We live in an age where algorithms quietly shape almost every part of our lives. What we read, what we watch, where we shop, how we date, even what we think — it’s all influenced by unseen systems predicting what we might want next.
It’s efficient. Convenient. Even impressive.
But it also raises a deeper question:
If algorithms know us so well, do we still know ourselves?
Kierkegaard and the Call to Become
Long before anyone had heard of machine learning, Danish philosopher Søren Kierkegaard was asking unsettling questions about identity. He believed that the self isn’t something we simply have — it’s something we’re constantly becoming. A process that happens not through trends or external feedback, but through inward reflection and relationship with the divine.
In The Sickness Unto Death, Kierkegaard warns against the danger of avoiding the self, of becoming so distracted, so outwardly occupied, that we lose contact with who we really are.
Sound familiar?
Today, that danger isn’t just noise from the outside world — it’s highly personalised noise. It looks like you, but it’s been curated for you. The risk? We end up living lives that feel tailored, but hollow.
The Algorithm Isn’t Neutral
It’s tempting to think of algorithms as neutral tools — they just show us what we want, right? But Kierkegaard would likely push back. He’d ask: Are you sure that’s what you want?
Or is it what you’ve been trained to want?
Modern algorithms are built on patterns of past behaviour — clicks, likes, purchases, pauses. But Kierkegaard believed that becoming your true self often means breaking away from patterns. Choosing what’s right, not just what’s familiar. Choosing what’s meaningful, not just what’s easy.
In a world of optimisation, becoming human may involve some resistance.
Convenience vs. Conscience
AI tools can save time, offer insight, and even simulate creativity. But they cannot replace conscience. They don’t ask us who we are before God. They don’t call us to wrestle with our limitations, our responsibilities, or our longing for eternity.
Kierkegaard’s challenge was always inward:
Not how many views did you get?
But are you being honest with yourself?
Not what’s trending?
But what are you becoming?
Reclaiming the Process of Becoming
We don’t need to reject technology to take Kierkegaard seriously. But we do need to slow down enough to ask what it’s doing to our sense of self. If we let the algorithm shape all our choices, we risk becoming what pleases others — or what performs best — rather than what’s true.
Becoming yourself, Kierkegaard says, means facing the quiet work of selfhood: the doubts, the decisions, the uncomfortable growth. It’s not flashy. It doesn’t always “perform.”
But it’s real.
The Self as a Sacred Task
Kierkegaard believed that each person is called to become a self before God — not before the marketplace, the comment section, or the metrics. That kind of selfhood can’t be generated by data. It can’t be outsourced. And it definitely won’t be recommended by an algorithm.
It’s slow. Messy. Deeply personal. And sacred.
💡 If you’ve ever felt lost in the curated feed of your life, maybe it’s time to tune into something deeper. Kierkegaard’s
👉 The Sickness Unto Death: A Modern Translation for the 21st Century
offers a clear and timeless path for anyone who wants to rediscover their soul in the noise of modern life.