Doubt, Despair, and Doxastic Agency: Kierkegaard on Responsibility for Belief

Abstract Although doubt ( Tvivl ) and despair ( Fortvivlelse ) are widely recognized as two central and closely associated concepts in Kierkegaard’s authorship, their precise relationship remains opaque in the extant interpretive literature. To shed light on their relationship, this paper develops a novel interpretation of Kierkegaard’s understanding of the connection between despair and our agency over our beliefs, and its significance for Kierkegaard’s ethics of belief. First, I show that an important yet largely overlooked form of Kierkegaardian despair involves either failing to take ethico-religious responsibility for one’s practical agency over one’s beliefs, or misusing one’s practical agency over one’s beliefs by refusing to recognize or comply with externally given ethico-religious norms governing belief. Second, I argue that Kierkegaard takes properly exercising one’s agency over one’s beliefs to matter because beliefs are partly constitutive of the theological virtues (faith, hope, and love) that Kierkegaard regards as the cure for despair.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie
Published
2025-04-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1515/agph-2024-0133
Primary Topic
Kierkegaardian Philosophy and Influence
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Doubt, Despair, and Doxastic Agency: Kierkegaard on Responsibility for Belief

Z Quanbeck
Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie
Kierkegaardian Philosophy and Influence
article

Doubt, Despair, and Doxastic Agency: Kierkegaard on Responsibility for Belief

Z Quanbeck
article en

Abstract

Abstract Although doubt ( Tvivl ) and despair ( Fortvivlelse ) are widely recognized as two central and closely associated concepts in Kierkegaard’s authorship, their precise relationship remains opaque in the extant interpretive literature. To shed light on their relationship, this paper develops a novel interpretation of Kierkegaard’s understanding of the connection between despair and our agency over our beliefs, and its significance for Kierkegaard’s ethics of belief. First, I show that an important yet largely overlooked form of Kierkegaardian despair involves either failing to take ethico-religious responsibility for one’s practical agency over one’s beliefs, or misusing one’s practical agency over one’s beliefs by refusing to recognize or comply with externally given ethico-religious norms governing belief. Second, I argue that Kierkegaard takes properly exercising one’s agency over one’s beliefs to matter because beliefs are partly constitutive of the theological virtues (faith, hope, and love) that Kierkegaard regards as the cure for despair.

Archiv für Geschichte der PhilosophieVol. 107(4)
Princeton University (US)
Princeton University, State University of New York, De La Salle University, University of Cambridge, University of Oxford
Openalex Percentile: Top 92%
Kierkegaardian Philosophy and Influence
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Doubt, Despair, and Doxastic Agency: Kierkegaard on Responsibility for Belief — Z Quanbeck · Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS