Over the centuries much has been written about the anguish; philosophers and thinkers have described the importance of this feeling differentiating of fear and despair.
In my opinion the anguish is human feeling that is positive so is meaning to words like "eternity", "existence" and "The nothing".
When human beings are capable of making sense of those words means that it has entered a higher level of thinking with respect to the common man.
It is at this level of independent thinking where anguish is positive because it allows us to analyze, understand, visualize our own existence, plus it allows the man (or woman) to be truly aware of their freedom, their actions and their consequences.
In that sense, we can understand the thinking of Kierkegaard who raised the "anguish" in the ethical stage distinct from the aesthetic stage. For the common man clinging to the stage aesthetic world of the senses, anguish is unproductive fear triggers in despair.
And that's because his fate is traced and is not able to do anything because this seduced by the sensual. Instead the ethical man is capable of searching through the knowledge, seeks to control his mind in pursuit of a high-level thinking that gives reason for his existence.
Anguish is a sign that man has the eternal in itself. Without the 'eternal' would not have "anguish". But the man who has felt the anguish within himself and stubbornly persists in having a presence in the area sensual, end in despair.
However, the situation can be given that when the man through the call of desperation felt the inefficiency of their aesthetic sphere in relation to life as a sensual pleasure and joy representation; suddenly lights up and makes the decision to no longer stay there; is that moment when he is mature enough to choose “something else” and is there when he is ready to enter the ethical stage.
Kierkegaard, understood the anguish, not as the fear of living beings about the fear of death, but more than that the discovery of "The nothing".
Kierkegaard shows how anguish is related to the true constitution of subjectivity, warning of the danger of losing their identity by the desire to make absolute the "I" and "self".
For him (Kierkegaard) anguish goes beyond a simple mood to become a fundamental and decisive experience in human life. The anguish is related to sin and freedom.
Engendered by nothing, fueled by impatience, emerged as "reality of freedom as possible," anguish is "the dizziness of freedom" and at the same time a means of salvation that leads to faith and truth seeking of ultimate meaning to existence. ´
Kierkegaard understood the desperation as a deadly disease and identifies it with sin, whose faith is the antidote.
Already the “anguish” is understood as the feeling that accompanies all human decisions
Based on the thought of Kierkegaard, Heidegger claimed that there is for the "Dasein" (being in itself) a permanent possibility of to deal with "nothing" and discover it as a phenomenon.. That would be “anguish”. The way we would face "The nothing", the cure of such non-being is “anguish”.
The ability to continue to exist facing “The nothing” is what it would be given by the anguish. Jean Paul Sartre for his part identifies “anguish” as the most important feeling, to the point where he declares that “man is anguish”.
Sartre distinguishes anguish from fear. Fear appears before a specific risk and relates to the alleged injury or damage that reality can inflict, the fear is for no specific reason or any external object, it is fear of oneself, of our decisions, the consequences of our decisions.
It is the emotion or feeling that comes with the consciousness of freedom: to realize our freedom that we realize who we are and what we will be dependent on ourselves, that we are responsible for ourselves and we have no excuses , anguish appears to feel radicals responsible for our own existence.
But beyond that Sartre stressed that this awareness of responsibility increases when we realize that our choice not only concerns the purely individual but also in relation to our social environment.
To conclude this post let's say the true value of the anguish is understandable when one overcomes the aesthetic stage, while still clinging to sensuality and all that the senses give us, the anguish is only despair.
Ethics is at the stage when “The anguish” may have value, “Existence” and “Nothingness” already have meaning for humans.
So far Kierkegaard, is great, and indeed the other concepts about the “anguish” of other thinkers have their foundation in the established by Kierkegaard.
And though Kierkegaard had a tendency to become too attached to his religious temperament, making him lose some objectivity in its concepts, did not mean that their original ideas lose lucidity. In addition, his religiosity was understandable if we look at the context of what was his life.