Episodios

  • Examples of Schopenhauer’s views on the nature of existence

    Examples of Schopenhauer’s views on the nature of existence
    May 1 2025
    I’m going to point to several examples to illustrate the views of Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860) on the nature of human existence. The examples are drawn from famous literary works depicting challenging situations that put Schopenhauer’s advice to the test. Before starting with the examples, let me summarise in four paragraphs Schopenhauer’s views on the nature of existence. First, living creatures are driven by the will, which I translate as “life force” or “primal energy;” the will drives them towards reproduction and survival. The will generates one desire after another. Some of them can be fulfilled, others not. Second, the influence of the will can have disastrous effects on humans because it drives them towards decisions that fulfil short-term desires but without considering the costs, risks, and liabilities. These aspects are presented in Schopenhauer’s book “About the fourfold root of the principle of sufficient reason,” published in 1814. Third, unless you adopt countermeasures, you are likely to succumb to the influence of the will and pay a high price. Your career, finances, reputation and health are at risk. It is in your interest to stay alert and steer away from questionable choices. These aspects are outlined in Schopenhauer’s book “The world as will and representation” (1818). Fourth, human beings can adopt countermeasures to reduce the negative influence of the will, avoid suffering and increase happiness. The measures involve self-discipline, risk reduction and keeping a margin of safety. The countermeasures are found in Schopenhauer’s book “Parerga and Paralipomena” (1851). Here is the link to the original article: https://johnvespasian.com/examples-of-schopenhauers-views-on-the-nature-of-existence/
    Más Menos
    8 m
  • Schopenhauer and Kant, a comparison

    Schopenhauer and Kant, a comparison
    May 1 2025
    Despite their closeness in time, there are huge differences in intent and content between the ideas of Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) and those of Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860). Kant aimed at reconciling empiricism and rationalism, but with little success. The only result of his efforts is to decouple philosophy and science from ethics, leaving the area of values to religion, mysticism, and subjectivity. Historians have baptised Kant’s philosophy “transcendental idealism” in order to hide its deep irrationality and immorality. According to Kant, we derive our understanding of reality from sensory experience and intellectual concepts as much as from the structure of the human mind. The structure is present at birth and predetermines our perceptions and reasoning, said Kant. On this basis, Kant made the distinction between “a priori knowledge” (derived from the structure of our mind) and “a posteriori knowledge” (derived from experience). In particular, he theorised that “a priori insights” come from predetermined categories such as cause and effect, shape, size, etc. Kant devoted his book “Critique of Pure Reason” (1781) to speculating about knowledge theory, predetermined categories, and the limitations of the human mind. Seven years later, he wrote “Critique of Practical Reason,” a book that relinquishes ethics to subjectivity and religion. They are supposed to identify “categorical imperatives” valid to all individuals in all circumstances. However, the moral chaos of our era shows that Kant’s expectations have completely failed. In contrast, Schopenhauer paid little attention to knowledge theory, considering Kant’s speculations of little practical value. Schopenhauer’s key concerns are human motivation, happiness and the minimisation of suffering. While Kant got lost in abstractions, Schopenhauer focused on giving practical advice. His works “About the fourfold root of the principle of sufficient cause” (1808) and “The World as will and representation” answer questions about key elements in human motivation, making better decisions, and minimising risks. Here is the link to the original article: https://johnvespasian.com/schopenhauer-and-kant-a-comparison/
    Más Menos
    6 m
  • Schopenhauer and the unconscious

    Schopenhauer and the unconscious
    May 1 2025
    The philosophy of Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860) on the unconscious has exerted a vast influence on later thinkers such as Sigmund Freud, Carl Jung, Alfred Adler, or Wilhelm Reich. In his work “The world as will and representation” (1818), Schopenhauer outlined his philosophy of the unconscious. Schopenhauer defined the will as the blind, irrational drive to survive, reproduce, and seek pleasure at any cost. It’s a force that influences all living creatures, and that can prompt human beings to make dire mistakes. The will encompasses instincts and impulses that Sigmund Freud had named “the unconscious.” Schopenhauer viewed the will as a force operating beyond the realm of awareness. Thus, the will can prompt individuals to act illogically, detrimentally, or foolishly. According to Schopenhauer, the conscious mind is a surface layer driven by the will; unless you adopt countermeasures, the desires, instincts and impulses created by the will can prompt you to take counterproductive decisions. Schopenhauer devoted decades to identifying measures to counteract the will, minimise suffering and increase happiness. However, in his work “Parerga and Paralipomena” (1851), he admitted that it is easier to minimise suffering than to ensure happiness. The will can lead to intense pleasure, but also to suffering. I must explain the latter because it is far from self-evident. If the will is trying to protect life, why does suffering take place? Here is the link to the original article: https://johnvespasian.com/schopenhauer-and-the-unconscious/
    Más Menos
    6 m
  • Impact of Schopenhauer’s views on the unconscious

    Impact of Schopenhauer’s views on the unconscious
    May 1 2025
    Few historians acknowledge the large influence of Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860) on psychology, but Schopenhauer’s theory of the will (“life force”) as irrational driver of human psychology had set the background for Freud’s concept of a subconscious. Nowadays, it’s widely accepted that wild impulses often prompt us to seek short-term pleasures at the cost of long-term suffering. Carl Jung (1875-1961) was also profoundly influenced by Schopenhauer’s views on the unconscious, but developed them further. Jung created the concept of collective unconscious, a layer shared by humans across cultures and throughout history. According to Jung, the collective unconscious contains the archetypes (universal symbols) employed by all humans; those help shape the myths and folklore of each culture. Jung believed that archetypes (such as the lonely hero, the intransigent innovator, the wandering ghost, the restless soul or the evil force) exist in all cultures. You can find versions of the archetypes in children’s stories around the world. It is not a coincidence that archetypes exist, argued Jung. In his view, archetypes represent fundamental human attitudes to situations that occur in all cultures. They supply templates that are recognisable in every human society. Schopenhauer would have dismissed the idea of a collective unconscious as speculative and meaningless. In contrast to the theory of the will developed by Schopenhauer, the concept of a collective subconscious does not explain human motivation. Even if it was true that all cultures use similar metaphors or story patterns, it doesn’t mean that human beings are driven by those stories. Even if all individuals know the archetype of the hero, only a few people are going to display heroic behaviour.According to Jung, the collective unconscious contains the archetypes (universal symbols) employed by all humans; those help shape the myths and folklore of each culture. Jung believed that archetypes (such as the lonely hero, the intransigent innovator, the wandering ghost, the restless soul or the evil force) exist in all cultures. You can find versions of the archetypes in children’s stories around the world. It is not a coincidence that archetypes exist, argued Jung. In his view, archetypes represent fundamental human attitudes to situations that occur in all cultures. They supply templates that are recognisable in every human society. Here is the link to the original article: https://johnvespasian.com/impact-of-schopenhauers-views-on-the-unconscious/
    Más Menos
    6 m
  • Critique of Schopenhauer’s views on the unconscious

    Critique of Schopenhauer’s views on the unconscious
    Apr 29 2025
    Specifically in the works of Carl Rogers, Wilhelm Reich and William James, the twentieth century brought strong criticism of the views on the unconscious presented by Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860). Their definitions of the unconscious are based on the ideas developed by Schopenhauer, but only after having narrowed them down to a point where they are almost unrecognisable. In their own ways, Carl Rogers, Wilhelm Reich and William James emphasise particular aspects of Schopenhauer’s concept of the unconscious. As a result, they have obscured the original concept and deprived it of its ability to explain human action. Let’s first recapitulate what Schopenhauer put forward in his two major books “About the fourfold root of the principle of sufficient reason” (1814), and four years later in “The world as will and representation.” According to Schopenhauer, the will (“life force”) drives all living creatures to ensure their survival and reproduction. Even if you adopt countermeasures, you will not succeed in escaping the influence of the will. You can minimise its negative effects, but you cannot shut it down. Schopenhauer defined the will as a blind, irrational force. It is a definition that matches Sigmund Freud’s conception of the unconscious. Although Schopenhauer had employed historical examples and Freud had referred to psychiatric cases, they are speaking about the same phenomenon. Here is a link to the original article: https://johnvespasian.com/critique-of-schopenhauers-views-on-the-unconscious/
    Más Menos
    8 m
  • Schopenhauer and the nature of truth

    Schopenhauer and the nature of truth
    Apr 29 2025
    Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860) devoted his whole life to the pursuit of truth. He acknowledged that truth is sometimes unpleasant and harsh, but humans are better off when they face problems and take action to solve them. In his major work “The World as Will and Representation,” (1818), Schopenhauer categorised the will (“life force”) as the main driver behind human actions. It exerts massive influence on perception, motivation, and on how people take decisions. Schopenhauer criticised mainstream philosophers because of their failure to grasp how the will drives the universe. If you fail to study the theory of the will, you cannot understand the tangible experiences of life. Truth can only be perceived, argued Schopenhauer, by those who acknowledge the influence of the will on the thoughts of individuals. Those thoughts combine the will (blind, irrational, external force) with individual perceptions and desires. Schopenhauer’s books “On the fourfold root of the principle of sufficient cause” (1814) and “Parerga and Paralipomena” (1851) recommend confronting the harsh realities of existence, instead of engaging in wishful thinking. The truth will help us make the right decisions. Here is the link to the original article: https://johnvespasian.com/schopenhauer-and-the-nature-of-truth/
    Más Menos
    7 m
  • Examples of Schopenhauer’s views on the nature of truth

    Examples of Schopenhauer’s views on the nature of truth
    Apr 29 2025
    Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860) gave us valuable insights on human behaviour. Let us take a look at historical examples of Schopenhauer’s views on the nature of truth. First of all, Michel de Montaigne (1533-1592), a French philosopher, as a worthy predecessor of Schopenhauer. Like Schopenhauer, Montaigne remained outside academic circles, but wrote essays on the nature of truth. Montaigne did not offer answers as sophisticated as Schopenhauer, but spent years doing research on the reliability of human judgement and the certainty of knowledge. Also like Schopenhauer, Montaigne underlined the fallibility of human reason, especially when influenced by strong external factors. However, Montaigne was willing to accept a higher level of subjectivity than Schopenhauer. While Schopenhauer employed his theory of the will to seek the nature of truth, Montaigne regarded truth as contingent on the cultural context and individual circumstances. Here is the link to the original article: https://johnvespasian.com/examples-of-schopenhauers-views-on-the-nature-of-truth/
    Más Menos
    6 m
adbl_web_global_use_to_activate_webcro805_stickypopup