Skip to main content

SCHOPENHAUER

 

"(...) he was the one among the philosophers who brought real suffering into the sphere of philosophy. Until then, until Hegel, philosophers were mere creators of systems.  Systems which were impenetrable,  logical, but also completely dead, because they lacked any element of real vitality. The philosopher got used to explaining everything, but at the same time explaining nothing, and life got used to go ahead just fine without him. Because he was content with pure concept, with pure theory, being, notoriously, always unfit for life. With the exception of those ancients, such as Epicurus, who tried to make philosophy a study for practical reality. These few, however, were labeled as non-philosophers, for trying to move, however timidly, from mere theoretical formulation to everyday wisdom. With Schopenhauer, a whole new period of Western thought was inaugurated, now open to the influence of ancient Eastern wisdom. And so, contrary to the eternal placidity of Hegels and Diderots, Schopenhauer comes onto the scene to proclaim that life is something essentially irrational and that pain and suffering are the only constants on earth. A statement that could only earn him antipathy in the "century in which we decided to change the world." In the century of socialism, evidently, Schopenhauer's pessimism could only sound like pure bourgeois indulgence. Schopenhauer's life, perfectly bourgeois in essence, without major shocks or difficulties, lends a certain weight to the criticism. But even so, his thought remains coherent and in line with everything we know so far about life on earth. A blind impulse. Without an ulterior purpose. An endless struggle just to continue existing. A world where my suffering is my neighbor's joy. Necessarily. Schopenhauer also brought, perhaps for the first time, the concern for all forms of life as something praiseworthy. Thus, while his contemporary and fellow countryman Hegel was concerned with matters beyond the understanding and concern of an ordinary man, Schopenhauer turns to this same man. What is the point of our being in the "perfect State"? What is the point of dialectics? How do Hegelian concepts help us in our daily lives? So, it is a fact that in Schopenhauer we have the first thinker entirely concerned with real life. A precursor of existentialism. Although he left only "The World as Will and Representation" as an essential work, in addition to his "manuals", the German philosopher remains current, unlike Hegel, because life remains essentially the same, and will always continue to be, and the best compliment one can give to any thinker is to say that he still has something useful to say. Thank you, Schopenhauer."

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

ANARCHISM

    Introduction: Nothing to do?  The play Waiting for Godot , by the Irish writer Samuel Beckett , begins with one of the most famous lines in literature:   “Rien à faire”  ( Nothing to do ). That line is crucial to the understanding of the play and expresses man’s absolute inability to change anything around him. According to Beckett’s point of view, the individual in society is crushed by forces that he neither understands nor has the power to control or change. It is a perspective similar to that adopted by  Franz Kafka . For the latter, too, man is trapped in an absurd universe against which he cannot fight. The rules and impositions of society suffocate him, and when he has the slightest possibility of action, the very perception of the uselessness of everything ends up crushing his spirit.  Both Beckett and Kafka present worldviews that are perfect for literature. Literature thrives on  drama , and what greater drama is there than an indivi...
Post a Comment
Read more

Why Bazarov had to die

Some literary characters, like some books and some very special people, never leave us. They found a way to win a space in our hearts and our imagination, because they represent something that complements or enriches our experience in this world. And if at some point we must invariably say goodbye to these people, these characters who fascinate and enrich us, something in them always remains. The more our experience grows, and our self undergoes transformations and mutations that differentiate it increasingly from what it was when we met that special person, the more distant and opaque the memory becomes. But whenever we return to them, seeing a photo or rereading the book in which we met them, our memory is revived, and we realize that we need these special, unique beings, even if only as a mere reminder of the possibilities of human experience. Or as a reflection of a side of ourselves which we need to deal with and overcome, sooner or later. Evgeny Bazarov is one of those characters...
Post a Comment
Read more

Homo liber

  (…)   Here, where we are reviewing the “types” of men with whom we deal in the world, we finally see the real product of all the revolutions, all the transformations of human thought in recent centuries. This type of man, already seen as the bearer of absolute despair, of a meaningless, empty, absurd existence after the “death of God,” will, in fact, appear more as someone who has learned not to take things as seriously as religious men, philosophers, and scientists do. Literature, beginning in the 19th century with Ivan Turgenev’s Fathers and Sons and, very strongly, in the 20th century, will explore this “human type” to exhaustion. Its most perfect model will certainly be Mersault, a character in Albert Camus’s novel The Stranger . Mersault is the man who sees all things in life in a natural, direct way. He has a relationship with things and people that is not tied to artifice. He does not know how to play a character. If he does not feel any affection for his mot...
Post a Comment
Read more