Scan barcode
ladypalma's review against another edition
4.0
Sono molto contenta di aver recuperato questa pietra miliare della filosofia, permettendomi di esplorare un filosofo che ho sempre sottovalutato. In particolare, le considerazioni estetiche sono davvero degne di nota (libro terzo). Bonus: la chiarezza espositiva di Schopenhauer è qualità rara tra i filosofi.
hades9stages's review
3.0
BLEAK. The World as Will and Representation is a philosophical magnum opus by German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer. Regarded as one of the most influential philosophical works, it delves into various facets of human existence and perception.
"Life is a constant process of dying."
The book's primary thesis revolves around two fundamental concepts:
˗ˏ✎ The "will" representing the inner essence driving human desires,
˗ˏ✎ And the "representation" depicting the external reality perceived by the mind.
Schopenhauer explores the nature of existence, consciousness, suffering, and the human condition.
Arthur Schopenhauer, born in 1788, was a renowned German philosopher known for his pessimistic views on life and his unique take on philosophy. His work significantly influenced future philosophers, including Nietzsche and Freud.
"The greatest of follies is to sacrifice health for any other kind of happiness."
Common criticisms of Schopenhauer's work revolve around the book's seemingly bleak perspective on life.
You can realise this without even reading the book, by the way Nietzsche's initial encounter with Schopenhauer's pessimistic philosophy played a significant role in shaping his intellectual development.
Schopenhauer's concept of the "will" and his pessimistic view of existence deeply impacted Nietzsche. Schopenhauer's influence on Nietzsche can be seen in Nietzsche's early work, particularly in his writing style and some shared themes, such as the critiques of conventional morality and the exploration of the human condition. Nietzsche's early work The Birth of Tragedy reflects Schopenhauerian themes of pessimism and the tension between the Dionysian and Apollonian aspects of life, echoing Schopenhauer's views on the duality of existence.
At the same time, Sigmund Freud, the father of psychoanalysis, acknowledged the influence of Arthur Schopenhauer's philosophical ideas on his early intellectual development also. During his formative years, Freud, too, showed interest in Schopenhauer's pessimistic view of human nature and the impact of unconscious forces on human behavior, which resonated with Freud's later work in psychology. Schopenhauer's concept of the unconscious will and his exploration of human drives, particularly in relation to suffering and desire, had a discernible impact on Freud's early thoughts about the unconscious mind. Freud was drawn to Schopenhauer's ideas about the irrational and unconscious motivations guiding human behavior.
But Freud eventually developed his own theories and methods that significantly diverged from Schopenhauer's philosophy. Freud's psychoanalytic theory delved deeper into the exploration of the unconscious mind, emphasising the role of early childhood experiences, the id, ego, and superego, and the significance of repressed desires and conflicts in shaping human behavior. Freud's work, particularly his development of psychoanalysis, moved beyond Schopenhauer's philosophical framework and established a distinct discipline in the field of psychology.
It is partly for this reason that this book does not satisfy me as much as it probably would’ve if I was reading it 100 years prior.
Freud's groundbreaking contributions in psychoanalysis became a departure from Schopenhauer's unfulfilled theories, contributing significantly to the understanding of human psychology and behaviour, and while I give Schopenhauer credit for being a founding father, he really hit a niche area with this work and I find its lack of applications disappointing.
The parts I did find interesting in this book were mostly due to the fact that I’m a bit of a Kant girlie- as of my time reading this book, I’ve also been reading quite a bit about Immanuel Kant and his philosophies. Schopenhauer was deeply influenced by Kant, particularly Kant's transcendental idealism and the distinction between the phenomenal and noumenal worlds.
Schopenhauer adopted and transformed Kant's ideas, especially in relation to the nature of reality and human perception, in developing his own philosophical system. However, Schopenhauer was still critical of certain aspects of Kant's philosophy, and it is this part that I find most interesting. He argued that Kant's work did not delve deeply enough into the metaphysical realm and that Kant failed to recognise the true nature of the world as will, a concept central to Schopenhauer's philosophy.
Schopenhauer believed that he had gone beyond Kant by uncovering the metaphysical concept of the will as the fundamental force underlying all existence:
˗ˏ✎ Kant's philosophy is built on the idea of transcendental idealism, where he argues that knowledge is structured by the mind's inherent categories and forms. He emphasises that our perception and understanding of the world are shaped by these mental structures. Schopenhauer, while initially influenced by Kant's transcendental idealism, departed from it by asserting that the will, not intellect, constitutes the fundamental reality behind phenomena.
˗ˏ✎ Kant posited the existence of the noumenal realm (things as they are in themselves) and the phenomenal realm (things as they appear to us). He argued that the noumenal world is inaccessible to human knowledge. Schopenhauer rejected this distinction, asserting that the will is the underlying reality and the noumenon itself, accessible through introspection and direct experience.
˗ˏ✎ Kant's philosophy centers on the limitations of human knowledge and the structure of experience. Schopenhauer, however, focused on the metaphysical aspects, positing that the will is the true essence of existence, underlying all phenomena.
˗ˏ✎ Kant is known for his deontological ethics based on moral duties and the categorical imperative, emphasising the importance of goodwill and moral obligations derived from reason. Schopenhauer, on the other hand, proposed a pessimistic view of human nature, emphasising compassion as the core of ethics, with a focus on alleviating suffering.
Schopenhauer's ethical emphasis on compassion and will resonate with me to some extent, as I do believe that on a very fundamental level, his basic philosophy is more true to me than that of Kant.
However, the individualistic aspect of Schopenhauer's ethics conflict with my personal belief in the strong need for collective action and societal transformation. I do not want to believe in the need for compassion, as I think it’s a very bleak way of putting things, although I also do not think it’s completely untrue. There’s like a secret third thing that I’m yet to discover.
I’m struggling to word my issues myself, maybe I will come back to this review and expand on my better formed opinion later. But for now, I’m going to say that the empty feeling I get from a lot, but not all, of Schopenhauer, prevents me from being able to fully praise and appreciate this book, because I can’t help but think about all that it is missing.
And as a whole, the complex language in this crazy massive book can be challenging to comprehend, as well as its sexist portrayal of women, which is just as frustrating to digest.
I see that people have also debated the consistency and coherence of his philosophical arguments- I’m not advanced enough to comment or care about this. I didn’t notice anything in this particular volume.
"Life is a constant process of dying."
The book's primary thesis revolves around two fundamental concepts:
˗ˏ✎ The "will" representing the inner essence driving human desires,
˗ˏ✎ And the "representation" depicting the external reality perceived by the mind.
Schopenhauer explores the nature of existence, consciousness, suffering, and the human condition.
Arthur Schopenhauer, born in 1788, was a renowned German philosopher known for his pessimistic views on life and his unique take on philosophy. His work significantly influenced future philosophers, including Nietzsche and Freud.
"The greatest of follies is to sacrifice health for any other kind of happiness."
Common criticisms of Schopenhauer's work revolve around the book's seemingly bleak perspective on life.
You can realise this without even reading the book, by the way Nietzsche's initial encounter with Schopenhauer's pessimistic philosophy played a significant role in shaping his intellectual development.
Schopenhauer's concept of the "will" and his pessimistic view of existence deeply impacted Nietzsche. Schopenhauer's influence on Nietzsche can be seen in Nietzsche's early work, particularly in his writing style and some shared themes, such as the critiques of conventional morality and the exploration of the human condition. Nietzsche's early work The Birth of Tragedy reflects Schopenhauerian themes of pessimism and the tension between the Dionysian and Apollonian aspects of life, echoing Schopenhauer's views on the duality of existence.
At the same time, Sigmund Freud, the father of psychoanalysis, acknowledged the influence of Arthur Schopenhauer's philosophical ideas on his early intellectual development also. During his formative years, Freud, too, showed interest in Schopenhauer's pessimistic view of human nature and the impact of unconscious forces on human behavior, which resonated with Freud's later work in psychology. Schopenhauer's concept of the unconscious will and his exploration of human drives, particularly in relation to suffering and desire, had a discernible impact on Freud's early thoughts about the unconscious mind. Freud was drawn to Schopenhauer's ideas about the irrational and unconscious motivations guiding human behavior.
But Freud eventually developed his own theories and methods that significantly diverged from Schopenhauer's philosophy. Freud's psychoanalytic theory delved deeper into the exploration of the unconscious mind, emphasising the role of early childhood experiences, the id, ego, and superego, and the significance of repressed desires and conflicts in shaping human behavior. Freud's work, particularly his development of psychoanalysis, moved beyond Schopenhauer's philosophical framework and established a distinct discipline in the field of psychology.
It is partly for this reason that this book does not satisfy me as much as it probably would’ve if I was reading it 100 years prior.
Freud's groundbreaking contributions in psychoanalysis became a departure from Schopenhauer's unfulfilled theories, contributing significantly to the understanding of human psychology and behaviour, and while I give Schopenhauer credit for being a founding father, he really hit a niche area with this work and I find its lack of applications disappointing.
The parts I did find interesting in this book were mostly due to the fact that I’m a bit of a Kant girlie- as of my time reading this book, I’ve also been reading quite a bit about Immanuel Kant and his philosophies. Schopenhauer was deeply influenced by Kant, particularly Kant's transcendental idealism and the distinction between the phenomenal and noumenal worlds.
Schopenhauer adopted and transformed Kant's ideas, especially in relation to the nature of reality and human perception, in developing his own philosophical system. However, Schopenhauer was still critical of certain aspects of Kant's philosophy, and it is this part that I find most interesting. He argued that Kant's work did not delve deeply enough into the metaphysical realm and that Kant failed to recognise the true nature of the world as will, a concept central to Schopenhauer's philosophy.
Schopenhauer believed that he had gone beyond Kant by uncovering the metaphysical concept of the will as the fundamental force underlying all existence:
˗ˏ✎ Kant's philosophy is built on the idea of transcendental idealism, where he argues that knowledge is structured by the mind's inherent categories and forms. He emphasises that our perception and understanding of the world are shaped by these mental structures. Schopenhauer, while initially influenced by Kant's transcendental idealism, departed from it by asserting that the will, not intellect, constitutes the fundamental reality behind phenomena.
˗ˏ✎ Kant posited the existence of the noumenal realm (things as they are in themselves) and the phenomenal realm (things as they appear to us). He argued that the noumenal world is inaccessible to human knowledge. Schopenhauer rejected this distinction, asserting that the will is the underlying reality and the noumenon itself, accessible through introspection and direct experience.
˗ˏ✎ Kant's philosophy centers on the limitations of human knowledge and the structure of experience. Schopenhauer, however, focused on the metaphysical aspects, positing that the will is the true essence of existence, underlying all phenomena.
˗ˏ✎ Kant is known for his deontological ethics based on moral duties and the categorical imperative, emphasising the importance of goodwill and moral obligations derived from reason. Schopenhauer, on the other hand, proposed a pessimistic view of human nature, emphasising compassion as the core of ethics, with a focus on alleviating suffering.
Schopenhauer's ethical emphasis on compassion and will resonate with me to some extent, as I do believe that on a very fundamental level, his basic philosophy is more true to me than that of Kant.
However, the individualistic aspect of Schopenhauer's ethics conflict with my personal belief in the strong need for collective action and societal transformation. I do not want to believe in the need for compassion, as I think it’s a very bleak way of putting things, although I also do not think it’s completely untrue. There’s like a secret third thing that I’m yet to discover.
I’m struggling to word my issues myself, maybe I will come back to this review and expand on my better formed opinion later. But for now, I’m going to say that the empty feeling I get from a lot, but not all, of Schopenhauer, prevents me from being able to fully praise and appreciate this book, because I can’t help but think about all that it is missing.
And as a whole, the complex language in this crazy massive book can be challenging to comprehend, as well as its sexist portrayal of women, which is just as frustrating to digest.
I see that people have also debated the consistency and coherence of his philosophical arguments- I’m not advanced enough to comment or care about this. I didn’t notice anything in this particular volume.
More...