키에르케고르의 진리이론: 메타프락시스적 관점

Kierkegaard’s Theory of Truth: An Interpretation in the Light of Metapraxis

키에르케고르는 실존하는 주체의 내면성, 열정적 자기화와 같은 주관성의 요소를 강조하고, 그것을 진리 기준으로 내세운다. 대응설에서 진리는 명제(사고)의 특성, 즉 그것이 사실(존재)과 일치한다는 특성에 지나지 않는 반면에, ‘인격을 함양시켜주는 진리’ 로서의 주관적 진리는 당사자의 전적인 헌신을 요구하는 과제로 간주된다. 소크라테스 사상과 기독교, 그 각각을 발달의 관점에서 규정하는 종교성 A와 종교성 B는 주관적 진리의 두 가지 양태를 보여주며, 그 양자의 관계는 그 각각에 상응하는 전달방법으로서의 ‘2중반사에 의한 간접전달’과 ‘복제에 의한 간접전달’에 상응한다. 주관성과 정합성의 관련에 주목하면, 키에르케고르의 진리이론은 정합설의 사례로 간주될 수 있다. 다만 이 경우에는 정합성이 논리적 무모순이라는 의미 이외에 자기화의 열정과 같은 주관성의 요소를 담을 수 있어야 한다. 주관적 진리와 간접전달에 관한 키에르케고르의 논의는 그의 진리이론이 정합설에 실제적 행위를 추가한 제4의 진리이론, 즉 ‘메타프락시스설’을 예시하는 것으로 해석할 수 있게 해준다. 그의 이론은 진리 기준의 절대성 또는 이차원성(異次元性), 영원한 진리와 주관적 진리의 우선성, 진리를 자기화하려는 열정 자체의 중요성에 관한 정합된 논의를 담고 있다.

Kierkegaard’s thesis that truth is subjectivity should be understood by contrast with the commonly accepted thesis that truth is objectivity. He suggested that subjective elements such as the individual’s passionate inwardness and a striving for appropriation of truth should be construed as the criterion of truth in the ethico-religious knowledge which is essentially a relating to the existence of a knowing subject. He criticized Correspondence Theory which defines truth as agreement of thought with being in that its objectivist position is not compatible with the subjective “how” and the upbuilding aspect of truth. For him truth was “the thing for which I will live and die,” whereas the objectivists like Hegelian speculative philosophers regarded it as mere propositional property of conforming with a state of affair. Upbuilding truth in Either/Or is the same as the subjective truth in Concluding Unscientific Postscript. Kierkegaard introduced Socrates and Christ as the two models of teacher who communicate the subjective truth. They represent the two modes of subjective truth that correspond to the two stages of edification, Religiousness A and Religiousness B(Christianity). The difference between these terms manifests itself in the way of indirect communication. The indirect communication by double-reflection suffices for the former, while the latter requires the indirect communication by reduplication. God’s eternal truth can be reduplicated as the subjective truth in the recipient’s existence by Jesus and his disciples as indirect communicators. By considering the relation between subjectivity and coherence, Kierkegaard’s concept of subjective truth can be seen as falling under the Coherence Theory of truth, but only if the concept of coherence includes the subjective element such as the passionate appropriation of an existing subject, besides the meaning of being free of logical contradiction. Kierkegaard’s insights on the subjective truth and the indirect communication make it possible to interpret his theory of truth as exemplifying the 4th theory of truth, namely Metapractical Theory to which we get by reinterpreting Coherence Theory in the light of Metapraxis. His theory of truth can be characterized as the coherent system of ideas constituted by the absolute and transcendental dimension of truth criterion, the circularity of eternal truth and subjective truth, and the importance of passionate appropriation and personal commitment.