SavedAdd your journal

Journals / MetaZihin: Yapay Zeka ve Zihin Felsefesi Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 1 Sayı: 1

[Guest Paper] Kierkegaard’s Concept of Irony and his Critiques on Romantic Irony

[Konuk Makale] [Kierkegaard’ın İroni Kavramı ve Romantik İroni Üzerine Eleştirileri]

İşıl Çeşmeli0000-0003-0065-4429
Pages
141–157
Publication Date
2018-06-30
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

It also shows that in the light of Kierkegaard’s critiques on Schlegel’s irony, the traces of the aesthetic, the ethical and the religious spheres of existence which form the outline of Kierkegaard’s existential philosophy and the place of irony as a border territory between the aesthetic and the ethical spheres, depicted in his later works, can already be found in The Concept of Irony .

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Abstract: Søren Kierkegaard’s doctoral dissertation, The Concept of Irony with Continual Reference to Socrates (1841) is not only a comprehensive analysis of the concept of irony but it also comprises his own characterization of irony.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Kierkegaard both elaborates on Socratic irony by addressing interpretations of Xenophon, Plato and Aristophanes and looks into core principles of romantic irony by concentrating on German Romantics in it.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It also shows that in the light of Kierkegaard’s critiques on Schlegel’s irony, the traces of the aesthetic, the ethical and the religious spheres of existence which form the outline of Kierkegaard’s existential philosophy and the place of irony as a border territory between the aesthetic and the ethical spheres, depicted in his later works, can already be found in The Concept of Irony .
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Kierkegaard · ironi · romantik ironi

Abstract

Abstract: Søren Kierkegaard’s doctoral dissertation, The Concept of Irony with Continual Reference to Socrates (1841) is not only a comprehensive analysis of the concept of irony but it also comprises his own characterization of irony. Kierkegaard both elaborates on Socratic irony by addressing interpretations of Xenophon, Plato and Aristophanes and looks into core principles of romantic irony by concentrating on German Romantics in it. This article first examines the key features of Kierkegaard’s irony and his critiques on romantic irony particularly through Friedrich Schlegel’s famous novel, Lucinde . Then, it discusses whether Schlegel’s romantic irony satisfies the necessary requirements of irony specified in The Concept of Irony . It also shows that in the light of Kierkegaard’s critiques on Schlegel’s irony, the traces of the aesthetic, the ethical and the religious spheres of existence which form the outline of Kierkegaard’s existential philosophy and the place of irony as a border territory between the aesthetic and the ethical spheres, depicted in his later works, can already be found in The Concept of Irony .

Özet

Öz: Søren Kierkegaard’ın doktora tezi Sokrates’e Yoğun Göndermelerle İroni Kavramı (1841) sadece ironi kavramının kapsamlı bir tahlili değildir, aynı zamanda Kierkegaard’ın kendi ironi tanımını da içerir. Kierkegaard tezinde hem Ksenophon, Platon ve Aristofanes’in yorumlarına değinerek Sokratik ironi üzerinde durur hem de Alman Romantikleri’ne odaklanarak romantik ironinin temel ilkelerini sorgular. Bu makale, ilk olarak Kierkegaard’ın ironisinin ana özelliklerini ve onun özellikle Friedrich Schlegel’in ünlü romanı Lucinde üzerinden yaptığı romantik ironi eleştirilerini incelemektedir. Daha sonra, Schlegel’in romantik ironisinin İroni Kavramı ’nda belirtilen zorunlu koşulları sağlayıp sağlamadığını tartışmaktadır. Makale ayrıca, Schlegel’in ironisi üzerine eleştirileri ışığında, Kierkegaard’ın sonraki eserlerinde betimlenen varoluşçu felsefesinin ana hatlarını oluşturan estetik, etik ve dinî var oluş alanlarına ve estetik ve etik alan arasında sınır bölge olan ironinin yerine dair izlerin hâlihazırda İroni Kavramı ’nda bulunabileceğini göstermektedir. Anahtar Kelimeler: Kierkegaard, ironi, romantik ironi, Schlegel, var oluş alanları.

🔖

Cite This Article

Çeşmeli, İ. (2018). [Guest Paper] Kierkegaard’s Concept of Irony and his Critiques on Romantic Irony. MetaZihin: Yapay Zeka ve Zihin Felsefesi Dergisi, Cilt: 1 Sayı: 1, 141–157. https://ajindex.com/articles/1528754

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. Beiser, F. C. (2003). The Romantic Imperative. Cambridge- Massachusetts & London: Harvard University Press.
  2. Firchow, P. (1971). “Introduction” in Friedrich Schlegel’s Lucinde and the Fragments, ed. P. Firchow, 3-39. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
  3. Gardiner, P. (1988). Kierkegaard. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.
  4. Gonzalez, A. (2014). “Humor” in Kierkegaard’s Concepts: Envy to Incognito. ed. J. Stewart, W. McDonald, and S. M. Emmanuel, 175-182. England: Ashgate Publishing Limited.
  5. Jothen, P. (2014). Kierkegaard, Aesthetics and Selfhood: The Art of Subjectivity. England: Ashgate Publishing Limited.
  6. Kierkegaard S. (1989). The Concept of Irony with Continual Reference to Socrates. trans. H. V. Hong, E. H. Hong, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
  7. Kierkegaard, S. (2009). Concluding Unscientific Postscript. ed. and trans. A. Hannay, New York: Cambridge University Press.
  8. Kylliäinen J. (2009). Living Poetically in the Modern Age: The Situational Aspects of Kierkegaard’s Thought. Helsinki: University of Helsinki.
  9. Lippitt, J. (2000). Humour and Irony in Kierkegaard’s Thought. Great Britain: Palgrave Macmillan.
  10. Pattison, G. (1998). “Art in an age of reflection” in The Cambridge Companion to Kierkegaard.” ed. A. Hannay and G. D. Marino, 76-100. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
  11. Rasmussen, J. D. S. (2005). Between Irony and Witness. New York & London: T&T Clark International.
  12. Schlegel, F. (1971). “Lucinde” in Friedrich Schlegel’s Lucinde and the Fragments, ed. and trans. P. Firchow, 42-140. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
  13. Schlegel, F. (1971). “Critical Fragments” in Friedrich Schlegel’s Lucinde and the Fragments, ed. and trans. P. Firchow, 143-159. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
  14. Schlegel, F. (1971). “Athenaeum Fragments” in Friedrich Schlegel’s Lucinde and the Fragments, ed. and trans. P. Firchow, 161-240. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
  15. Söderquist K. B. (2003). “Kierkegaard’s Contribution to the Danish Discussion of ‘Irony’” in Kierkegaard and His Contemporaries: The Culture of Golden Age Denmark. ed. J. Stewart, 78-105. Berlin & New York: Walter de Gruyter.
  16. Thielst, P. (2003). “Poul Martin Møller: Scattered Thoughts, Analysis of Affectation, Struggle with Nihilism” in Kierkegaard and His Contemporaries: The Culture of Golden Age Denmark. ed. J. Stewart, 45-61. Berlin & New York: Walter de Gruyter.