Ethics and Metaphysics

Within Kierkegaard’s Fear and Trembling, there seems to be two aspects of metaphysics that are being called into questioned. First, there is the idea of the three different realms and the type of world these three spheres are situated within and the experiences they create. These realms are in a specific context, which develops the metaphysical ideas of the type of nature where human beings live. In conjunction, Kierkegaard’s work calls into question the metaphysics as a singular form of experience as a being. To fully understand “being qua being” in the world, Kierkegaard suggests that one must look at the metaphysics in conjunction with the ethics. Metaphysics and ethics are inseparable when trying to understand humans in the world. Searching for the metaphysical questions that we have been discussing in class such as what it means to be, how it varies in form, and studying what is cannot be fully explored or understood without considering the ethics. For Kierkegaard, metaphysics and ethics cannot be drawn out as singular matters to consider, but rather they should be seen in correlation to one another. In support, I will be reviewing Kant’s third antinomy. There are four antinomies where he considers two contrasting ideas. He accounts for their differences, but is able to connect them in some regard. The third antinomy is the one of most importance for my thesis. It discusses nature and freedom, which parallels my ideas of metaphysics and ethics. Also in support, an article in International Journal of Ethics titled Ethics and Metaphysics is written by Dorothy Walsh who attempts to show not only that “ethics… has its metaphysical presuppositions.” It is not only a matter of considering them as being connected, but she seems to question how much ethics depends on metaphysics.

My first primary source is Kierkegaard’s Fear and Trembling. As discussed, the first metaphysical aspect called into question is the nature of the environment in which we live. The study of what is revolves around the type of environment that we are placed within. (This is the first step in recognizing the connection between metaphysics and ethics.) There are three realms according to Kierkegaard that we exist in the world. First, there is the aesthetic realm. This deals with individual relationships on a personal level such as an inside joke or a common understanding in a relationship. The next realm is the ethical, which holds universal understanding such as judgments, rules and laws. The final realm is the religious, which is an actual relationship with God. Kierkegaard uses these realms to identify the Biblical relationship between Abraham and God. In the story, God calls upon Abraham to sacrifice his one and only son. Having faith in the Lord, Abraham obeys what the Lord has asked and takes Isaac to the top of the mountain to be sacrificed. This act has been used by many scholars as a reference to absolute faith, which is taking the “what is” of the situation and calling it into question due to the lack of understanding of the world. Normally, we perceive things through the universal, even our relationship with God. Kierkegaard wants to ask the question of whether the universal can be completely overlooked and there can be a direct relationship with God. This would alter our general understanding of the world, and it would seem that to do this would correlate not only to the way of acting in the world, but how and why one acts in the world drawing on the ethics of the situation. To clarify, the ethics are a large part of being in the world when we look at the story not as mere facts, but the truth of the situation. Kierkegaard asks how this can be a true testament of faith, when ethically it is so wrong. The perspective of the world and the moral duties of a father and of a religious leader of God seem to encompass both metaphysical questions and ethical questions.

My next source will be Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, where he attempts to settle the question of freedom verse the idea that everything is determined by nature. He goes on to define the what he means by freedom and nature. He says that the laws of nature are only significant in space and time; therefore, they are valid in their appearance. Freedom is existing outside the confines of experiences; therefore, they only apply to things within themselves. Yet, the overarching theme appears that reason excludes the idea of experience. There is a more indepth analysis which will be covered in my paper, but essentially Kant gets to the point that humans can be free and can also be subjected to the confinements of the natural world. His analysis is another attempt to show that freedom, an ethical question, is inseparable from the metaphysical question such as the laws of nature.

Another one of my sources comes from the International Journal of Ethics. Dorthy Walsh writes on Ethics and Metaphysics. She does not question whether or not they are used in conjunction, but rather how much they overlap. Her question is along the lines of how much of ethical questions are reliant upon metaphysics. There seems to be a dependency of ethics and this could create a whole new form of inquiry. So many times, philosophers try to separate these questions into epistemological, logical, metaphysical, when in reality by taking them out of the realm of the whole they miss a large part of the experience or knowledge they are trying to gain. It is through this paper that I am going to attempt to show the importance of keeping an open mind when studying the philosophical questions. Although it is convenient to analyze one aspect at a time, it significantly alters how something should b perceived in reality. Through Kierkegaard’s example of Abraham and God situated within the different realms and supported by many other philosophers work, I will attempt to show that the ethics and metaphysics are inseparable when analyzing these forms of knowledge.