fourth short answer

4. if one were to define existential philosophy as " being wholly absorbed in a study of the venture of human freedom and its pitfalls" comment on the validity of this definition in relation to kierkegaards writings studied this term.

If one were to define existentianl philosophy as, "being wholly absorbed in a study of the venture of human freedom and it's pitfalls" they would not be doing kierkegaards writing justice. Oppennets of exestientialism always try to paint existenialism as being a negative or gloomy philosophy. But Kierkegaard'swriting are devotional pieces aimed at defining man as an individual and stressing the immportance striving for a realtionshiop with God or "the Infinite."
-Kierkegaard is saying that trying to study the infininite and know it is hubris because we can never know because we are here for a finite amount of time.
-living the venture of human freedom not studying it
-the best way to live your life is through the pitfalls

[nick]

According to Sartre existentialists are concerned with how we exist. The answer to how we exist is existence precedes essence. Our existence is then that freedom to create our essence, such is human possibility. This is how we exist in the world, as freedom/possibility. To Kierkegaarde, accessing this possibility means accessing the infinite which is man's
true form. It is constant reflection on the self as the possibility of the infinite that allows for this access. "the development of the subject consists precisely in his active interpretation of himself by reflection concerning his own existence, so that he really thinks what he thinks through making a reality of it" (K in Becoming Subjective, pg. 151 from coursepack)

The definition "being wholly absorbed in a study of the venture of human freedom and its pitfalls" seems to me to be a bit of a trick. According to Kierkegaarde, being wholly absorbed in one's own freedom and acting only in subjectivity to the reality of being a human being in the world ( a human being being that freedom (blech, this course drives me nuts!)) is existential philosophy. Because human freedom is the how of how we exist. The existential philospher does study and refute the pitfalls of this philosophy, ie, Hegel's System, objective philosophy. The first part of Kierkegaard in the coursepack is refuting objectivity, and he continues to refute it through his discourse on world-history, the individual, etc.

But to be existential is to be wholly absorbed in the self. IT seems that to also include the pitfalls would be, to K, to keep acting and not allow for one to live in the possibility of human freedom. If the self keeps seeing these pitfalls and concentrates on them, they will keep building anxiety, imagine themselves guilty and sin time and time again.

So this is sort of a weird answer. I think the pitfalls thing is the tricky part. If anyone wants to refute one of my stances on pitfalls, do so. I tend to read too much into questions and get caught on words.