Kierkegard has many beliefs and ideas. One of them is that truth is subjectivity. The truth of subjectivity can be defined in many ways in our eyes. For example, truth as subjectivity (and reality) is his definition of faith. Kierkegaard's definition of truth is: "An objective uncertainty maintained in a process of appropriating the most passionate interiority is the truth, the highest truth attainable for the individual." Which one can agree with because all Kierkegard is trying to say and deny is the objectivity of truth. But what he means by this is that, essentially, truth is not just a matter of discovering objective facts. Furthermore the truth can be expressed in different ways, for example by finding a statistic or calculating your final grade, those are all truths but they are not subjective and it is not just about discovering objective facts. People might think that when they hear the truth it is only to hear objective facts. Kierkegard also states that the objective thinker is interested in objective truth, while the subjective thinker is interested in subjective truth. We say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Objective truth includes historical truth and philosophical truth. Subjective truth includes religious truth. But the difference between subjective and objective truth is that subjective truth is something that is not confirmed by science and depends heavily on opinions and beliefs, but it could be true or false. Meanwhile, the goal is confirmed by science but is universally accepted by all. For example, scientists and historians study the objective world, trying to understand the truth of nature – or perhaps the truth of history. However, in this way, scientists and historians hope to predict and understand how the future will unfold in accordance with these laws. In terms of the historical aspect, by studying and focusing on the past, the individual can perhaps understand the laws that determine how events will unfold – in this way the individual can predict the future more accurately and hopefully take control of the events that in the past seemed to escape human control. Subjectivity (as we stated before) is what the individual – and no one else – possesses. But you may be wondering what it means to have such a thing? It cannot be understood in the same way as having a car or a bank account. It means being someone who is becoming someone, it means being a person with a past, a present and a future. No one can have an individual's past, present or future. Different people experience them in various ways – these experiences are unique, not anyone else's. Having a past, a present and a future means that a person is an existing individual – that a person can find meaning in time and by existing. Individuals don't think they exist, they are born. But once born and past a certain age, the individual begins to make choices in life; now those choices can be his, his parents', society's, etc. The important point is that to exist, the individual must make choices: the individual must decide what to do in the next moment and in the future. What the individual chooses and how he chooses will define who and what he is – for himself and for others. According to Socrates the purpose of life is to know yourself (know yourself and who you really are). Knowing yourself means being aware of who you are, what you can be and what you cannot be. Kierkegaard uses the same idea that Socrates used in his writings. In terms of subjectivity it manifests and comes with the consciousness of myself as self. It includes emotional and intellectual resources withwhich the individual is born. Subjectivity is what the individual is as a human being. Now the problem of subjectivity is to decide and determine how to choose which rules or models to apply the individual will use to make the right choices? What are the right choices? Who defines well? To truly be an individual, to be true to himself, his actions should somehow be expressed in a way that describes who and what he is to himself and others. The problem, according to Kierkegaard, is that we must choose who and what we will be based on subjective interests: the individual must make choices that will mean something to him as a rational and sensitive being. Kierkegaard decided to climb the Tree of knowledge of good and evil for himself, replacing Adam, and makes his choice in the presence of God, where no one was there to accuse or judge him except his Creator. This is what he made Abraham do in Fear and Trembling. According to Kierkegaard, this is how self-learning occurs. It is here that the individual learns guilt and innocence. His book, The Concept of Anxiety, makes it clear that Adam had knowledge when he made his choice and that was the knowledge of freedom. The prohibition was there but there was also freedom and Eve and Adam decided to use it. In Kierkegaard's meaning, purely theological assertions are subjective truths and cannot be verified or invalidated by science, nor through objective knowledge. For him, choosing whether one is for or against a certain subjective truth is a purely arbitrary choice. He calls the leap from objective knowledge to religious faith a leap of faith, since it means that subjective acceptance of claims cannot be rationally justified. For him, the Christian faith is the result of the path started by such choices, which do not have and cannot have a rational foundation (in the sense that reason is neither for nor against such choices). Considered objectively, purely theological assertions are neither true nor false. However, Kierkergard's truth is that subjectivity is interpreted in different ways like the ones we discussed above. Unfortunately it can also be easily misunderstood as you can believe whatever you want to believe. But this is not what Kierkergard seeks and means by this. He is trying to express that selecting beliefs for convenience is a superficial and consumerist way of life. Which leaves and leads people to justify their beliefs by saying “it works for me” or “it's my truth”. What makes the difference between “it works for me” and “I work for this, therefore it's true” is the concept of personal commitment to the truth. Leading Kierkegaard to state that “most people are subjective towards themselves and objective towards everyone else, sometimes frighteningly objective, but the task is precisely to be objective towards themselves and subjective towards everyone else”. Which does not show the image of a convenient subjectivity that supports the convenience of avoiding any kind of change. It can be described as a subjectivity that requires a reorientation of the self and the acceptance of a commitment that places personal demands. Kierkegaard's quote above expresses the enormous personality and commitment of the “leap of faith”. Which is often used in many ways, such as taking risks in everyday life or when you feel comfortable enough to trust someone, be it a friend or family member. We must also take into account the fact that Kierkegaard was a Christian and, in Kierkegaard's sense, purely theological statements are subjective truths and can neither be verified nor invalidated by science, that is, through objective knowledge. He explained that “if God did not exist it would obviously be impossible,.