Inductivo... Schopenhauer’s Ethics: AMetaphysicsSchopenhauer’s inAction Compassion, Virtue moral philosophy. metaphysics andacritical ofthis analysis ontheplausibility on whetherthere isaframeworkembedded inhis ofEthics Schopenhauer’smoral philosophy.This entails elucidation an this paperistoof ascertain apossible normative exposition of achievesHence,action. embodiment in its principal intentthe of hisethics,i.e.,onewhich is emergingfrom metaphysics and seek to underscore adifferent vantage pointonthegrounding compassionon This paperwill then ethics. his basis of asthe manyof synopticassessment, works onSchopenhauer focused as WillandRepresentation,68). Through Section this, by way and ethical precepts ofthesacred booksofIndia(TheWorld of Christianity, as well as being consistent withthedoctrines explicitly thathisviews are onmorality entirely inthespirit how thereexists a moral works.his dimensionin he statesIndeed, well ofcharacter as thedeterminability raises thequestion of dispiriting claim that philosophy can neverconduct’ ‘guide as in hisphilosophyan interminable hasbeen topic. Despite his assent to(1788-1860) acertain normative system ofEthics Keywords: Abstract: - Arthur Schopenhauer “It is just as little necessary forthesaintto beaphilosopher “It isjustaslittlenecessary ArthurSchopenhauer, Metaphysics, Will-to-Live,Ethics, Disputations whetherArthur Schopenhauer Ivan BrianL.Inductivo, M.A. person to beagreat sculptor, or foragreat sculptor Department ofEducation just as it is not necessary foraperfectly beautiful, just asitisnotnecessary In general, itisastrange demandonamoralist that heshouldcommend noothervirtue , TheWorld asWillandRepresentation han thatwhich hehimself possesses.” 90 as forthephilosopherto beasaint; to behimself abeautifulperson. Schopenhauer’s Ethics: A Metaphysics in Action .... 91 he study of ethics has been an interminable field of concern of field interminable an been has ethics of study he among philosophers, especially in our time contemporary T As a rationale for this paper, one of the notable problems However, there could However, be disputations whether Schopenhauer’s poignant and feasible option, a framework which is totally devoid others, towards humanity. This is of where Schopenhauer the comes notions in. of Schopenhauer’s ethics ethics may posit a called upon. There is a need to seek an paradigm, alternative i.e., a morality which is not compelled by religious obligation or rational duty; but by a voluntary act of benevolence that is tended towards intellectualize moral principles and found their groundwork mostly mostly groundwork their found and principles moral intellectualize on reason, transcendent/divine laws, or egotistical An examination motivations. of an alternative grounding of morality is being with most ethical theories today is that they rationalize or over- apparently apparently uncertain that a potent system of ethics is discernible ethical his elucidate to worthwhile is it action, of metaphysics his in thought. departure, departure, the world is in dire need of moral rejuvenation, that is, any inspiration by provided a major thinker such as Schopenhauer should be heartily welcomed and cogently considered. While it is which which is proliferated by utilitarian, theological, and axiological deontological, foundations existential, of ethics. As a point of Schopenhauer’s moral theory might open potentially a post plausible modern ethics which could bear relevance for a much wider beyond the audience, sphere of particularly, traditional philosophy set aside from mainstream discussion. mainstream set aside from philosophy may assent to a certain normative system of ethics. is now coming to the realization that our of proponents many moral amongst that categories regrettable is It are retooling. of in need been ethical theories, Arthur Schopenhauer’s ideas have normative being re-examined for society modern post the a Perhaps, issues. contemporary our address more robust framework of ethics to and ethicists alike continue to exhaust the moral principles categories by and which we have always lived and these horizons further to a new challenge The frontier. roots of ethics are currently where where it is constantly being confronted with normative and meta- Philosophers today. crossroads a at itself finds It quandaries. ethical Introduction Inductivo... Method ofInquiry metaphysics. his in embedded is that path a traverses It disposition. committed socially-politicallya nor transcendence, for higher capacity the moralor ground any from anchor not does content, religious any of Bobbs MerrillCompany, 1965),205.Henceforth cited asOn theBasisofMorality. I example, For realm. physical or causal the that in and occurs affected effect be this certain but are help cannot there we that which claim upon to conditions wants he instead, but of mind, doorstep the the at stops world causal the that think not does He traced” be stronger movements of our own will, to which all inner feelings can or weaker manifold “the Schopenhauer, claims recognize, to able are also We nature. of forces causal the to susceptible actions our makes that space and time in located substance physical some of throughintuitivecomposed arethat weperception assertion the is Embarking From Metaphysics ethics ofaction. of themetaphysics ofSchopenhauer, inanattempt to arrive atan mainstream ethicalsystems. Thisethicalinquiryisanelucidation of theplausibilityandnovelty ofthisethicsasopposedto other potent basis of hisethics;andsecond,itplungesinto aninquiry probes into themetaphysics ofSchopenhauerandelucidates a man relations. in terms ofallhumanbeingsandthefoundation ofauthentichu question. Ethical inquirythusbecomesauniversalizing discourse, are alsoethicalinthesensethatthisquandary puthumanityin work ofethicsandprobing into themetaphysics ofSchopenhauer towards thegoodofhumanity. Hence,thepursuitofanewframe the moral value oftheresearch andputsinquestionitsbearing ticularly thatofanethicalinquiry. Ethical inquiryexplores into The first claim Schopenhauer makes with respect to metaphysics This paperapproached theproblem it intwo modes:first, This papermadeuseofaphilosophicalresearch design,par 1 1 Arthur Schopenhauer, On the Basis of Morality, trans. by E.F.J. Payne (Indianapolis: The (Indianapolis: E.F.J.Payneby Morality, trans. of Basis the Schopenhauer,On Arthur 1 Mtvs r toe hc ae epnie o causality. to responsive are which those are Motives . 92 - - - Schopenhauer’s Ethics: A Metaphysics in Action .... . Despite this Despite . 4 . In addition, we 3 . 2 [esse] 93 . If plurality is reserved only for those things those for only reserved is plurality If . . If this is the case, that the notion of plurality plurality of notion the that case, the is this If . 6 7 . Since plurality and difference can only ever be 5 It is worth noting that Schopenhauer is a post-Kantian and subscribes fully to the Schopenhauer attributes this doctrine of the unity of an existing essence to in the Vedas Cf. Arthur Schopenhauer, The World as Will and Representation, I. trans. by E. F. J. Payne, J. Payne, as Will I. and The by E. trans. Representation, World F. Cf. Arthur Schopenhauer, Schopenhauer, On the Basis of Morality, p.195. Basis of Morality, On the Schopenhauer, p.205. Basis of Morality, On the Schopenhauer, p.205. Basis of Morality, On the Schopenhauer, 6 7 2 3 4 5 Affirming the foregoing, we cannot assume to have full the Upanishads, as well as Pythagoras. Schopenhauer, On the Basis of Morality, p.207. On the Basis of Morality, Schopenhauer, as Pythagoras. the Upanishads, as well depth of Kant’s mind there is anything that is true beyond all doubt, it is the Transcendental Aesthetic, Aesthetic, Transcendental the is it doubt, all beyond true is that anything is there mind Kant’s of depth apparent an even raise to that established clearly so is It time. and space of ideality the of doctrine the as Will I, and and objection Representation, The to it World has not been possible” Cf. Schopenhauer, p.206. On the Basis of Morality, Schopenhauer, (New York: Dover Publications, 1969), p.412. See also Schopenhauer, On the Basis of Morality, p.205. On the Basis of Morality, Publications, 1969), p.412. See also Schopenhauer, Dover (New York: noumena-phenomena distinction: “If in the information that is to given the world by the marvellous is viable only in the realm of the appearances, then Schopenhauer’s then appearances, the of realm the in only viable is of that which cannot be represented, our only recourse is to unity, so necessarily is it and understood understood in terms of space-time, that which eludes space time, conceived so be cannot think we when then time, and space in phenomenally, appear which “it may be one and identical in or all”, in other perhaps is words, approach cannot phenomenon that the which and which hidden lies a unifying force knowledge, we are not aware of the nexus or origination of the will. will. the of origination or nexus the of aware not are we knowledge, Despite this however uncertainty, inevitable, we can intimate that which which arise on the occasion of external motives” can be certain of the “manifold weaker or stronger movements of traced” be can feelings inner all which to will, own our the one hand, we are able to assert that as bodies, we are extended are we in space, and motives these that external through physically aware of “the continuous series of our aspirations and acts of will knowledge knowledge of ourselves. This is apparent, Schopenhauer concurs, as a perennial On testament arising from the history of philosophy. are are still responsible. This stems responsibility, however, not from our essence from our actions, but However, instead of pairing our causally motivated actions with the with actions motivated causally our pairing of instead However, of essence the at contingency for place a finds he agency, of freedom we world, causal a in situated are we that fact the Despite being. our and could never be, true. So, just as my body is causally motivated, alludes seemingly claim a such Although make. I decisions the are so to determinism, Schopenhauer does aim to preserve autonomy. lunch, where lunch, in where fact, Schopenhauer would claim that certain causal not, is reverse the that way a such in decision my influenced motives may may think to myself that I to decided eat freely, a fried chicken for Inductivo... stand. Schopenhauerphrases itinthefollowing manner: must other, the and ego the of abolishment the concerning claim compassion/, 2010. https://philophysis.wordpress.com/2010/03/04/a-brief-description-of-schopenhauers-ethic-of- is, that accordingly, act will compassionately andaltruistically distinctness our of dissolution the recognize who those hand, other the On unjustly. and egoistically necessarily be predisposed to behave according to this view, that is, distinct egos and define their ego as separate from the non-ego will as themselves understand who Those knowledge. of modes these of presence the fromresults this and bad or inherentlygood either entity” same the one and all and are “we caring, that us loving, reminds knowledge for Such action. basis virtuous the is Schopenhauer, to (oneself)” according to only self-consciousness (one’s) in known itself makes it as directly as thing living every in “exists appearances, and separateness; however, our inner being or essence, differences, acknowledge to susceptible representation”,is as man manifests itself inall livingthat conceptionthen things, same essenceit isoneandthe and if phenomenon, the that his relationhis to is primarily it goodhostile…the character,on In the phenomenal world, or as Schopenhauer puts it “the world nature.” again recognizing anotherhisown self, hisown trueinner metaphysicaland consist basisofethics inoneindividual’s proper expressionview.that of Accordingly, itwould bethe compassion isthe compassion;of phenomenon the of fact, in mirage. Itistheformerview which we foundto bethebasis byas Maya,Hindus the illusion, deception,i.e. phantasm, described is conception latter this that also find We be. must erroneous;not contrary,on the but oppositethe conception that abolishes thedifference ego andnon-ego between is 1 11 10 9 8 “The world [to thebadman]isanabsolute non-ego and “Accordingly, andseparateness ifplurality belong only to Schopenhauer, TheWorld asWilland Representation, I. Schopenhauer, OntheBasis ofMorality, p.209. Schopenhauer, OntheBasis ofMorality, p.211. rp A re dsrpin f coehurs ti o cmaso, eree from retrieved compassion, of ethic Schopenhauer’s of description brief A Brap, 8 10 Shpnae cam ta idvdas are individuals that claims Schopenhauer . 94 11 : 9 Ti knowledge, This . Schopenhauer’s Ethics: A Metaphysics in Action .... . 15 . This 14 . 12 . This even includes 13 95 Schopenhauer, On the Basis of Morality, p.92. On the Basis of Morality, Schopenhauer, p.56. On the Basis of Morality, Schopenhauer, p.132. On the Basis of Morality, Schopenhauer, Schopenhauer, On the Basis of Morality, p.211. On the Basis of Morality, Schopenhauer, 12 13 14 15 Schopenhauer also argued that reason alone cannot grasp all According According to Schopenhauer each moral system aims to satisfy Here Here lies the crux of Schopenhauer’s foundation for his ethics. is, therefore, friendly; he feels himself intimately akin to all akin to intimately himself he feels friendly; is, therefore, and and woe, in their weal interest an immediate beings, takes in them” the same sympathy assumes confidently with his own true being. The others are not a non-ego for for him, a non-ego not true being. others The are his own with everyone to relation His fundamental more.” once but an “I the other hand, lives in an external world that is homogeneous that is homogeneous world in an external the other hand, lives that is pertinent in moral decision understanding is able to capture making. that which is so integral to Neither moral lead reason may understanding or reason to nor accordance in Acting behavior. egoism. He affirms that: everyone makes “accordingly, himself the his selfish interest” to everything refers and of the world centre is where Schopenhauer critiqued the foundations of other moral system as rooted, not on altruistic tendencies, but specifically on undeniably conditioned, and conditioned by reward or punishment, or reward by conditioned and conditioned, undeniably and in religious beliefs, immorality of the agent, then it must also be the case that all impetus for action is inherently selfish that we conceive our actions to be dictated laws, or guided imperative, by and duties, obligations, or even this theological is indeed the origins. case that as duty, If conceived by Kant’s system, is assumption here lies that moral behavior is reason metaphysical, this for that is It is, realm. phenomenal the beyond reach actions our contrary, help contrary, everyone as much as you can” Kant’s categorical imperative. This being altruism the is case, the then foundation clearly upon which this premise rests. The the following maxim: “do unto others do as unto you”, which you one would can have rephrase as: them “Injure no one; on the On the Critique of other Moral Systems of other Moral On the Critique acting sympathetically towards everyone as “I-once-more”. The acting act as sympathetically everyone towards “I-once-more”. of the self. becomes a reiteration of relation This already alludes to the metaphysical reality of one’s being as Inductivo... o a a, ahr hn u o mr cmaso o lv fr other to for tendencies loveegoistic its or surpass must Morality, compassion then, individuals. mere of out than rather law, a respect forof out act to us orders that schema ethical an building of Schopenhauer others. for points out compassion that with regards or to loveconstruing morality, to we must appeal be wary we that voluntariness without is however,it obedience; moral sheer to us in Nature trans. by E.F.J. Payne (NewYork: Berg Publishers,1992). will-to-live.the the of manifestationsAll arewe all recognition that intuitive an of consists behavior Moral commandments. God-givenor rules rational than rather morality, of basis real the as argued within theChristian,HinduandBuddhisttraditions. intrigued by the examples and the discussions of compassion found was He ethics. then, of wonder,basis the as no compassion calls Schopenhauer is that It life. all of connectedness fundamental the to of but recognition more”,a once “myself, non-ego, is it man, the compassionate the is humanity says, Schopenhauer egoist, where the is For act. This altruistic sublime it. the as practice compassion coins actuallySchopenhauer to compulsion no has which these, motives willoperate onmanandactionswill,then,ensue in different and incredibly unequal proportions. In accordance with incentives, egoism, malice, and compassion are present in everyone you as much as can”).AccordingSchopenhauer,to everyoneman’s ethical threefundamental help contrary, the on one; no (“Injure phraseLatin bythe expressed be can actions moral all towards Schopenhauer, For means end. some the with concerned and instrumental, merely is categorical the implies that morality or does not originate in human rationality, which commandments Schopenhauer question. the answer theistic to render will that imperative of adherence the through not is it surely foregoing, the in presented As tendencies? motivatecan What individualsovercomequestion: to egoistic their Compassion: TheRoute to Ethics become truly moral. It is compassion, or act (non-egoistic) altruistic an is act moral truly a Therefore, book Schopenhauer’s On 16 16 Schopenhauer,Morality,of Basis the On Schopenhauer, Arthur also See p.29. Will the On Neminem laede,imo omnes quantumpotes, juva Mitleid (fellow-feeling), which Schopenhauer On the Basis of Morality 96 , he asks the asks he , 16 . Schopenhauer’s Ethics: A Metaphysics in Action .... . 17 . 20 . ‘It is the 18 97 . In this sense, compassion as beneficence 19 David David Cartwright. “Scheler’s Criticisms of Schopenhauer’s Theory of Mitleid,” in Christopher Christopher Janaway, ed. “Willing and Nothingness: Schopenhauer as Nietzsche’s Timothy Timothy J. Madigan, “Nietzsche & Schopenhauer On Compassion”, retrieved from Schopenhauer, On the Basis of Morality, p.18. On the Basis of Morality, Schopenhauer, 17 18 19 20 “Compassion is not egoistic because the compassionate the compassionate because is not egoistic “Compassion Schopenhauer thus considered it to be true that “compassion, as “compassion, that true be to it considered thus Schopenhauer presupposes presupposes that to a certain extent I have identified myself the barrier betweenwith the other and in consequence man, is for the moment abolished….” non–ego and the the ego as an external being, “I nevertheless feel it with him, feel it as it with him, feel feel being, “I nevertheless as an external and not within me, but in another person… But this own, my person does not feel different from the suffering or person from different feel not person does is experienced though the animal that sufferer is seen. Even Schopenhauer holds that the ultimate identification of human Educator”. (Oxford; Clarendon Press, 1998). Cf. Schopenhauer, On the Basis of Morality, p.144. On the Basis of Morality, 1998). Cf. Schopenhauer, Press, Clarendon (Oxford; Educator”. 62, 1981, p.145. Schopenhauer–Jahrbuch, Philosophy Philosophy 6. Compassion, 2000, para Now https://philosophynow.org/issues/29/Nietzsche_and_Schopenhauer_On_ fellow-feeling fellow-feeling signifies a morally desirable attitude towards evil, a he claims that: it. eliminate Further, to desire egoism (which is the source of evil) into compassionate participation compassionate into evil) of source the is (which egoism in the life of the other’ beings with another as the basis of compassion egoistic will impulse counter and the persuade actions of moral worth of scope narrow the of out one takes that suffering of apprehension knowledge knowledge cannot be taught or even communicated, but can only experience. about by be brought nothing other than the felt knowledge that the suffering of another has a reality equal to one’s own suffering insofar as the itself world in is an undifferentiated unity. Schopenhauer asserts that this expresses expresses a deeper knowledge than what is found in the ordinary manner of viewing the world. Indeed, the feeling of compassion is of another person, and Schopenhauer characterizes it as a kind of felt felt of kind a as it characterizes Schopenhauer and person, another of individuation that awareness the of born is Compassion knowledge. is merely phenomenal. Consequently the ethical point of view of endless suffering through the pursuit of goals which can never be never can which goals of pursuit the through suffering endless of satisfied. This pursuit ultimately results in suffering a the of meaningless awareness death the by prompted is compassion However, reality, but reality, they all lost sight of this due to their endless doctrinal What disputes. us unites all is itself that the consists life realization great great religions, he felt, were attempts to express this metaphysical Inductivo... object” of my will my of object” will-to-live. This can the only occur when another individual becomes of “the ultimate negation or denial the of consists Compassion compassion. in is it ratherknowledge, with do to all at nothing had He propounded the theory that the source and foundation of morals the sole non–egoistic motive, is also the only genuinely moral one”. On theBasisofMorality, p.143. of Basis Morality,the p.19. On Schopenhauer, also See 1995). Books, PrometheusYork: New (Amherst, Saunders. in sees he suffering the that point the to further, even it through sees person good the whereas another, to harm causing avoid to enough individuation of principle the through sees person just the compassion: levelof their by but actions, their of nature the by not person good the from person just the distinguishes Schopenhauer intention of causing harm in another then this action is immoral. Conversely,moral outright. Thus purethe performed with is action the if considered be cannot therefore and performed egocentrism with tinged is is it action the as long So entirely for the sake egoism. of another, the action of is a moral one. Otherwise, trace a fulfilled without is action an once attained be only can that worth” moral Conclusion towards revenge, andthatonecultivate directed astrong senseof compassion. thoughts and egoism avoid one that world, the in sufferingreduce to measures take and refrainviolence fromone prescribing that one treat others as kindly as one those treats areoneself, that respects he precepts the Among action. ethical the of realmwithin lie not does it compassion, by accompanied not is it if myself, and individual an dissolves. Any other action, no matter to what benefit or hindrance, between difference absolute the that possible are justice” “voluntary and it is on the basis compassion, of this as alone affirms that “genuine Schopenhauer loving-kindness” and own, one’s as pleasure and suffering other’s the identify to able be to as so head own one’s in myselfanother.with toactuallyability representThis individualan the other is felt as if it were my own, that is, I must be able to identify What is central in the ethics of Schopenhauer is the “stamp of “stamp the is Schopenhauer of ethics the in central is What 23 22 21 Schopenhauer, OntheBasisofMorality, p.144. Arthur Schopenhauer, The Wisdom of Life and Counsels and Maxims, trans.by T.trans.by BaileyMaxims, and Counsels and Life of Wisdom Schopenhauer,The Arthur Schopenhauer, The World as Will and Representation, I. p.412. See also Schopenhauer,also See p.412. I. Representation, and Will as WorldSchopenhauer, The 22 . In turn this can only happen if the pain felt by felt pain the if happen only can this turn In . 23 98 . It is only the case in compassion in case the only is It . 21

Schopenhauer’s Ethics: A Metaphysics in Action ....

- - 24 26

)” Mitleid “[T]o be just,“[T]o noble, and . Schopenhauer’s ethics of 25 99 Bibliography Cartwright, Schopenhauer’s Theory of Mitleid, p.60. Cartwright, Schopenhauer’s Theory of Mitleid, p.209. II, p.600. Vol. as Will and Representation, The World Schpopenhauer, Thinker Thinker Against the Tide. Translated by Joachim T. Baer and 1989. Mellon Press, David : Edwin N.Y Cartwright. Lewiston, E. 24 25 26 sity Press, 2010. sity Press, Barnes and Noble, 1975. Press 1990. Press 1995. Press, California (62), 1981. Schopenhauer–Jahrbuch, I concur with the article written by Cartwright that “Schopenhauer “Schopenhauer that Cartwright by written article the with concur I Jacquette, Jacquette, Dale, ed. Schopenhauer, Philosophy, and the Arts. Cambridge: Cam Hübscher, Hübscher, Arthur, The Philosophy of Schopenhauer in Its Intellectual Context: Copleston, Copleston, Frederick. Arthur Philosopher Schopenhauer, of Pessimism. London: 1980. Paul, & Kegan London: Routledge Schopenhauer. D.W. Hamlyn, Cartwright, David. “Scheler’s Criticisms of Schopenhauer’s Theory of in Mitleid,” Cambridge: Cambridge Univer Cartwright,E. Schopenhauer: A David Biography. ______. Schopenhauer on the Character of the World, Berkeley: University of Atwell, Atwell, J. Schopenhauer: The Philadelphia: Human University Temple Character, metaphysics into action. into As he affirmed that metaphysics action” into metaphysics my translate is nothing but to benevolent his own self, his own true inner nature’ compassion may be rendered as an active stance in translating his in establishing a consistent foundation for ethics. The philosophical The ethics. for foundation consistent a establishing in that tenet the in lies thought ethical Schopenhauer’s of contribution another in again recognizing individual one in ‘consists compassion . Schopenhauer’s metaphysical demonstration that foundation the of morality is ultimate to be in human nature itself, discovered by insight in the essence of being should be set down as significant deserves deserves to be considered a first-rate moral philosopher because of his analysis of the ethical significance of compassion ( Schopenhauer, Schopenhauer, is the highest point in ethical conduct, the path to happiness. suffering of others with such clarity that he is willing to sacrifice his sacrifice to willing is he that clarity such with others of suffering own well-being for the sake of others, if by doing so the suffering he will the outweighs alleviate suffering he must endure. This, says not only avoids harming others, but actively tries to alleviate the the recognize point,may someone highest its At others. of suffering others touches him almost as closely as does his own. Such a person person a Such own. his does as closely as almost him touches others Inductivo... Kant, Immanuel. Critique of Pure Reason, trans. Norman Kemp Smith. London: Smith. Kemp Norman trans. Reason, Pure of Critique Immanuel. Kant, Jonas, Hans. The Imperative of Responsibility: In Search of an Ethics for the Tech Janaway,Nietzsche’s as Schopenhauer Christopher,Nothingness: and Willing ed. Young, Julian, Willing and Unwilling: A Study in the Philosophy of Arthur Scho Arthur of Philosophy the in Study A Unwilling: and Willing Young,Julian, 2017from 11, February on Retrieved Schopenhauer. Arthur Mary. Troxell, Taylor, Richard. “Schopenhauer”. JournalofPhilosophy 61(9),pp.288-289:1964. TranslatedMaxims. and T.byCounsels and Life of Wisdom The ______. Bailey TranslatedNature. in E.F.J.byWill the On York:Payne.______. New Pub Berg The Morality.E.F.J.TranslatedIndianapolis: of byPayne. Basis the On ______. TranslatedReason. Sufficient of Principle the of FourfoldRoot the On ______. ______. WorldThe Representation,and Will as Vol. translatedI, by Nor Judith ______. The World as Will and Presentation, Vol. I, translated by Richard Aquila ______. WorldThe Representation,and Will as Vols. translatedII, and I by F.E. Schopenhauer, Arthur. The World as Will and Idea, 3 Vols., translated by R. B. Hal Magee, Bryan. ThePhilosophy ofSchopenhauer. Oxford: Carendon Press, 1983. fromRetrieved Compassion. On Schopenhauer & Nietzsche J. Timothy Madigan, York:New Paton. J. H. trans. Morals, of Metaphysic the Groundworkof ______. bridge University Press, 1996. nent nylpda f Philosophyhttp://www.iep.utm.edu/ penhauer. Dordrecht: MartinusNijhoff,1987. of Encyclopedia schopenh/#SSH2bii 2011 Internet NewYork:Saunders. Amherst, Prometheus Books, 1995. lishers, 1992. Bobbs MerrillCompany, 1965. by E.F.J. Payne. LaSalle:OpenCourtPress, 1997. Cam Cambridge: bridge University Press, 2010. Janaway, Christopher and Welchman, Alistair man, in collaboration withDavid Carus,NewYork: Longman,2007. J. Payne, NewYork: Dover Publications,1969. dane andJ.Kemp, London:Routledge andKegan Paul Ltd, 1883. On_Compassion, 2000. https://philosophynow.org/issues/29/Nietzsche_and_Schopenhauer_ Harper Torchbooks, 1964. Macmillan, 1929. nological Age.Chicago:University ofChicagoPress, 1984. Educator. Oxford; Clarendon Press, 1998. 100 ------