Kierkegaard, the father of existentialism, is often seen as an iconoclast, philosophical which rejects an excessive formalism, and instead believe in the subjectivity of the autonomous individual; autonomy for the is the best guide as to what people should do ethically and ethics could, in turn, allows the individual approach to knowledge through faith. This philosopher was, therefore, often refer to the nature of truth and knowledge, especially with regard to the articles of faith. It is commonly known that biblical Christianity is founded on the truths of the Word of God. Kierkegaard's claim that the knowledge or truth can be reached through the subjectivity is, therefore, at first glance, incomprehensibly elusive. However, it should be borne in mind that Kierkegaard is basing their ideas on a critique of Hegel's approach to the nature of the absolute knowledge. …show more content…
Saint John Climacus, a monk of the 7th century, argued against this idea by pointing to the effect that the Acceptance of this approach would mean that knowledge is more important for Christians to believe; two acts that are very different in the kernel, because the qualitative difference between knowledge and faith. (Garrett) Kierkegaard important emphasis in this regard is that the Christian life is based on something more than a simple belief in an orthodox doctrine. For this reason, when Kierkegaard stresses the need for the subjectivity to arrive at a knowledge that is simply asserting that all human beings "must take ownership of the truth of what we believe that if it is truly to take control of their lives." (Garrett). In summary, Kierkegaard holds a rational life is really a moral life and a moral life is a religious life. Morality and ethics, therefore, inevitably lead to the