se flere citater af Søren Kierkegaard.

"The matter is quite simple. The Bible is very easy to understand. But we Christians are a bunch of scheming swindlers. We pretend to be unable to understand it because we know very well that the minute we understand, we are obliged to act accordingly. Take any word in the New Testament and forget everything except pledging yourself to act accordingly. My God, you will say, if I do that my whole life will be ruined. How would I ever get on in the world? Herein lies the real place of Christian scholarship. Christian scholarship is the Church's prodigious invention to defend itself against the Bible, to ensure that we can continue to be good Christians without the Bible coming too close. Oh, priceless scholarship, what would we do without you? Dreadful it is to fall into the hands of the living God. Yes, it is even dreadful to be alone with the New Testament."

– Søren Kierkegaard, Provocations: Spiritual Writings of Kierkegaard

- Søren Kierkegaard: In vino veritas, 1844

"Es ist keine Kunst, ein Mädchen zu verführen, aber ein Glück, eines zu finden, das es wert ist, verführt zu werden."

- Søren Kierkegaard: Tagebuch des Verführers

Guided by the motto "learn continuously, live generatively," I define myself as a teacher and a student engaged in an ongoing process of investigation, evaluation and application of information. In my opinion, being a teacher is just a different word for being a student, a concept echoing the ideas of Danish philosopher Søren Kierkegaard who wrote "to be a teacher in the right sense is to be a learner. I am not a teacher, only a fellow student.”

My goal is to inspire generative learning in my students. In his 1994 book, The Fifth Discipline, MIT professor Peter Senge explains that generative learning “enhances our capacity to create,” (p. 14). I further define it as the process of integrating your existing knowledge about a subject with new information you acquire about it. The result is a deeper, more personal, and ultimately more meaningful understanding of that subject. Achieving generative learning requires engaging information, taking ownership of it, and converting it into knowledge.

Dedicated to helping students reach this learning state, I embrace Pulitzer Prize winning poet Mark Van Doren's philosophy that "the art of teaching is the art of assisting discovery." However, I believe that without relevance a discovery is less meaningful. So, I assign projects that allow my students to solve real issues in their lives outside of school. As a student, I always prefer assignments of this nature and give my students the same opportunity.

Likewise, I want my classes to be meaningful. At the start of each new session I survey my students about their knowledge of the topic, their comfort level with the assignments and what they hope to accomplish in the weeks ahead. After reviewing their submissions I customize the curriculum while making sure to still satisfy the desired learning outcomes. Throughout the term I continue to assess their progress and, whenever possible, make changes. After all, I am delivering a service to my students who, as the consumer, deserve the highest quality!

In the classroom I combine learning with laughter. With youthful enthusiasm and a dry sense of humor I motivate my students while keeping them focused with my more mature traits. Acting as a "guide on the side" and not a "sage on the stage," I make my students my priority. Following Goleman's concept of "emotional intelligence," I remain responsive to them at all times. Having taught students of various ages, ethnicities and socioeconomic backgrounds, I am sensitive to the diverse challenges with which my students might be contending.

In keeping with this idea, I believe that an educational environment should encourage students to compete with themselves, but not with each other. Learning should never be about winners and losers. I prefer to promote a concept called collective individualism: a knowledge management process that leverages the contributions of independent, but interconnected participants to solve a shared problem.

Interdisciplinary by nature, I teach courses in communication, composition, information technology, management and marketing. While each discipline is distinct from the other, I approach them all from the perspective of their shared intersection with humanity, technology and industry. Given my perception of these disciplines I often include elements of one or more of them in every class, regardless of its primary focus.

I enjoy challenging my students to think evolutionarily in an attempt to shatter preconceptions and create meaningful knowledge. It is because of this potential outcome that I am drawn to teaching. I find that it can be as rewarding as it is challenging, but no other professional experience has allowed me to help shape the future of other people while simultaneously giving my own life greater meaning and purpose.

I picked Maron's name from the movie Braveheart, thinking with their heavy Scots accents (minus Mel Gibson) that was the name they were saying for Mel's wife. Turns out, it was actually Murron, which means "wished-for-child," an equally beautiful name. Maron's name means "bitter" :) For some reason, I just couldn't get the name out of my head. Bryan did not like it at first, and I honestly don't remember how long it was before we decided on it. He woke up one morning and said, "Do you still like the name, Maron?" to which I of course replied yes, and so we used it! Then of course, we grumbled with each other over the spelling we would use. Later on, Bryan developed a rule for the naming of our children. It actually makes things a WHOLE lot easier, and is kind of fun too. The rule is: First name has to be someone historically admirable, second is a close friend who has touched our lives. I got on a bit of a Stonewall Jackson kick, fascinated by his life and belief in God's soveignty, thus Jackson got his name, and his middle name was after Bryan's dear friend Scott Kerzman.

Anyways, to make a long post longer, Bryan loves Søren Kierkegaard's philosophy, and the way in which he challenged the emptiness and deadness of the Danish state church. He had a real approach to the Christian life, one in which he was not afraid to express sorrow, doubt, and fear. So, if the Maes that is cookin' right now (as Sarah Sloan would put it :) is a boy, I wanted to name him after Kierkegaard in honor of Hubby's love for his writing, and because I like the name and how uncommon it is, and because it just fit all too perfectly into the name rule we have!! The middle name will be Joshua, after our other dear friend, Joshua Mee. Here's a little Kierkegaard I stole from Hubby's Blog =)

Until we meet again,

~R

Father in heaven! Draw our hearts to you so that our longing 
may be where our treasure is supposed to be. Turn our minds
and our thoughts to where our citizenship is – in your kingdom,
so that when you finally call us away from here, our leavetaking
may not be a painful separation but a joyful union with
you. We do not know the time and the place, perhaps a long
road still lies before us, and when strength is taken away from
us, when exhaustion fogs our eyes so that we peer out as into a
dark night, and restless desires stir within us, wild, impatient
longings, and the heart groans in fearful anticipation of what is
coming, oh Lord God, fix in our hearts the conviction that also
while we are living, we belong to you.

- Søren Kierkegaard
Journals & Papers IV, 45

In your face!!...

After I came back from killing myself running around the island of Rusanavka (easy now...it's only a few kilometers, we're not talking running around Australia or anything) this morning it hit me that something is wrong with the response that believers often give (and are taught to give) when they hear an accusation like the crutch-one. Believers feel they have to defend themselves and accuse back with statements like: "everyone needs a crutch, some are addicted to coffee, sex or respect. You have a crutch too, mine is just different than yours". It struck me though that Christ is not a crutch. If he was a crutch for me that would indicate that I just have some issues walking, and all I need is a little help to walk better. But my problems are much bigger than that. He is much more than a crutch for me. I pondered whether Jesus was a wheel chair then. If you're in a wheel chair you've had to accept that you can't walk on your own, and you need permanent help to be able to move around. But I realized again that my problems are much bigger than that. Jesus is much more than a wheel chair to me.

Jesus is not a crutch, Jesus is not a wheel chair, Jesus is nothing more or less than my life! I'm nothing without him! "Hooray...I knew it, Christians are pathetic!" I hear some non-Christians yell as they read this statement. "Please, Torben, you're not helping us....we don't have to sound more pathetic than we are" some believers might sigh as they read my ideas. 

But it's the truth, and with David I will gladly yell out that I will become even more undignified with God! (2. Samuel 6:21-22) In myself I am nothing. I am crucified, buried, resurrected and ascended with Christ! Jesus Christ is my life. And my life as a believer is one where he does it all. He is the vine, I'm just a branch. He gives life, light, love and joy to me and through me (John 15). He is the one who has given me everything! It's because of him that I am a somebody! I am a prince! I am a co-heir with Christ to everything God has (Romans 8)! I am fearfully and wonderfully made by God, and I am a poem, a masterpiece in the eyes of God (Psalm 139 and Ephesians 2: 1-10)!

That's my status as a child of God. But it's all about him. So yes, Jesus is much more than a crutch or a wheel chair to me. He is my life. It is in him that I live and move and have my being (Acts 17:28). So yes, my problems are much bigger than walking difficulties. I can't do anything worth anything without Jesus!

Is that humbling to me? Yes it is. But as Søren Kierkegaaard wrote it: "Christianity didn't come in order to develop the heroic virtues of the individual, but rather to remove self-centeredness and establish love". Growing as a believer requires that I give up on thinking that everything is about me, my ego and my accomplishments. Life is about Jesus. He is LIFE (John 14:6), and every time anybody, whether believer or atheist, experiences life that brings freedom they're experiencing Christ. I cannot create life. I cannot create life in myself. I do need someone else to do it for me and in me and through me. And that someone is Jesus Christ. 

And because I know Jesus to be kind, loving, caring, understanding, creative, fun, entertaining, wonderful, etc. I don't mind giving up my felt right to think that I need to make things work on my own. I gladly surrender to him, and I choose to allow him to be my life! There are days where I choose to walk on my own and try to create life separate from Christ, but over and over again God in his mercy shows me that it doesn't work, and only when I seek him will I - or any other human being - experience real life and love and meaning without any headaches and hangovers!

Torben 

The dude's intellectually fearless.

The Scriptures contain a lot of things that just don't make perfect sense, but, rather than attempting to force them to make complete sense, he says we should simply believe and obey them - even when they're a little painful. He believes the Bible enough that he's unwilling to turn its stories into pop-up books with bright colors and put it on display in Mardel. For him, a person must approach the Bible as either absolute garbage or as the Truth of God - but it's scary regardless.

As Ben would say, the Bible may not be as family-friendly as we've made it out to be.

Now, Kierkegaard isn't infallible and I definitely have trouble fully agreeing with (and understanding!) a lot of what he says, but I love that he doesn't try to reconcile all the classic theological problems. This brings me back to Fear and Trembling. Kierkegaard uses the story of Abraham on Mt. Moriah (Genesis 22) to answer the question, "What is faith?" He argues that Abraham's intention to sacrifice of Isaac on Moriah is either murder, obedience (faith), or both, but we can't pretend like the story's tension isn't important for us. Right standing with God through faith is pretty central to the Bible's message, and Abraham is usually considered the father of all that.

Or do you think that the outcome of the story is what justified Abraham before God?

Abraham was reckoned righteous because he rode for three days, tied his son onto a pile of sticks, and raised the knife without hesitation - not because God spared Isaac.

But we breathe a sigh of relief and excitedly retell the story. I mean, it has such a happy ending! And no, I'm not cynical I'm frustrated! It's difficult for me to grasp the horror of Exodus 33 because I put so much emphasis on the ending. I don't try to understand the anguish Abraham must have felt during his trip into the mountains, how deplorable it would seem to watch an old man tie his son with the intention of bleeding him out and then burning the remains, and I especially don't try to understand why God would command it.

I mainly just focus on the conclusion.

And this is what I learned from Fear and Trembling: I'm numb to the terrifying reality of faith. God commands crazy things from us, but I've slipped into thinking that life is just about going to heaven and enjoying things till you get there. But I don't wanna focus on the ending at the expense of the beginning and middle

Citat af Søren Kierkegaard (1813-1855), dansk teolog og filosof.

Klik her for at se flere citater af Søren Kierkegaard.

Harry Potter is certainly one of the most popular characters in the world

(from Harry Potter and Philosophy edited by David Bagget and Shawn E. Klein)

Take away:

Harry Potter's Recipe for Courage

1. Prepare for the challenge
2. Surround yourself with support
3. Engage in positive self-talk
4. Focus on what's at stake
5. Take appropriate action

Cited philosophers, books

• Søren Kierkegaard - ""Concluding Unscientific Postscript"

N.B. I made a typo in the author's first name. Tom and not Tim! All apologies.

- Søren Kierkegaard, 1813-1855,
dänischer Philosoph -

Guided by the motto "learn continuously, live generatively," I am eternally engaged in a process of investigation, discovery and application – as both an educator and a lifelong learner. This duality is fundamental to my belief that being a teacher is merely a different word for being a student. Echoing this philosophy is Danish philosopher Søren Kierkegaard who explains "to be a teacher in the right sense is to be a learner. I am not a teacher, only a fellow student.”

Knowing this, I strive to create learning environments that embody the ideals of collective individualism: a knowledge management process that leverages the contributions of independent, but interconnected participants to generate answers to a question of common interest. I don't instruct my students from afar, I actively engage and learn with my students. Pulitzer Prize winning poet and Professor Mark Van Doren reflected this idea when he commented "the art of teaching is the art of assisting discovery."

My goal as a teacher is to initiate "generative learning," which management professor Peter Senge defines in The Fifth Discipline as “learning that enhances our capacity to create,” (p. 14). Generative learning is the process of integrating your existing knowledge with new information about a subject. The result is a deeper, more personal, and ultimately more meaningful understanding of that subject. In short, generative learning is about owning information by engaging it and making it uniquely your own knowledge.

With this in mind, I see myself as a partner with my students who facilitates their learning process as they actively explore an area of interest through hands-on exercises.  I listen to my students and act accordingly. In Leadership is an Art Max DePree, chairman of furniture company Herman Miller, argues "the leader listens to the ideas, needs, aspirations, and wishes of the followers and then…responds to these in appropriate fashion," (p. xxi).  I have two ears and one mouth for a reason!

With a youthful enthusiasm (and a dry sense of humor) I inspire my students while engaging my maturity to keep them focused. Acting as a "guide on the side" and not a "sage on the stage," I am first and foremost about my students. Embracing Goleman's concept of "emotional intelligence," I remain responsive to their unique needs. Having taught students of various ages, ethnicities and socioeconomic backgrounds I am sensitive to issues of diversity and the need to adapt my style to my students -- not the other way around.

I am committed to making my students' educational experience as practical and, hopefully, transformational, as possible. I connect theory with reality while encouraging them to relate their own experiences and life stories to ideas discussed in class. Notably, Max DePree also emphasizes, “Stories help us learn and remember who we are, where we have been, where we are going. Stories preserve our sense of community,” (p. 1). Sometimes stories, however divergent, can ultimately lead the class to a better understanding of the specific subject matter!

I am primarily drawn to the study and teaching business because it offers an invigorating intersection of people, technology and commerce – a hub of humanity. I approach business from the human side of the equation because I feel that is where its essence exists. It offers a tangible environment in which students and teachers alike can apply their knowledge and witness an immediate result -- however anecdotal. It provides a microcosm of the larger setting and elevates everything to a level of educational inquiry and academic achievement.

Teaching is as rewarding as it is challenging – but no other professional experience has allowed me to help shape the future of my students while simultaneously giving my life greater meaning and purpose.

 

1.            Denmark is the oldest existing kingdom in the world 

2.            Denmark has the oldest existing flag in the world (June 15, 1219)

3.           Denmark is ruled by a queen (Queen Margrethe II), and her husband is a prince not a king!

4.           Denmark has the happiest people in the world 

5.           Søren Kierkegaard was a very intelligent Dane who said clever things such as : “Now, with God’s help, I shall become myself” and “Purity of heart is to will one thing” 

6.            “Rødgrød med fløde” (approximately strawberry porridge with cream) is really hard to say if you’re not a Dane

7.            LEGO is the greatest Danish invention ever 

8.            …but Skype comes pretty close..! 

9.             Norway is not the capital of Denmark, Copenhagen (København) is!

10.           Hans Christian Andersen, the world’s greatest fairy tale writer, was born in Odense, Denmark

11.           Denmark’s highest point is only 170 meters (557 feet) – in your face, Mount Everest!!

12.           Denmark is made up of 444 islands of which 76 are inhabited

13.           Clicking on www.fck.dk will take you to the website of Scandinavia’s best football club

14.           Denmark has, without much competion, the greatest food in the world

15.           Danes like to draw and print cartoons, also when they probably shouldn’t…

16.           Denmark’s language is called Danish, not Dutch…!!!

That won't be too hard to remember, right?!!

Torben 

Don't get me wrong I believe God desires to communicate with us, but I refuse to believe everyone is hearing what they say they're hearing. I don't think God tells people to fly planes into buildings...but I also wouldn't think God wants people to murder their children, and we all know the story of Abraham on Moriah...

Faith is a scary thing. It's a scary thing because it can't be completely proven or completely denied, it has to be worked out in fear and trembling.

Most of us have heard the story so many times we're deadened to it, but try to be there: you're following Abraham into Moriah, up the mountain, and - hidden from view - looking on in horror as he raises the knife to kill his kid. From a moral standpoint this is horrible right? Yet this is sung about at VBS and remembered by many as an act of incredible faith. My point is that faith isn't as simple as intellectually assenting to a specific set of values or to some ethical framework. Faith is often irrational, maybe even always irrational.

Just to clear up that previous statement, I don't believe the men who flew planes into buildings were faithless, but I also don't believe their faith was from God or in God. But I do think God calls us to do weird things. Things that are in opposition to governing authorities, the Law of Moses, and, like Abraham, even in opposition to a promise He had previously made. Otherwise we're just following the system, right? That's no relationship! In part, Abraham's faith was great because he had no system to follow, he only had God's personal promises to trust. Abraham was great because he believed anything God told him - even the crazy stuff. Referring to Abraham in Fear and Trembling, Kierkegaard says it much better:

"No! No one shall be forgotten who was great in this world; but everyone was great in his own way, and everyone in proportion to the greatness of what he loved. For he who loved himself became great in himself, and he who loved others became great through his devotion, but he who loved God became greater than all. They shall all be remembered, but everyone became great in proportion to his expectancy. One became great through expecting the possible, another by expecting the eternal; but he who expected the impossible became greater than all."

These are just a few thoughts I've had while reading this book. Kierkegaard believed God calls His followers to a higher law than just the moral law (Teleological Suspension of the Ethical). Sometimes, in order to test, preserve, and strengthen our faith, God commands us to do something that seems contradictory.

So, if this is true and we can't always determine faith by morality, how can we know 'true faith' from 'false faith'? How do we know whether or not someone is right when they say "God told me"?

I obviously need to keep reading, but I'd love to hear your thoughts.

Af alle tyrannier er en folkeregering den kvalfuldeste, den åndløseste, ubetinget alt storts og ophøjets undergang. ... En tyran er dog kun én; man kan altså, hvis det så synes én, indrette sig på at undgå ham, leve fjernt fra ham o.s.v. Men hvor skal jeg i en folkeregering undfly tyrannen? Ethvert menneske er jo, i en vis forstand, tyrannen; det er blot han skaffer et opløb: en majoritet.
Dagbogsoptegnelse fra 1848

What the hell is wrong with me? It's truly taking over.

 De direkthed, som præger P.L.Møllers prosa i debat med Søren Kierkegaard, fik han ikke med over i sine digte. Så min version er et forsøg på engang at rive digtet løs af fortidens digtkonvention og fastholde det i dets egen tid, dog med nogle versfriheder, som vel ingen dengang ville tage sig.

Philosophy of religion as a discipline seems peculiarly resistant to change. A glance through the plethora of textbooks in the field gives one the impression of a subject largely cocooned from events within the world, a subject, the focus of which, is on timeless otherworldly realities and problems. As Oxford philosopher Tim Mawson argues in a recent introduction to the subject, philosophers of religion are (and should be) “loath to engage with…empirical facts” (Mawson p. 176).

The assumption Mawson makes, in line with many analytic philosophers of religion, is that philosophical conclusions are best arrived at when the purity of rational argumentation is unsullied by the messiness of practical considerations. Mawson has no intention of challenging this position. We have no such reservations. The analysis of religious beliefs requires an understanding of their grounding in the particularities of human life and experience, and this necessitates considering the role religion plays in the contemporary world. Our time is one defined in no small part by the events of 9/11 and the resulting War on Terror. These disturbing and horrific occurrences are increasingly shaping legal arguments, political and historical reflections, and the broader intellectual scene. The so-called ‘New Atheists’ (Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris) have no qualms about addressing the religious foundations of these events. It seems bizarre in the extreme that philosophers of religion – those in the academy who most of all should be thinking critically about the nature of religion and its relationship to those passions that lend to themselves to atrocity - resolutely refuse to engage with such events. Presumably these philosophers would adopt the default position that religiously inspired terrorism is a perversion of true religious feeling and not significantly informed by more mainstream religious notions. We want to suggest, however, that to ignore the relationship between religion and terror is an abrogation of responsibility, and that there are two core issues in the philosophy of religion which must be addressed and settled in the light of the terrible events of our time.

First, the perennial issue of the relationship between religion and morality, so often treated as a merely academic exercise, gains greater urgency in an age of religiously inspired violence. A common way to consider the tension between religion and morality is to consider Soren Kierkegaard’s rendition of the story of Abraham and of Abraham’s willingness to obey the divine command to slaughter his son Isaac. Abraham’s faith is presented by Kierkegaard (and, indeed, the monotheistic tradition as a whole) as the highest form of religious commitment, for Abraham is prepared to submit unconditionally to the will of God even if it means denying commonly held moral principles. But the fairytale ending of the Abraham and Isaac story conceals the fact that Abraham is far from alone in being prepared to suspend his moral duties to other human beings in the name of commitment to a higher power. It is, of course, possible to see Abraham as an exemplar of faith – but only if we are prepared to ignore the impact of really holding such a position. Events of the recent past reveal all too well the consequences of enacting the “teleological suspension of the ethical” (Kierkegaard p. 85).

Examples are, sadly, not hard to come by. In 1984 Brenda Lafferty and her fifteen- month old baby Erica were murdered – their throats slit – by Ron and Dan Lafferty, two fundamentalist Mormons who believed that they had received a revelation from God that they should kill their kin. And,while there may have been other contributing causes for the events of September 11, the hijackers led by Mohamed Atta undeniably believed that the slaughter of thousands of people was in accordance with the will of Allah. Against the contempt that such positions reveal for other human beings, we believe that it is more crucial than ever before to embrace wholeheartedly the Kantian prioritising of morality over religious enthusiasm. This principle is succinctly stated in Kant’s Religion Within the Boundaries of Mere Reason: “Apart from a good life-conduct, anything which the human being supposes that he can do to become well-pleasing to God is mere religious delusion and counterfeit service to God” (Kant, p. 166).

Kant’s position is most powerfully articulated in Stewart Sutherland’s inexplicably neglected book God, Jesus and Belief, in which he states that: “a religious belief which runs counter to our moral beliefs is to that extent unacceptable” (Sutherland, p. 16). More than ever before, adherence to this principle is an absolute requirement. Doubtless many believers – and philosophers of religion - will also resist the conclusion that religion should supersede ethics, though it is a mark of the times in which we live that this point needs to be made at all.

The second position that we wish to criticize is one that theists (and many philosophers of religion) will be more reluctant to give up. This position concerns the division of reality into two worlds. While this is often seen as being of enormous comfort to believers – the world of pain that we inhabit is contrastable to a world of bliss that awaits us in the hereafter – we are of the view that this belief is inherently nihilistic and needs to be excised altogether. Religious extremists will invariably justify their appalling actions by denying the value of ‘this merely earthly life’. Hence the Al-Qaeda instruction document given to the 9/11 hijackers exhorted them to: “forget and force yourself to forget this thing which is called the world” (cited in Ruthven, p. 36). In case we are tempted to consider this sentiment to be merely the preserve of Islamist terrorism, we should note St John Chrysostom’s contention that Christians should “learn to despise the things of this life”. The dismissal of all worldly things that echoes in these statements is also, disturbingly, found in contemporary philosophy of religion.

Tim Mawson, for example, proffers a similar disregard for the sufferings of this world when viewed in the light of the hereafter:

After our finite lives here an infinite life awaits us hereafter. For every creature who suffers, there will come a day when they say that as individuals their suffering has been more than adequately compensated for and on which they will be able to see how their suffering fitted into a greater whole that was overall worth it. On that day, even those who were broken on the wheels of the machine as they turned will thank God for it.
(Mawson, p. 215)

The denial of the reality of suffering is one of the worst excesses of traditional Christian theodicy. The perpetrators of religiously inspired violence also seek to trivialise the sufferings of their victims in the light of a commitment to divine justice. The lack of compassion that emanates from the actions of terrorists and the theories of such philosophies of religion is rooted precisely in two-worlds thinking, and it is this refusal to value the lives of others that must be resisted wherever it is found.

Lenin’s famous question - “what is to be done?” – must, then, be asked of the philosophy of religion. Mainstream philosophy of religion refuses to accept the situatedness of philosophising and in the process ignores the need for a critique of those aspects of religion that are far from conducive to human flourishing. The subject is, indeed, well-placed to explore the reasons for religious terrorism. An overriding concern of the philosophy of religion is the consideration and critique of belief. Figures like R B Braithwaite emphasised the way one’s beliefs affected one’s actions. It is this claim that can be extended when considering the sources of religious terrorism. Understanding the religious beliefs of the terrorist is of paramount importance, for they contribute to the sources of those actions, creating a predisposition to treat the lives of others lightly. The interesting work comes, not from thinking of the beliefs of terrorists as distinct, but from considering the common ground that such beliefs occupy with what would be considered mainstream religious notions. Central to this enterprise must surely be the criticism of that recalcitrant idea which consistently informs religious theorising: the notion that there is another and a better world. In place of such beliefs we need, more than ever, a philosophy of religion that is “true to the earth” (Nietzsche, p. 42), which engages with the transient world in which we find ourselves, rather than seeks to deny its significance. That is the task.

Bibliography

Braithwaite, R. B. ‘An Empiricist’s View of the Nature of Religious Belief’. In Mitchell, B. The Philosophy of Religion. Oxford: OUP, 1971, pp. 72-91.

Clack, Beverley, and Brian R. Clack. The Philosophy of Religion: A Critical Introduction. 2nd edition. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2008.

Kant, Immanuel, Religion Within the Boundaries of Mere Reason. Tr. A. Wood and G. Di Giovanni. Cambridge: CUP, 1998.

Kierkegaard, Søren. Fear and Trembling. Tr. A. Hannay. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1985.

Krakauer, Jon. Under the Banner of Heaven: A Story of Violent Faith. New York: Random House, 2004.

Mawson, T. W. Belief in God. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.

Nietzsche, Friedrich. Thus Spoke Zarathustra. Tr. R. J. Hollingdale. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1969.

Sutherland, Stewart R. God, Jesus and Belief. Oxford: Blackwell, 1984.

Ruthven, Malise. A Fury for God: The Islamist Attack on America. London: Granta, 2002.

-------
Related Compass articles:

After Freud: Phantasy and Imagination in the Philosophy of Religion
By Beverley Clack , Oxford Brookes University
(Vol. 2, November 2007)
Philosophy Compass

Secrecy and New Religious Movements: Concealment, Surveillance, and Privacy in a New Age of Information
By Hugh B. Urban , Ohio State University
(Vol. 2, November 2007)
Religion Compass

Views of Jihad Throughout History
By Asma Afsaruddin , University of Notre Dame
(Vol. 1, November 2006)
Religion Compass

For me, this quotes' initial richness of meaning was found in the sheer fact that Kierkegaard said it, but I quickly became more interested in the truth behind it than the person saying it. Here S.K. is using an allusion to the fig leaves in Genesis 3 to thank Christ for covering our shame. The text is as follows:

"When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it. Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves. Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the LORD God as he was walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and they hid from the LORD God among the trees of the garden. But the LORD God called to the man, 'Where are you?' He answered, 'I heard you in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; so I hid.'" Genesis 3.6-10

Here is the idea that, after rebellion, the inclination is to cover ourselves and hide our shame. I find it particularly ironic that the first thing to condemn Adam and Eve was not God, but their own conscience. Their recognition of guilt the loss of innocence led them to dress like the lost boys and hide from God. God didn't immediately materialize and backhand them both across the face, He came seeking fellowship with them. But they were condemned by their own shame.

So human history progresses with this simple pattern: God provides boundaries, we break them, and someone (or some animal) must absorb the pain and punishment - someones gotta pay. God finally steps in and finishes it by absorbing everything and offering a covering that not only removes shame and guilt, but provides us with the best robe He's got and welcomes us into a blissful inheritance.

May we praise Him who has covered us completely! He is worthy of our every endeavor as we walk fully clothed and live to show others how they, too, can be clothed.

Jeg husker ikke, at jeg som barn forbandt noget negativt med ordet neger - selvom jeg meget vel forstod, at måden det blev sagt på kunne være negativ. Det var noget helt andet med ordet nigger. Det må være tilflyttede amerikanere, som forstår ordet neger, som om der blev sagt nigger. Skulle jeg da overfor vedkommende fastholde at sige neger? Det gør jeg ikke.

Noget lignende er det vel med den famøse tegning i Jyllands Posten, som går under navn af Muhammed. Vi er mange som ved, at det ikke er Muhammed. Da tegningen taler om misbrug af Muhammed i terroristernes terminologi, forstår jeg først ikke det ramaskrig, den rejser. Men når jeg nu ved, at den opleves ganske anderledes af muslimer, vil jeg da ikke bruge den. Vil jeg udtrykke, at jeg synes terrorister tager Islam som gidsel, må jeg finde på noget andet. Bedst er det jo, når det siges af muslimer.

Så læser jeg et stykke af Søren Kierkegard, som jo måtte løbe spidsrod i København på grund af Corsarens tegninger, hån og spot:

"Den Omstændighed at Frækheden har tilhold i et Blad gjør at de Frække mene aldeles at være i Retten, ja at være Udøvere af den offentlige Mening. Og det forstaar sig, jeg har dog  i en vis Forstand taget feil af Danmark, jeg troede dog ikke at Pøbelagtighed var den egentlige offentlige Mening i Danmark, men jeg skal med Fornøielse bevidne, hvad der faktisk let sig sig bevise, at det er Tilfældet."

( Citat fra PAP VIII 1,A 99, her efter Børge Andersen: Et vendepunkt i Søren Kierkegaards liv, 1997, p. 72, foresten købt i C.A.Reitzels Boghandel for kr. 25,-, da de har deres helt egen variant af bogudsalget.)