Are the writings of Kirkegaard useful to a non-christian or do I have to be religious?

Are the writings of Kirkegaard useful to a non-christian or do I have to be religious?

I didn't find much benefit in his writings.

As a Muslim I just couldn't relate, or maybe what he was saying just has no significance or relevance to me as someone with no cultural background in Christianity, let alone his version of it.

The first half of The Sickness Unto Death is some of the most powerful, practical philosophy I've read. Likewise, Either/Or is aesthetically valuable; if you read it, you might be pushed a little further towards Christianity (it depends on how despairing you are currently).

Don't read Fear and Trembling, unless you're really into Hegel getting BTFO. Works of Love would also likely not interest you. Depending how deep you want to go, Concluding Unscientific Postscripts has many interesting ideas that were so far ahead of its time (like the basis for true and pure humor being anonymous! hmm...).

This this this
I am literally a Muslim and Kierkegaard's teachings are better than all of the sufists combined

I don't agree.

Kierkegaard only makes sense to someone with a Protestant cultural background

Not at all. Perhaps the greatest work of Kierkegaard is in being able to elucidate the gut wrenching despair of living in a Godless world

Absolute horseshit, describe one way in which this is the case

Were you born Muslim? Did you grow up in an anglophone country?

If something doesn't make sense to you you're not in a position to claim special knowledge determines this to be the case. That's logically impossible.
Your problem is more likely being a sub-95 IQ sandnigger

If you grew up in the west then you are mentally a Protestant and modern man whether you realize that or not.

this

Awful post

It's beta male grandomania, so go right ahead and read his work.

This is correct.

Please answer

Only so far as people from other backgrounds are generally intellectually inferior

t. Alpha

I don't expect Veeky Forums to know the difference but Kierkegaard is not intellectually stimulating.

Thats an interesting opinion

Dr. Sadler

I disagree. F&T had a really profound effect on me and pretty much converted me. Got baptized a few months after reading it.

Lol
Cuck

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahabahababa...muslims reading kirkegaard...hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

They couldn't why Abraham did not follow Allah's divine command and kill the infidel child

Ultimately they're only useful for christians. You can not get past the ethical stage otherwise.

That being said, I found him to be better at tearing down illusions and contradictions in a character than actually building something in their stead, so you might find his writings useful for that alone. He makes a powerful case against in-action

>That being said, I found him to be better at tearing down illusions and contradictions in a character than actually building something in their stead
Cool, that's basically all I do all day

If Epictetus can be digested and put into action even by the non religious, I'm sure Kierkegaard can be too.

Well, Either/Or might still be useful to you. As I said, his description (and sort of parody) of the aesthetic stage is really compelling and makes his case for action all the better. If you find yourself unable to do anything, caught up in fleeting dreams, it's still the right book, even if you're not christian

Putting Kierkegaard into action as an atheist means drinking yourself to death

So no? That's what I thought. Go fuck a goat.

>Dr. Sadler
Thanks.

It's an accurate opinion. Kirkegaard has an emotionally-focused style of argumentation. He appeals (in more ways than one) to the passions, not the intellect.
Again, not that most people on Veeky Forums would know the difference, but...

Fascinating

>being this much of a brainlet

You're confirming my point.

He is incredibly smart i heard

Religion can only be defended emotionally. Any writer who appeals to the intellect rather than the passions is not religious, for all religion is irrational.

Ok whiteboy

lol

wtf i am no longer roman catholic now

Labels you assume have no bearing on your assumptions and way of thinking, imparting upon you by the society you find yourself in. Most Atheists still have a Protestant cultural background.

This.
I just finished reading his work yesterday.

Maybe you shouldn't have been a goat fucker then Mahmoud

Quads of Truth

Shhh, you will trigger the brainlets who think you need to be "intellectually superior" to grok Kierkegaard