This is the second volume of "Either/Or", being the "Or". The first volume consisted of several separate shorter pieces, written with an aesthetic outlook on life, while this volume consists of two longer pieces, written in favour of a more ethical approach to life. The two pieces take the form of letters in the form of essays, addressed from one friend (who is a judge) to another (the author of the Seducer's Diary in the first volume) with the purpose of correcting his beliefs and morally improving him.
The first piece focuses on the question of marriage; while the aesthetist disagrees with marriage on aesthetic ground, the judge in this volume argues for the aesthetic and ethical validity of marriage. The second main piece in this volume is titled "Equilibrium", and is written more generally about life – love, God, and occupation. There is also a short sermon at the end, which is not written by the judge, but which the judge is sending to the first character.
The second volume is more unnecessarily wordy than the first volume, and could have benefited more from being condensed. It is not, however, lacking in philosophical seriousness, which is an impression it would have been possible to get from the first volume (perhaps wrongly).
A quote might allow one to gain some idea of the book's purpose:
"My either/or does not in the first instance denote the choice between good and evil; it denotes the choice whereby one chooses good and evil / or excludes them. Here the question is under what determinants one would contemplate the whole of existance and would have himself live. That the man who chooses good and evil chooses the good is indeed true, but this becomes evident afterwards; for the aesthetical is not the evil but neutrality, and that is the reason why I affirmed that it is the ethical which constitutes the choice."
From this one can see that Kierkegaard anticipates, at least in part, some of the distinctions that Nietzsche makes about good, evil, and ethics, though the two otherwise differ greatly, not least regarding their attitude to morality.
This volume is best read after the first, and in the preface it is stated that neither should be read without the other, as alone they cannot be properly understood. I think the author is correct in saying this. This is certainly more the case with the second volume though, and while the first could be read alone, it would not have the effect that it's author intended if the reader chose to do this.
Kierkegaard makes a great impression on the reader with these two volumes, with his diversity of styles, the way he uses multiple psuedonyms to present the work, and with the content of his thoughts. For this reason these volumes will be of interest to the reader of philosophy and the general student of literature. ( )