The Sickness Unto Death by Soren Kierkegaard: Study & Analysis Guide

The Sickness Unto Death is not merely a book about sadness; it is a radical excavation of the human condition that reframes our deepest anxieties as symptoms of a fundamental structural flaw. Written under the pseudonym Anti-Climacus, Kierkegaard’s 1849 work offers a dense psychological phenomenology that diagnoses despair not as a passing emotion but as a universal, often hidden, state of being. Its analysis of inauthenticity and self-alienation powerfully anticipates twentieth-century existential thought, making it essential reading for anyone seeking to understand the foundations of existentialism and the perpetual struggle for an integrated self.

The Structure of the Self: A Relation That Relates to Itself

To understand despair, you must first grasp Kierkegaard’s revolutionary definition of the human self. He does not define it as a static thing or a collection of traits. Instead, he presents the self as a dynamic relation: "The self is a relation that relates itself to itself or is the relation’s relating itself to itself in the relation." This complex formulation means the human being is a synthesis of opposing elements—infinite and finite, eternal and temporal, freedom and necessity. A person is not just this synthesis, however; a person is the activity of holding these opposites together. The self is the conscious process of relating these poles to each other.

The health of the self, therefore, depends entirely on where it anchors this relating activity. Kierkegaard posits that the self "is grounded transparently in the power that established it." This "power" is God, but you can initially understand it as the ultimate source or ground of one’s being. A self in proper order consciously acknowledges that it did not create itself and transparently grounds its existence in this external, establishing power. Despair, then, is defined as the "misrelation" in this self-relation. It is the sickness that occurs when the self fails to relate authentically to itself by refusing or ignoring its grounded nature. This misrelation can be so ingrained that one can be in despair without knowing it, a concept of unconscious despair that deeply influenced later psychology.

The Three Forms of Despair: Weakness, Defiance, and Ignorance

Kierkegaard meticulously categorizes despair into a penetrating typology, moving from less to more conscious forms. His central distinction is between despair considered in terms of consciousness and in terms of the will's relation to the self.

1. Despair as "Not Willing to Be Oneself" (Despair of Weakness). This is the most common form. Here, you feel the burden of your self—its anxieties, limitations, and contradictions—and you wish to be rid of it. You might fantasize about being someone else or seek to lose yourself in crowd mentality, pleasures, or mundane affairs. This is a despair of finitude, where you refuse the task of becoming the unique self you are meant to be. It is a passive despair, characterized by a longing to escape. For example, a person who constantly molds their personality to fit every social group, never asserting a genuine opinion, is likely in this form of despair, not willing to endure the vulnerability of being a defined self.

2. Despair as "Willing to Be Oneself Defiantly" (Defiant Despair). This is a more active, potent form of despair. In this state, you are acutely aware of your self, but you defiantly insist on creating yourself on your own terms. You refuse to acknowledge that your self is established by and grounded in any power outside yourself. This is the despair of the "self-made" individual who proudly declares their total independence, making their own identity the ultimate authority. Kierkegaard sees this as the deepest despair because it is a form of rebellion, where you would rather be a self of your own making—even if that self is in torment—than to surrender your will to the divine. A brilliant but arrogant artist who views their talent as solely their own creation and rejects any notion of gift or grace exemplifies this defiant stance.

3. Despair as "Not Knowing One Has a Self" (Unconscious Despair). This is the most fundamental and universal level. Kierkegaard argues that because despair is a structural misrelation, all people who are not grounded transparently in God are in despair, whether they feel it or not. Most people live in "spiritlessness," absorbed in worldly immediacy—career, family, social status—without a deeper awareness of themselves as eternal spirits. They are "too sensate" to have a self. They may consider themselves perfectly happy, but from the spiritual perspective, this ignorance is the sickness. This concept directly anticipates modern theories of ideology and false consciousness, where people are unaware of their own alienation.

Faith: The Antidote as Transparent Grounding

If despair is the misrelation, then faith is Kierkegaard’s prescribed cure. It is crucial to understand that for Anti-Climacus, faith is not simply intellectual assent to doctrines. It is the active, ongoing task of the self. Faith is defined as "that the self in being itself and in willing to be itself rests transparently in God." This definition directly counters the three forms of despair.

First, it counters weakness: in faith, you will to be yourself, accepting the specific, concrete self you are called to be, rather than fleeing from it. Second, it counters defiance: you are willing to be yourself, but not defiantly on your own terms; you are willing to be yourself as established by God. You surrender the project of self-creation and accept yourself as a created being. Finally, it cures ignorance by bringing the self into full, transparent consciousness before God. The self no longer relates to itself alone but relates to itself while consciously relating to the power that established it. This "transparency" means there is no hidden corner of the self claiming autonomy; every aspect of one's being is acknowledged as grounded in and dependent upon God. This state is not a one-time achievement but a continual, passionate striving—the hallmark of Kierkegaardian existence.

Critical Perspectives

While Kierkegaard’s analysis is powerful, it invites several critical questions. A primary critique is that his solution—faith—is presented as the only logical cure for a sickness he has defined using specifically Christian theological premises (a self established by God). From a secular existentialist viewpoint, this can feel like defining a problem only a religious answer can solve. Can one achieve authenticity or overcome alienation without belief in God? Thinkers like Jean-Paul Sartre embraced the defiant, godless self-creation that Kierkegaard labeled as the deepest despair, arguing that embracing this absolute freedom and responsibility is authentic existence.

Furthermore, some modern psychologists might question the claim of universal, unconscious despair. While his phenomenology of anxiety and inauthenticity is deeply respected, the pathologization of all non-religious life as a form of sickness is a normative claim that goes beyond clinical observation. Finally, readers often grapple with the book’s stark either/or: utter despair or Christian faith. The work offers little middle ground, challenging those who seek spiritual integration outside of orthodox Christian belief to re-conceptualize what "grounding" might mean for them.

Summary

• Despair is structural, not emotional: Kierkegaard defines it as a fundamental "misrelation" within the self’s dynamic activity of relating to itself, a condition that can be entirely unconscious.
• The triad of despair: It manifests as 1) Weakness (not willing to be oneself), 2) Defiance (willing to be oneself autonomously), and 3) Ignorance (not knowing one has a self), progressing from passive to active and unconscious to conscious.
• The self is a relation: Human identity is not a static thing but an active synthesis of opposites (finite/infinite, etc.) that must be consciously managed.
• The cure is faith as transparency: Health is found not in eliminating the self but in "resting transparently in God"—willing to be the self one is meant to be while fully acknowledging one’s dependence on the power that established it.
• Anticipates modern thought: The work’s exploration of inauthenticity, self-alienation, and the "crowd" provides a crucial foundation for twentieth-century existentialism and depth psychology.
• The existential challenge: The book ultimately presents a rigorous either/or: a life spent in varying degrees of self-misrelation or the difficult, passionate task of grounding the self in something beyond its own will.