Living Poetically in the Modern Age : The Situational Aspects of Kierkegaard's Thought

How did Søren Kierkegaard (1813 1855) situate the human subject into historical and social actuality? How did he take into consideration his own situatedness? As key for understanding these questions the research takes the ideal of living poetically that Kierkegaard outlined in his dissertation. In The Concept of Irony (1841) Kierkegaard took up this ideal of the Romantic ironists and made it into an ethical-religious ideal. For him the ideal of living poetically came to mean 1) becoming brought up by God, while 2) assuming ethical-religiously one s role and place in the historical actuality. Through an exegesis of Kierkegaard s texts from 1843 to 1851 it is shown how this ideal governed Kierkegaard s thought and action throughout his work. The analysis of Kierkegaard s ideal of living poetically not only a) shows how the Kierkegaardian subject is situated in its historical context. It also b) sheds light on Kierkegaard s social and political thought, c) helps to understand Kierkegaard s character as a religious thinker, and d) pits his ethical-religious orientation in life against its scientific and commonsense alternatives. The research evaluates the rationality of the way of life championed by Kierkegaard by comparing it with ways of life dominated by reflection and reasoning. It uses Kierkegaard s ideal of living poetically in trying to understand the tensions between religious and unreligious ways of life.

Major Events and the European Code of Police Ethics

Examines the symbolic significance of major events and their security provision in the historical and contemporary context of the European Code of Police Ethics. Stresses the potential of major events to set new practical policing and security standards of technology and in doing so necessitiate the maintenance of professional ethical standards for policing in Europe.

After interpretation.

Using 58 audio recorded sessions of psychoanalysis (coming from two analysts and three patients) as data and conversation analysis as method, this paper shows how psychoanalysts deal with patients’ responses to interpretations. After the analyst offers an interpretation, the patient responds: at that point (in the “third position”), the analysts recurrently modify the tenor of the description from what it was in the patients’ responses. They intensify the emotional valence of the description, or they reveal layers of the patients’ experience other than those that the patient reported. Both are usually accomplished in an implicit, non-marked way, and they discreetly index possible opportunities for the patients to modify their understandings of the initial interpretation. Although the patients usually do not fully endorse these modifications, the data available suggests that during the sessions that follow, the participants do work with the aspects of patients’ experience that the analyst highlighted. In discussion, it is suggested that actions that the psychoanalysts produce in therapy, such as choices of turn design in third position, may be informed by working understanding of the minds and mental conflicts of individual patients, alongside the more general therapeutic model of mind they hold to.