Soren Kierkegaard

about which Sibbern would later sigh: “In vielen Worten wenige Klarheit”
[German: “many words, little clarity”].
Although it seems almost symbolic that the first real entry about Møller
in Kierkegaard’s journals is the one concerning his death, there is no doubt
that Møller made a profound impression on the young student. At the same
time, however, there may be some doubts about the nature and actual ex-
tent of his influence, which is about as difficult to ascertain as the effect of
a random shotgun blast. Kierkegaard’s involvement with Møller’s writings
is demonstrable, and it can in fact be followed in his journals, where he
refers to Møller’s “excellent review” of Thomasine Gyllembourg’s novel
The Extremesand later mentions the essay “On Telling Fairy Tales to Chil-
dren,” which in 1837 inspired Kierkegaard to make journal entries on the
same subject. Similarly, Kierkegaard commented on Møller’s essay on im-
mortality and, like Møller, he concerned himself with the figures Don Juan,
Faust, and the Wandering Jew. It goes without saying that Kierkegaard
could not but be amused at Møller’s parody of Grundtvig, just as he now
and then helped himself to one of Møller’s random thoughts, which lent
liveliness and form to his own “Diapsalmata” in the first part ofEither/Or.
But there were also times when Kierkegaard would return repeatedly to
Møller’s lyric poetry, particularly to the poem, “The Old Lover.”
Thus Møller struck some of the chords upon which Kierkegaard subse-
quently composed his own works. The harmonics are unmistakable in the
second part ofEither/Or, where Judge William’s notion of “the develop-
ment of the personality” brings to mind Møller’s philosophy of personality,
but indeed there is an echo of Møller wherever the theme of the person
andthought is sounded. Kierkegaard feared, not without reason, that when
Møller was no longer able to support his ideas with his own living personal-
ity—and therebydemonstratetheir legitimacy—posterity would be unable
to sense the scope of his contribution to a philosophy of living. For Møller
practiced his philosophy by living it out—or, more precisely, out on the
streets, in conversations while en route to greater insight into himself, just
like his exemplar Socrates.
This conception of the dialogical nature of philosophy also heightened
Møller’s interest in psychological matters and led him to make what he
called his “sketches of moral nature.” The phrase is from the introduction
to his essay on affectation, which he put on paper in 1837 but which had
long been in the making, as can be seen from various preliminary studies
and sketches. With its emphasis on the subjective, the intent of the essay is
clearly anti-Hegelian, and indeed after a couple of lines Møller—with a bit
of posturing that in fact looks a good deal like affectation—becomes busily
engaged in bidding farewell to speculative readers who are expecting a sys-