Abstract

This dissertation is intended to be a contribution to ongoing explorations of the philosophical relationship between Immanuel Kant and Soren Kierkegaard. Over the last century, Kant and Kierkegaard have generally been placed in opposition to one another. Recently, commentators have begun to question this. With regard only for the ethical theories of Kant and Kierkegaard, I suggest that this dispute can be at least partly resolved through a religious approach. My contention is that certain neglected elements of their ethical theories become more noticeable and more important when it is kept in mind that the same type of Christianity forms the background for both Kant's and Kierkegaard's thinking. In particular, by approaching Kant's ethical writings through the lens of the apostle Paul's words at Romans 2:14--15, I am able to show that Kant's ethics bears a striking similarity to what I label a direct version of a law-based ethics. In other words, I believe that there is evidence that Kant may have been an ethical intuitionist similar in style to W. D. Ross. I also note how both Kierkegaard and traditional Protestant moral thought tend to place little emphasis on moral rules. The reason for this is that, according to the apostle Paul, one's life as a Christian fundamentally centers around the Holy Spirit. One does not need rules to follow because the Christian life is one which is ruled by God Himself in the person of the Holy Spirit. In other words, Kierkegaard's ethics is a version of what I label a Spirit-based ethics. Thus, one way of describing the relationship between Kant and Kierkegaard is to state that whereas God plays almost no role in Kant's ethics, God plays almost the only role in Kierkegaard's ethics. This manner of understanding the relationship between the ethical theories of Kant and Kierkegaard allows me to suggest a parallel to the distinction between law and Spirit as found in the New Testament writings of Paul. Past ways of understanding this relationship have differed significantly from this, in part because they have depended so heavily upon what I believe is a misinterpretation of Kierkegaard's Fear and Trembling. I try to take away this kind of support for past approaches by arguing that Fear and Trembling should not be understood as a philosophical work in ethics, but rather as a clever effort at Christian evangelism