The Self as a Center of Ethical Gravity: A Constructive Dialogue Between Søren Kierkegaard and George Herbert Mead
Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt
Standard
The Self as a Center of Ethical Gravity : A Constructive Dialogue Between Søren Kierkegaard and George Herbert Mead. / Hjortkjær, Christian; Willert, Søren.
I: Kierkegaard Studies Yearbook, Bind 2013, Nr. 1, 2013, s. 451-472.Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - The Self as a Center of Ethical Gravity
T2 - A Constructive Dialogue Between Søren Kierkegaard and George Herbert Mead
AU - Hjortkjær, Christian
AU - Willert, Søren
PY - 2013
Y1 - 2013
N2 - This paper examines the striking similarity between Kierkegaard’s and Mead’s theories of the self as relation, reflection and process as well as the normativity behind these theories. It is claimed that the theologian and the social psychologist share the view that the human being is an ethical being because its self is a dual relation; it relates to itself and in this relating it relates to an Other. Thus, regardless of their diverging views on the nature of this Other, they both define that of becoming a self as an unavoidable task: the task of standing in an ethical relation to oneself and to the Other. It is argued that differences in professions can be overcome: while reading Kierkegaard in the light of Mead helps to underline the relational character of Kierkegaard’s ethical notions, reading Mead in the light of Kierkegaard underlines the normative aspect of Mead’s social psychology.
AB - This paper examines the striking similarity between Kierkegaard’s and Mead’s theories of the self as relation, reflection and process as well as the normativity behind these theories. It is claimed that the theologian and the social psychologist share the view that the human being is an ethical being because its self is a dual relation; it relates to itself and in this relating it relates to an Other. Thus, regardless of their diverging views on the nature of this Other, they both define that of becoming a self as an unavoidable task: the task of standing in an ethical relation to oneself and to the Other. It is argued that differences in professions can be overcome: while reading Kierkegaard in the light of Mead helps to underline the relational character of Kierkegaard’s ethical notions, reading Mead in the light of Kierkegaard underlines the normative aspect of Mead’s social psychology.
M3 - Journal article
VL - 2013
SP - 451
EP - 472
JO - Kierkegaard Studies
JF - Kierkegaard Studies
SN - 1430-5372
IS - 1
ER -
ID: 74184757