Or – Or of Kierkegaard: The Art of Choosing Without Knowing the Result

Søren Kierkegaard was a Danish philosopher of the 19th century, often called the father of existentialism. His major work, “Or – Or”, written in 1843, still remains one of the most provocative and profound texts in the history of thought. But what did he mean when he chose such a title? Is it really about a final choice and a definitive decision? Or is it perhaps about something more complex – about life where we can never be sure we made the right choice? Let's delve into this without academic pomposity but with respect for the Danish genius.

Two Paths, or What Does “Or – Or” Mean

For Kierkegaard, “Or – Or” is not just a logical alternative. It is an existential challenge. He offers the reader a choice between two fundamental ways of existing: aesthetic and ethical. The aesthetic path is a life built on enjoyment, the pursuit of beauty, novelty, pleasure. The ethical path is a life based on duty, morality, responsibility, marriage, career. But the philosopher does not say that one is better than the other. He says that you need to choose. And this choice can only be made through a “leap” – an act of personal determination that cannot be justified rationally.

“Or – Or” is not about weighing all the pros and cons and making the optimal decision. It is about the fact that rational weighing is impossible when it comes to choosing a life path. Because there is no objective scale that could compare pleasure and duty. Kierkegaard asserts that choice is always subjective, always personal, always risky. And it is in this risk that its authenticity lies.

Not Just “Or”, But “Or” and No “And”

Unlike the modern world, where we are accustomed to compromises and syntheses, Kierkegaard insists on the rigor of the alternative. It is impossible to live in both aesthetic and ethical simultaneously. You cannot be both a hedonist and a moralist at the same time. Eventually, you will have to choose. This does not mean that the aesthetic life lacks morality, and the ethical lacks pleasure. But their foundations are different. And trying to combine them leads to an inner emptiness, to dishonesty towards oneself.

Kierkegaard writes that most people live in an “intermediate” zone, avoiding a final choice. They do not dare to take a radical “or”, because it requires sacrifice, it destroys the illusion of security. This is why “Or – Or” is more than a book about choice; it is a book about the courage to choose. It calls for resolution, not analysis. And here Kierkegaard radically differs from Hegel, who believed that truth is born from the synthesis of opposites. For Kierkegaard, synthesis is evasion. Truth is born in the act of personal decision.

The Aesthetic Stage: Life as Enjoyment

The aesthetic path is a life where a person seeks diversity, impressions, avoids boredom. This can be art, love adventures, travel, intellectual pursuits. However, the aesthete inevitably faces longing and disappointment because enjoyment quickly fades away, and the new requires more. In this sense, the aesthetic life is a life in the bondage of endless pursuit that never brings fulfillment. And here Kierkegaard is very accurate: he does not condemn the aesthete, he shows his drama. The brightest example of an aesthete in the book is the image of the seducer, who enjoys playing with emotions but ultimately ends up alone with emptiness.

But the aesthetic stage is not just about entertainment. It is about trying to avoid making a choice. An aesthete can be smart, creative, sensitive. But he dodges the responsibility for his life. He does not say “I choose”, he says “I try”. And it is this lack of finality that makes him unhappy in his innermost depths, even if he seems successful on the outside.

The Ethical Stage: Life as Duty

The ethical stage is a choice in favor of responsibility. Here, a person takes on obligations: towards the family, society, oneself. He enters into marriage, builds a career, follows moral principles. This is not a search for enjoyment but a service to values. Kierkegaard does not say that the ethical life is easier or more pleasant. On the contrary, it requires constant effort, self-discipline, readiness to make sacrifices. But it gives what the aesthete does not have: a sense of integrity and consistency.

However, the ethical stage is not a final point either. Kierkegaard acknowledges that an ethical person may fall into self-satisfaction, into the confidence that he is “good”, that he fulfills his duty. And then a crisis may arise that can lead to the third stage – the religious one. But this goes beyond the bounds of “Or – Or”. Because for Kierkegaard, religion is not just a belief in God; it is a personal attitude to the absurd, to the paradox that does not服从 ethics.

A Choice That Does Not Guarantee Happiness

Kierkegaard's key thought is that choice does not guarantee success. Choosing, we do not know where our choice will lead. We can choose the ethical life and fall apart. We can choose the aesthetic and remain lonely. But what is important is something else: choice makes us who we are. It is in the act of choice that we create our essence. Kierkegaard does not believe in predetermination, does not believe that someone has already created us. He believes that we create ourselves through our decisions. Therefore, what is most important is not the correctness of the choice but its sincerity.

Here he resonates with later existentialists like Sartre, who would say that existence precedes essence. But Kierkegaard's choice is also colored with a religious dimension: it is a choice in the face of God, in the face of eternity. This is why it requires not just rational weighing but a “leap of faith” – an act that cannot be fully understood by reason.

What Does It Mean to Make a Final Choice?

The final choice in Kierkegaard's philosophy is not a one-time, once-and-for-all decision. It is a decision that defines everything else but still needs to be constantly confirmed. Choosing the ethical path means constantly renewing this choice. Choosing faith means remaining in tension before the absurdity every minute. So finality here is not a static, but a dynamic quality. It is readiness to be true to one's choice, even when it seems illogical or unsuccessful.

In this way, “Or – Or” does not offer a simple answer. It offers a question that changes life. And this question sounds like this: “Are you ready to take responsibility for your choice, even if it leads to the unknown?” And it is this unknown that is the price of authentic existence. Kierkegaard does not give a map, he gives a compass. He offers everyone to find their own path.

Conclusion: Choice as Vocation

“Or – Or” of Kierkegaard is a book about the impossibility of living without choice. And it is impossible to avoid responsibility for it. Even if we refuse to choose, we are still making a choice – choosing not to choose. But true life begins only when we make a decision with full awareness, in fear and trembling, without confidence in the future. In this sense, “Or – Or” is an invitation to courage. The courage to be free, the courage to err, the courage to continue moving forward, even when the road does not seem clear.

This is the main lesson of the Danish philosopher. To be oneself means to choose. And this choice is always final and always open at the same time.

Permanent link to this publication: