Home Philosophy Religiosität als Differenzerfahrung
Chapter
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Religiosität als Differenzerfahrung

  • Katia Hansen
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Abstract

The article deals with the question of the position and status of religiosity within a philosophical-anthropological determination of man and compares the approaches of Sören Kierkegaard and Helmuth Plessner. Both thinkers seek to understand religiosity within the context of noticeably analogous notions of man as a ‘self’. Through the concepts of “despair” (Kierkegaard) and “eccentric positionality” (Plessner), they describe man as a precarious relation of identity and difference, whose unity has to be constantly redefined and performed by himself. Thus, being a self also means being free. Representing only a limited and finite form of freedom however, human beings remain banned in the boundaries of, for example, their corporeality and sociality, from which they are also elevated. Because of its fragmentary and temporary constitution, the self ultimately finds itself referred to transcendence as a last possibility of obtaining unity. Both Kierkegaard and Plessner locate the possibility of religiosity at this intersection of freedom and transcendency, what allows to understand Religious experience as an experience of difference

Abstract

The article deals with the question of the position and status of religiosity within a philosophical-anthropological determination of man and compares the approaches of Sören Kierkegaard and Helmuth Plessner. Both thinkers seek to understand religiosity within the context of noticeably analogous notions of man as a ‘self’. Through the concepts of “despair” (Kierkegaard) and “eccentric positionality” (Plessner), they describe man as a precarious relation of identity and difference, whose unity has to be constantly redefined and performed by himself. Thus, being a self also means being free. Representing only a limited and finite form of freedom however, human beings remain banned in the boundaries of, for example, their corporeality and sociality, from which they are also elevated. Because of its fragmentary and temporary constitution, the self ultimately finds itself referred to transcendence as a last possibility of obtaining unity. Both Kierkegaard and Plessner locate the possibility of religiosity at this intersection of freedom and transcendency, what allows to understand Religious experience as an experience of difference

Downloaded on 22.12.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/9783110739978-007/html
Scroll to top button