From 20th century, a medium's meaning becomes very complicated. This factor is that we can use electric media which didn't exist in 19th century, for example, telephone, radio, TV, etc.. And so, we can use Internet, DVD, cellular phone, that we know multimedia. Most people in a middle of 20th century couldn't think even the notion of these media. But we can use them easily whether we know these system. Sometimes we identify newspaper, radio, TV,... namely mass media or multimedia with the media, but 19th century people didn't know even these words. Therefore the 20th century's notion of the medium is different from that of 19th century. So we have to consider the problem of the medium by the new theory.

In this paper, we consider the notion of Kierkegaard's medium. But unfortunately Kierkegaard was the person in the 19th century, he didn't know mass media, and so he couldn't consider the problem of the medium by new theory. But we know that Kierkegaard was thinking the issue of communication[meddelelse] through his life, so we can guess that he discusses the medium as communication tools, In fact, he does so in "THE DIALECTIC OF ETHICAL AND ETHICAL-RELIGIOUS COMMUNICATION". Reading this journal, we can compare Kierkegaard's theory of the medium with the new theory in 20th century. Now we try this study, and we will know Kierkegaard's theory is able to apply to the present theory of the medium.

This paper consists of 2 parts. In Part 1, I discuss the difference between Hegel's view of medium and Kierkegaard's one, and consider "the capability of the medium" on Kierkegaard's thought. In Part 2, we see the today's theory of the medium, and try to apply Kierkegaard's view to that theory, and we consider whether Kierkegaard's view of the medium can overcome the new theory, mediology.

By the way, What's medium? Medium means "a middle quality, degree, or condition." and means "any intervening substance through which a force acts on objects at a distance or through which impressions are conveyed to the senses". Generally, we use this word in the meaning of "an intermediate agency, means, instrument or channel" or "a vehicles of mass communication". But before 20th century, European thinker understood the medium as only the former meaning.

Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel 1770-1831 also takes medium as middle quality. He considers the middle term as uniting two or more different objects. He says:"As each of the objects is posited as self-contradictory and self-sublating in its own self, it is only by an external compulsion[Gewalt] that they are help apart from one another and from their reciprocal integration."(Hegel(1969);728-9). So the middle term needs to combine both contradictory objects. And says:"Now the middle term(Mitte) whereby these extremes are concluded into a unity is first the implicit nature of both, the whole Notion that holds both within itself."(Hegel(1969);729). Here, the middle term works as a middle quality."Secondly, however, since in their concrete existence they stand confronting each other, their absolute unity is also a still formal element having an existence distinct from them--the element of Communication(Mitteilen) in which they enter into external community with each other." In this sentence, we should pay attention to Communication. This reason is that when the middle term combines both contradictory objects or it realizes their unity, both are communicated. Hegel also explains their communication more concretely. "Since the real difference belongs to the extremes, this middle term is only the abstract neutrality, the real possibility of those extremes... is the theoretical element of the concrete existence of chemical objects, of their process and its result."(Hegel(1969);729). Clearly, Hegel thinks that communication is possible to combine two objects.

After the above argument, finally Hegel approaches the medium. "In the material world water fulfills the function of this medium; in the spiritual world, so far as the analogue of such a relation has a place there, the sign in general, and more precisely language, is to be regarded as fulfilling that function."(Hegel(1969);729)

Certainly, medium is less important than Mediation on Hegel's thought. The view which signs or languages belong to the medium, is the common view in this period, so his view of the medium is not original. We can imagine that Kierkegaard also understands the medium in this way. But we know, he protested against Hegel's mediation and communication. By the medium, one and the other can communicate, so Kierkegaard should indicate a different view of the medium to Hegel's one. In fact, he shows his medium theory in "THE DIALECTIC OF ETHICAL AND ETHICAL-RELIGIOUS COMMUNICATION"

In this Journal, Kierkegaard laments "the delusion and confusion of modern science and scholarship" and "modern age". According to Kierkegaard, the confusion of modern age is that "the distinction between science and scholarship, and art is understood only esthetically as fine art".(Pap. VIII² B 82) He thought that modern science and scholarship(especially Hegel's scholarship) forget the distinction between communications, so he had have to insist on the distinction against the Hegel's unity. Kierkegaard divides communications into two types. One is the communication of knowledge[Videns Meddelelse], the other is the communication of capability[kunnens Meddelelse].¹

The communication of knowledge "consists in an objective transmission of conceptual notions"(Taels(2003); 58), and holds that there is the object, so what is communicated, is important for this communication, but the latter does that there is no object. Though the object is not important for the communication of capability, it is important that the communicator, the receiver, and not what but how is communicated.

More concretely, we have to consider Kierkegaard's communication. The object means the knowledge, and it means, for example, the mathematical thesis, and the capability means ethical capability or religious one. The communication of capability means that a communicator enables that a person realizes some capability. So in this communication, it is very important who the communicator is, where and when the capability was communicated, namely in what kind of a situation it was communicated.

But why this delusion and confusion occur? This reason is "due to a wrong use of the medium of communication."(Taels(2003); 58) As long as there are two kinds of communications, the medium corresponding to these communications have to be two types. But in modern age, publishers, book-sellers, journalists, authors...which don't think the difference of knowledge and capability, they try to communicate, and they think that they can communicate the capability without thinking this difference. So Kierkegaard divides the medium into two types, one is the fantasy-medium, the other is the medium of actuality. And says "All communication of knowledge is in the fantasy-medium", or "the communication of capability is in the medium of actuality". Reading a book, a reader can memory a knowledge, but once the knowledge is pounded in the reader, neither the book or the author of this book is important for the reader, because the reader can memory the knowledge by reading another books. And Kierkegaard says "Every new communication of knowledge only nourishes sickness"(Pap. VIII² B 81,5) . Because this communication doesn't need a true human, so this situation is that "science and scholarship have become fantastic" and "what is means to be a human being has been forgotten."(Pap. VIII² B 82).

So it is clear that the difference between Kierkegaard's notion of communication and of the medium, and Hegel's notion. And Kierkegaard divides mediation and medium. Hegel's Mediation[Vermittlung] and medium combines extremes. Since Kierkegaard thank also that Hegel's mediation is also the central part of his philosophy, so Kierkegaard criticizes Hegel's mediation. So his Media is different from Hegel's one. Using the medium, Hegel aims unity or sublation. but Kierkegaard does distinction.

Therefore we should pay attention to the meaning of the notion of Kierkegaard's communication. Kierkegaard's communication is not the same meaning as general one. The common meaning of communicate is "to hold intercourse or converse", "to impart, transmit, or exchange thought or information". But Kierkegaard's communication means that the communicator pounds the knowledge or capability to the receiver, it doesn't mean intercourse. Certainly communicate means "to give to another as a partaker", but today, this meaning is not main one. And his communication doesn't includes the communication from the receiver to the communicator. We should try to translate his communication[Meddelelse] to new word except communication. Considering this issue, let's go to the next part.

Once upon a time, Marshall McLuhan 1911-80 said "The medium is message". This phrase is still very meaningful. Because he analyzed the medium by his new theory. Terrence Gordon says: McLuhan's "Understanding Media" "focuses on the media effects that permeate society and culture, but McLuhan's starting point is always the individual, because he defines the medium as technological extensions of the body.". McLuhan spread the meaning of the medium. His new theory clearly showed that Newspaper, radio, TV, money, etc..various media also make social and cultural trend.

Truly, McLuhan's phrase itself was a shocking accident. Johan Taels discusses the relation between McLuhan and Post-modern, for considering Kierkegaard's notion of the medium. But the medium is complicated than McLuhan's period, and McLuhan's theory itself has many problem, therefore his theory is criticized. This critic is : Many people think McLuhan's media are material equipment, but this treatment of these media is excessive simplification. Though there are the society and equipment which surround the media, McLuhan didn't express this situation clearly, or by rhetoric, made a kind of confused language world.

So we already need a new theory to approach today's media, this theory is just mediology. Régis Debray 1940- advocates new theory, named mediology. The object of mediology isn't medium itself. Debray reflects upon the historical and cultural nature of the medium by his own notional equipment. Debray's notional equipment is MO-matiere organisee(organized matter)- and OM-organisation materielle(material organization)-.MO is goods which human uses. OM is the institutional organization like a church, a school, a political party, political organization, a society, a labor union, etc.. Researcher of mediology is called mediologue, a mediologue explains mediology as "The aim of mediology is to elucidate the mysteries and paradoxes of cultural transmission."². On mediology, transmission is an important notion. Debray sets transmission against communication. Before mediology, the medium is discussed within thinking of communication. But in the viewpoint of knowledge, the conventional communication theory like McLuhan's one, tended to discuss only contemporary communication. So mediologue tries "to understand how a break in our theories of transmission and transportation provokes a change in mentalities and behaviours"³ and "how a cultural tradition provokes, assimilates or modifies a technical innovation."⁴Mediology insists that the function of media, namely transmission must be considered in the relation between media and history, human life circumstance etc.. And mediology "is a theory of analysis, to understand the transfer in duration of a piece of information (transmission)."⁵ and Debray tries to exchange communication for mediation. Because the meaning of communication is limited than necessity, for thinking the true function of media, the conventional notion of communication must be broken. "Not a special field of knowledge... but..., an original mode of coming to knowledge, consisting in relaying an historical phenomenon to the mediations, both from those formal learning and practical aspects which have made it possible."⁶

Mediology also sets 3 spheres of the medium. "Bringing light onto symbolic effectiveness (= power of speech, power of words, influence of the image, etc…) leads to a close examination of the technical variables of message diffusion (logosphere, graphosphere, videosphere, current hypersphere), themselves linked to the different modes of transportation through space"⁷.

In the mediology, we should pay attention to Transmission and Sphere. As we know, Sphere is important term in Kierkegaard's thought. Surely, the meaning of mediology's sphere has social objects, namely MO and OM, so the notion of Kierkegaard's Sphere and that of mediology's is very different, but in the view that communication occurs in each sphere, Kierkegaard's theory is the same as mediology.

I think that mediology is important when someone considers Kierkegaard's communication, whereas mediology also has many problem. And so in the view of the research of Kierkegaard's thought, mediology's problem is that because this thought limits the transmission of information or knowledge, mediologue also discuss only "fantasy media", they can't do "the medium of actuality". We can grope about "Kierkegaard's mediology" and if possible, his mediology must overcome today's mediology. As above mentioned, the medium of capability is the communicator, the receiver, etc.. More concretely, for Kierkegaard, the communicator is a teacher, and the receiver is a pupil. So Kierkegaard says only the medium of actuality as human being, doesn't say non-humanistic one. This is the problem of Kierkegaard's mediology. Mediology criticizes the limitation of media like Kierkegaard. And people think that the medium means non-humanistic medium, they don't think a teacher is a medium. In this media-situation, people can't understand Kierkegaard's notion of the medium. So we must make new translation of Kierkegaard's communication and media. The notion of the medium is very complicated, so we can't make new translation. But since concerning to communication, the notion of communication is not complicated than that of the medium, we can try to make a translation of his communication. Mediology exchanges communication for mediation. But on the research of Kierkegaard, mediation means Hegel's one, if we exchange like mediology, this situation is more confused. Kierkegaard's communication is not the same as transmission, and a part of notion of mediology's communication includes Kierkegaard's one. But as a hypothesis, I want to translate his communication into transmission. My next task is to consider whether this translation is appropriate.

Søren Kierkegaards Papier, 2. forøgede Udgave ved N.Thulstrup, bd. I-XVI(25 vol.), København, Gyldendal, 1968-1978

Søren Kierkegaard's journals and papers / edited and translated by Howard V. Hong and Edna H. Hong, assisted by Gregor Malantschuk, Bloomington : Indiana University Press, 1967-1978

Hegel, Georg Friedrich Wilhelm(1969) Hegel's Science of logic / translated [from the German] by Miller, A. V. ; foreword by Findlay, J. N.; London, Allen & Unwin; New York Humanities Press, 1969.

Debray, Régis(1991)Cours de Médiologie générale, Bibliothèque des Idées, Paris, Gallimard, 1991.

-Japanese translation by Shimazaki, Masaki 『一般メディオロジー講義』Tokyo,NTT出版, 2001.

-Japanese translation by Shimazaki, Masaki 『メディオロジー宣言』Tokyo, NTT出版, 1999.

-English translation by Rauth, Eric; Transmitting Culture, Colombia University Press, 2000.

-Japanese translation by Shimazaki, Masaki 『メディオロジー入門「伝達作用」の諸相』Tokyo, NTT出版, 2000.

McLuhan, Marshall(2001) Understanding media : the extensions of man, London, Routledge, 2001

--Japanese translation by Kurihara, Yutaka.; Koumoto Nakakiyo. 『メディア論 : 人間の拡張の諸相』Tokyo, みすず書房, 1987.

Taels, Johan(2003) A MORE PRIMITIVE THINKING: WORD AND SPEECH-ACT IN KIERKEGAARD ,Immediacy and Reflection in Kierkegaard's Thought, Leuven University Press, 2003.

thought.ne.jp：メディオロジー入門: http://thought.ne.jp/html/text/medio/medio10.htm

1A difference between direct communication and indirect communication is the popular distinction between Kierkegaard's communications. Of course, this two communications appear in this journal, the communication of knowledge is direct communication, and the communication of capability is indirect communication.

2Le site la médiologie

3Le site la médiologie

4Le site la médiologie

5Le site la médiologie

6Le site la médiologie

7Le site la médiologie