The Sickness Unto Death

Paperback, 201 pages

English language

Published Nov. 1, 1983 by Princeton University Press.

ISBN:: 978-0-691-02028-0

The 'sickness' which Kierkegaard's book refers to as 'unto death' is resistance to this belief. It is the inclination to accept that as far as the individual is concerned, death is indeed the end. Now why should Kierkegaard want to call that a sickness? After all, even in his own time there must have been people strong both in might and body who rejected the Christian teaching of sin and salvation, and who faced what they accepted as total extinction with equanimity. And today, of course, even in societies that once proudly professed Christian principles, the rejection of Christian belief--or at least the failure unequivocally to accept it--is the rule rather than the exception. So in what sense can the denial of Christian dogma constitute an illness?

28 editions

decadent_and_depraved reviewed The Sickness Unto Death by Søren Kierkegaard

Review of 'The Sickness Unto Death' on 'Goodreads'

1 star

Terribly disappointing.
Never before have I encountered a book that I found so disagreeable. I mean that in a non-metaphorical sense. I literally could not agree with one thing Kierkegaard argued for in this book. At times, it felt as if the book was arguing for the diametrical opposite of every one of the opinions I hold. How strange is it to read such a book? Quite. The stranger more is the fact that Kierkegaard keeps insisting upon certain points, but never adequately defines any of the words he uses to argue for those points. Even worse, at one point, almost as if he had a moment of self-doubt, Kierkegaard throws his arms in the air and proclaims, "But can anyone comprehend this Christian doctrine? By no means -- this too is Christian, and so is an offense. It must be believed. Comprehension is conterminous with man’s relation to the …

Terribly disappointing.
Never before have I encountered a book that I found so disagreeable. I mean that in a non-metaphorical sense. I literally could not agree with one thing Kierkegaard argued for in this book. At times, it felt as if the book was arguing for the diametrical opposite of every one of the opinions I hold. How strange is it to read such a book? Quite. The stranger more is the fact that Kierkegaard keeps insisting upon certain points, but never adequately defines any of the words he uses to argue for those points. Even worse, at one point, almost as if he had a moment of self-doubt, Kierkegaard throws his arms in the air and proclaims, "But can anyone comprehend this Christian doctrine? By no means -- this too is Christian, and so is an offense. It must be believed. Comprehension is conterminous with man’s relation to the human, but faith is man’s relation to the divine. How then does Christianity explain this incomprehensible? Quite consistently, in an equally incomprehensible way, by means of the fact that it is revealed."
Now, this is not a novel idea. It is well understood that spiritual can never be put into words, to say that it must be experienced, but to proclaim such a thing, after arguing for 100 and so pages, that one can only orient oneself if one believes that center is old father God, is somewhat comical.
This book is theology, plain and simple. If you ask me, nothing wrong with theology. It has its place. So does philosophy. And this book is no philosophy.