Making Sense of Kierkegaard’s Subjective Truth Within Kant’s Bounds of Mere Reason

The position presented in Concluding Unscientific Postscript to “Philosophical Fragments” published under the pseudonym Johannes Climacus—crystallized in the infamous declaration that truth is subjectivity—has often been interpreted as dramatically upholding the rift between the Christian faith and common-sense reason. Through a comparison with Kant’s approach in philosophy of religion, I explain why such a response naturally arises. I then take a stab at making sense of Climacus’ position by comparing his account of faith in the historical God-man with contemporary analytic accounts of hope. The structural similarity between the two suggests that divine incarnation may not be all that puzzling as an object of hope, as it can be judged as morally useful within the framework of Kant’s practical philosophy. The question, then, is whether Climacus is justified in going beyond demanding hope and calling instead for faith, an absolute yes to Jesus. His crucial move is to frame our proper relationship to this person as a case of unconditional love. I take this move to establish Climacus’ subjective truth as a sensible aspirational ideal within Kant’s bounds of mere reason, although it never comes into full possession of finite humans.