Again, i think we interpret Kierkegaard very differently. I really thought he was a theologian demonstrating the modern path of a christian. you seem to see the quite opposite as you believe he is pointing toward being the ethical as the answer. oh well, i guess better reread some literature
anyways, there is one point, however, i disagree strongly which is your saying "Nietzsche wrote so much about how we need to reject these accepted standards of morality. If morality is illogical, why the hell do we accept it? ". From beyond good and evil, and thus spoke Zeruthustra or however the hell you spell his name
i believe Nietzche points out specificly that he does not promote nihilism in the sense of rejecting morals and standard but instead he believes to be a ubermanchen one needs to first follow moral standards as guildlines as the "lion" then move BEYOND it. it is important to understand that you do not abandon them but instead you are beyond it for the purpose of self improvement. I believe in the existantial sense, --although it seem that i'm probably way off :P -- the notion of hte ubermanchen is parallel to the notion of the relgious as one devote not to moral but instead to someone beyond. for Niezche it's being beyond good and evil for one's own growth while for Kierkegaard it's for god which is why i believe they call Nietzche the atheist existantialist while Kierkegaard the christian existantialist -- but again, i seem to be way off from your comment T_T need to reread -- . My question then is why Kierkegaard studied by theologians as part of the course and why is he THE christian existantialist? **confused** moving back to Nietzche, i cannot stress the point of BEYOND good and evil and being the "above" man. I remember reading the essay demonstrating that Kurtz from Heart of Darkness. If you agree with this notion, then Kurtz would be an example of a failed ubermanchen. Thus the importance of his idealism in moral and the ultimately destruction of his moral. Now i'm just babbling -_- but as i said, i strongly disagree in your saying Nieztche believieng moral standards are illogical; i think he believes that they are created by what he calls the "herd mentality" which men follow for the survival of the race. yet in essense, the ubermanchen can move beyond that for his own gain just as Kurtz exploited the natives in heart of darkness. yes nietzche DOES redicule tradition but he does NOT redicule morals in its basic forms as illogical...//two cents /// time to reread my Kierkegaard before summer ends :P