The Self as a Center of Ethical Gravity: A Constructive Dialogue Between Søren Kierkegaard and George Herbert Mead

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningfagfællebedømt

Standard

The Self as a Center of Ethical Gravity : A Constructive Dialogue Between Søren Kierkegaard and George Herbert Mead. / Hjortkjær, Christian; Willert, Søren.

I: Kierkegaard Studies Yearbook, Bind 2013, Nr. 1, 2013, s. 451-472.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningfagfællebedømt

Harvard

Hjortkjær, C & Willert, S 2013, 'The Self as a Center of Ethical Gravity: A Constructive Dialogue Between Søren Kierkegaard and George Herbert Mead', Kierkegaard Studies Yearbook, bind 2013, nr. 1, s. 451-472.

APA

Hjortkjær, C., & Willert, S. (2013). The Self as a Center of Ethical Gravity: A Constructive Dialogue Between Søren Kierkegaard and George Herbert Mead. Kierkegaard Studies Yearbook, 2013(1), 451-472.

Vancouver

Hjortkjær C, Willert S. The Self as a Center of Ethical Gravity: A Constructive Dialogue Between Søren Kierkegaard and George Herbert Mead. Kierkegaard Studies Yearbook. 2013;2013(1):451-472.

Author

Hjortkjær, Christian ; Willert, Søren. / The Self as a Center of Ethical Gravity : A Constructive Dialogue Between Søren Kierkegaard and George Herbert Mead. I: Kierkegaard Studies Yearbook. 2013 ; Bind 2013, Nr. 1. s. 451-472.

Bibtex

@article{2d0ed413e3e2447e9f418dc897427c7d,
title = "The Self as a Center of Ethical Gravity: A Constructive Dialogue Between S{\o}ren Kierkegaard and George Herbert Mead",
abstract = "This paper examines the striking similarity between Kierkegaard’s and Mead’s theories of the self as relation, reflection and process as well as the normativity behind these theories. It is claimed that the theologian and the social psychologist share the view that the human being is an ethical being because its self is a dual relation; it relates to itself and in this relating it relates to an Other. Thus, regardless of their diverging views on the nature of this Other, they both define that of becoming a self as an unavoidable task: the task of standing in an ethical relation to oneself and to the Other. It is argued that differences in professions can be overcome: while reading Kierkegaard in the light of Mead helps to underline the relational character of Kierkegaard’s ethical notions, reading Mead in the light of Kierkegaard underlines the normative aspect of Mead’s social psychology.",
author = "Christian Hjortkj{\ae}r and S{\o}ren Willert",
year = "2013",
language = "English",
volume = "2013",
pages = "451--472",
journal = "Kierkegaard Studies",
issn = "1430-5372",
publisher = "Walterde Gruyter GmbH",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Self as a Center of Ethical Gravity

T2 - A Constructive Dialogue Between Søren Kierkegaard and George Herbert Mead

AU - Hjortkjær, Christian

AU - Willert, Søren

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - This paper examines the striking similarity between Kierkegaard’s and Mead’s theories of the self as relation, reflection and process as well as the normativity behind these theories. It is claimed that the theologian and the social psychologist share the view that the human being is an ethical being because its self is a dual relation; it relates to itself and in this relating it relates to an Other. Thus, regardless of their diverging views on the nature of this Other, they both define that of becoming a self as an unavoidable task: the task of standing in an ethical relation to oneself and to the Other. It is argued that differences in professions can be overcome: while reading Kierkegaard in the light of Mead helps to underline the relational character of Kierkegaard’s ethical notions, reading Mead in the light of Kierkegaard underlines the normative aspect of Mead’s social psychology.

AB - This paper examines the striking similarity between Kierkegaard’s and Mead’s theories of the self as relation, reflection and process as well as the normativity behind these theories. It is claimed that the theologian and the social psychologist share the view that the human being is an ethical being because its self is a dual relation; it relates to itself and in this relating it relates to an Other. Thus, regardless of their diverging views on the nature of this Other, they both define that of becoming a self as an unavoidable task: the task of standing in an ethical relation to oneself and to the Other. It is argued that differences in professions can be overcome: while reading Kierkegaard in the light of Mead helps to underline the relational character of Kierkegaard’s ethical notions, reading Mead in the light of Kierkegaard underlines the normative aspect of Mead’s social psychology.

M3 - Journal article

VL - 2013

SP - 451

EP - 472

JO - Kierkegaard Studies

JF - Kierkegaard Studies

SN - 1430-5372

IS - 1

ER -

ID: 74184757