«Тайна» псевдонимов Кьеркегора

Abstract

Unriddling S. Kierkegaard’s pseudonyms is important for interpretation of his philosophical views. That is why the issue of his pseudonyms remains one of the most important problems for historians of philosophy and commentators on Kierkegaard’s works. This paper analyses various points of view on the reasons for Kierkegaard’s use of pseudonyms in his philosophical works. Among the opinions of various philosophers presented in the article, key hypotheses can be distinguished viewing pseudonyms as the following: literary characters; Kierkegaard’s experiment; a search for self-identification; understanding the past; an alternative to Hegel’s The Phenomenology of Spirit; alternative forms of human existence; roles played by S. Kierkegaard, who is also the author of these plays; demonstration of representative figures showing the boundaries of forms of human existence; a way to overcome loneliness; means of indirect communication; dissociation of Kierkegaard’s personality. The author believes that the concept of conceptual persona (or character) used by Deleuze and F. Guattari allows us to reveal the “secret” of Kierkegaard’s pseudonyms, since this concept demonstrates the complexity and multidimensionality of pseudonyms. Applying the concept of conceptual persona is relevant since pseudonyms have the same properties as conceptual personae: 1) like conceptual personae, pseudonyms are autonomous from their creator and express their own worldview; 2) dialogism, intrinsic to them, allows them to reveal through dialogue the idea embodied in a pseudonym; 3) among the pseudonyms there are no sympathetic pseudonyms expressing the author’s point of view or antipathetic pseudonyms opposing the author; 4) like conceptual personae, pseudonyms form a plane of immanence; 5) pseudonyms are not identical to a social role or the concept of literary character.