n October 1843, Kierkegaard published Repetitionunder the pseudonym Constantin Constantius: a “droll little book”, in which he stages one of the most original and deepest concepts of his philosophical reflection. Not even two months later, Johan Ludvig Heiberg (1791-1860) wrote a review that gave rise to a polemical reaction by Kierkegaard. A controversy that, however, has the strange peculiarity of remaining solitary. Kierkegaard in fact writes a long and inflamed answer that he decides to keep in the drawer, sure of the contradictory nature of wanting to transform into “direct communication” what only indirectly, through irony, can be introduced into reflection. In the unpublished manuscripts named Little Contributionby Constantin Constantius Author of “Repetition”, Kierkegaard engages in the rare attempt to explicitly explain himself and his category of repetition to contemporaries who have misunderstood it, preferring the Hegelian mediation

Basso, I. M., Constantin Constantius’ Little Contribution to an Ontology of Becoming, <<REVISTA BRASILEIRA DE FILOSOFIA DA RELIGIÃO>>, 2022; (v. 8 n. 1): 103-117 [http://hdl.handle.net/10807/209208]

Constantin Constantius’ Little Contribution to an Ontology of Becoming

Basso, Ingrid Marina
2022

Abstract

n October 1843, Kierkegaard published Repetitionunder the pseudonym Constantin Constantius: a “droll little book”, in which he stages one of the most original and deepest concepts of his philosophical reflection. Not even two months later, Johan Ludvig Heiberg (1791-1860) wrote a review that gave rise to a polemical reaction by Kierkegaard. A controversy that, however, has the strange peculiarity of remaining solitary. Kierkegaard in fact writes a long and inflamed answer that he decides to keep in the drawer, sure of the contradictory nature of wanting to transform into “direct communication” what only indirectly, through irony, can be introduced into reflection. In the unpublished manuscripts named Little Contributionby Constantin Constantius Author of “Repetition”, Kierkegaard engages in the rare attempt to explicitly explain himself and his category of repetition to contemporaries who have misunderstood it, preferring the Hegelian mediation
Inglese
Basso, I. M., Constantin Constantius’ Little Contribution to an Ontology of Becoming, <<REVISTA BRASILEIRA DE FILOSOFIA DA RELIGIÃO>>, 2022; (v. 8 n. 1): 103-117 [http://hdl.handle.net/10807/209208]
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/10807/209208
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact