Nietzsche, Dostoevsky and Kierkegaard.compared

Opening 

All three were of that same era and there existed a high degree of commonality in their concern for what they saw, with remarkable accuracy, the inevitable descent into nihilism. The events being played out then were the rapid adoption of post enlightenment thinking in Western Europe and to usher in the new scientific age that had been gathering pace over the past few hundred years. That sudden jolt was to become even more pronounced in Russia which was only just emerging from serfdom. 

These titanic like forces were already exerting their forces on the traditional values and societal chemistry that were to be challenged in the ensuing chaos, possibly to be seen as a manifestation of the hostilities that involved the First World War

Each was to exhibit a high degree of consistency in their overarching theme as to how one finds meaning in life, even to find that meaning in suffering, which was to afflict all of them in different ways. 

Early childhood and youthful influences  

All three might be regarded as having a privileged background as it is suffice to say they all received a good education and went on to become prodigious writers and philosophers, principally concerned with demonstrating how to live a meaningful life in their respective narratives. But, suffering was to be their constant companion, particularly that of Nietzsche's persistent nausea, stomach complaints and migraines. Dostoevsky suffered from epilepsy and Kierkegaard from melancholy, as did his father. 

Like father, like son applies to some degree, to possibly their ongoing afflictions, as Nietzsche's father may have died from a brain tumour and that could possibly have been responsible for his son’s condition, but this remains purely speculative. Certainly Kierkegaard, writing in 1846, talks about his melancholy, to discern he had inherited that affliction from his father. The early influence for Nietzsche was Schopenhauer whose work was contained in his work, 'The World as Will and Representation'. 

Hegel influenced  Kierkegaard and Belinsky was the early mentor for Dostoevsky. In common to all, that youthful attachment and admiration gave way in maturity to a critical analysis that rejected their conclusions to make way for their own philosophy. 

Differences in their approach.

Dostoevsky differs markedly from the other two in that it is only through his epic novels that he speaks to us

Philosophically and even then only one ‘The Underground’ could be considered an existential novel. Rather, we see his embrace of the ideals of the Russian Orthodox Church that he wants to retain as the redemptive power over the encroachment of Nihilism. This idea of retaining the sacred is evident in the characters of the 'Brothers. This approach is in marked contrast to Nietzsche's idea, because of the decadent nature of the Judeo Christian in the way it has become under enslavement, the only way forward is to adopt revised trans values resplendent in the superman or overman as exemplified in 'Thus spoke Zarathustra'.  Contrasting the previous two is Kierkegaard and his synthesis that provides a recipe to living a balanced life, to become the father of the existentialist movement.

A summary of the principal differences is as follows:

u Free will – Nietzsche talks about eternal occurrence which is thought experiment inclusive of determinism.

u All against Hegel – that part of the thinking spirit that he talks about as  purely rational   

u Kierkegaard & Dostoevsky- want to retain Christianity or the Russian Orthodox Church whilst Nietzsche talks about a new ideal resplendent in the Overman.       

u Nihilism –Nietzsche extends to aspects of Christianity as practised then  

u Perspectives- Nietzsche & Kierkegaard postulate we are to become who you are.

u Dostoevsky-and Kierkegaard faith over doubt.

u Modern day applications – Kierkegaard is evident in existential psychology. Nietzsche &  Dostoevsky – evident in Freud & Carl Jung as in the archetypes.