We've been reading Kierkegaard all wrong

[shunyadragon]

I believe Kierkegaard overstates the 'Natural Signs' evidence for God, particularly a Christian God. I consider it overwhelmingly neutral.

[LaplacesDemon]

Ok I think the main points are.
K would agree with something like reformed epistemology.
When K said faith contradicted reason , he didn't mean it contradicted logic or evidence , just that human beings had their faculties corrupted by sin and it was difficult to trust God because of that.
K understood teh limits of human reason , but was not an existentialist is the mode of Sartre or other thinkers he was later associated with.

[RBerman]

This does seem more like a Philosophy thread. It would be helpful for you to summarize the interesting points you think the article makes. Otherwise you are asking other people to write at length on a complicated topic in which you yourself have invested nothing but a quick weblink.

[LaplacesDemon]

Who is Sarte?

French existentialist philosopher. (I misspelled his name)

[LaplacesDemon]

Maybe we should move it to the philosophy thread.

[RBerman]

Who is Sarte?

[LaplacesDemon]

http://www.philosophynews.com/post/2...hen-Evans.aspx

See above. He argues that too many people have been reading him under the lens of later thinkers like Sartre