DOCSLIB.ORG

The Basis of Morality;

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Basis of Morality; fuBRARV I Of 1 I ONIVERStTY I CALIFOUNIA 1 I SANOIEGO J ^ /c::c:>c: THE BASIS OF MOKALITY ARTHUR SCHOPENHAUER Uranalateft witb ^ntrofeuctfon anb "Hotcs bg ARTHUR BRODRIOK BULLOCK, M.A. TRINITY COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE LONDON SWAN SONNENSCHEIN & CO., LIMITED PATERNOSTER SQUARE 1903 PRINTED BT HAZELL, WATSON AND VINEY LD., LONPOK AND AYLESBURY. — PRIZE ESSAY ON THE BASIS OE MORALITY NOT APPROVED BY THE DANISH ROYAL SOCIETY OF SCIENCES, Copenhagen, 30 Janiiary, 1840. "To preach Morality is easy, to found it diflBcult." (ScHOPENHAUBB : C/e6er den WiUen in der Natur ; p. 128.) Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2007 with funding from IVIicrosoft Corporation http://www.archive.org/details/basisofmoralityOOschoiala MATRI CARiSSIMAE. CONTENTS. PAGK translator's preface . ix translator's introduction . xi THE QUESTION ........ 1 part I. INTRODUCTION. CHAP. I. THE PROBLEM . .5 II. GENERAL RETROSPECT . .12 IPart II. CRITIQUE OF KANT'S BASIS OF ETHICS. I. PRELIMINARY REMARKS 23 II. ON THE IMPERATIVE FORM OF THE KANTIAN ETHICS . 28 m. ON THE ASSUMPTION OF DUTIES TOWARDS OUR- SELVES IN PARTICULAR . .38 IV. ON THE BASIS OF THE KANTIAN ETHICS. 42 NOTE 76 V. ON THE LEADING PRINCIPLE OF THE KANTIAN ETHICS 82 VI. ON THE DERIVED FORMS OF THE LEADING PRINCIPLE OF THE KANTIAN ETHICS 92 vii VUl CONTENTS. CHAP. PAGE VII. kant's doctrine of conscience . .106 VIII. kant's doctrine of the intelligible and em- pirical CHARACTER. THEORY OF FREEDOM . .115 NOTE .... 121 IX. FICHTE'S ETHICS AS A MAGNIFYING GLASS FOR THE ERRORS OF THE KANTIAN . .124 part III. THE FOUNDING OF ETHICS. I. CONDITIONS OF THE PROBLEM . .133 II. SCEPTICAL VIEW 135 III. ANTIMORAL INCENTIVES 150 IV. CRITERION OF ACTIONS OF MORAL WORTH . .161 V. STATEMENT AND PROOF OF THE ONLY TRUE MORAL INCENTIVE 165 VI. THE VIRTUE OF JUSTICE 176 VII. THE VIRTUE OF LOVING-KINDNESS . .198 VIII. THE PROOF NOW GIVEN CONFIRMED BY EXPERIENCE 206 IX. ON THE ETHICAL DIFFERENCE OF CHARACTER . 237 Ipait IV. ON THE METAPHYSICAL EXPLANATION OF THE PRIMAL ETHICAL PHAENOMENON. I. HOW THIS APPENDIX MUST BE UNDERSTOOD . 257 II. THE METAPHYSICAL GROUNDWORK . .264 JUDICIUM REGIAE DANICAE SCIENTIARI 5l SOCIETATIS . 283 TRANSLATOR'S PHEEACE. This translation was undertaken in the belief that there are many English-speaking people who feel more than a merely superficial interest in ethical research, but who may not read German with suifi- cient ease to make them care to take up the original. The present Essay is one of the most important contributions to Ethics since the time of Kant, and, as such, is indispensable to a thorough knowledge of the subject. Moreover, from whatever point of view it be regarded,—whether the reader find, when he closes the book, that his conviction harmonises with the conclusion reached, or not ; it would be difiicult to find any treatise on Moral Science more calculated to stimulate thought, and lift it out of infantile imitation of some prescribed pattern. The believer in the Kantian, or any other, basis of Ethics, could hardly measure the strength or the weakness of his own position more surely than by comparing it with the Schopenhauerian ; while he who is yet X translator's preface. in search of a foundation will find much in the follow- ing pages to claim his attention. Those acquainted with the luminous imagery, the subtle irony, the brusque and penetrating vigour of the German, will doubtless admit that it is no easy task to reduce Schopenhauer to adequate English prose ; and if this has been attempted by the present writer, no one can be more conscious than he of the manifold shortcomings discoverable. But such as it is, the work is heartily offered to all who still follow the true student's rule, ^'^laWg; iaolbt Jjt larn^ xcnb glaHg hcl§t" with the single hope that it may help, however slightly, to widen their knowledge, and ripen their judgment. My friend, R. E. Candy, Esq., I.C.S., has kindly given me information concerning several Indian names. Rome : June, 1902. TRANSLATOR'S INTRODUCTION. "Ou 8i 6eo\ TifiSxriv, 6 Koi fia^evfieuos alvf2. —Theognis : 169. In 1837 the Danish Royal Society of Sciences pro- pounded, as subject for a prize competition, the question with which this treatise opens ; and Schopen- hauer, who was glad to seize the opportunity of becoming better known, prepared, and sent to Copen- hagen, the earliest form of " The Basis of Morality." In January, 1840, the work was pronounced unsuc- cessful, though there was no other candidate. In September of the same year it was published by the author, with only a few unimportant additions, but preceded by a long introduction, which, cast in the form of an exceedingly caustic philippic, is, in its way, a masterpiece. In 1860, (only a month before Schopenhauer's death,) the second edition was printed with many enlargements and insertions, the short preface, dated August being one of the last things he wrote.^ The reason why the prize was withheld is not far to seek, and need not detain us. At that time the philosophical atmosphere was saturated with Hegel, and, to a certain extent, with Fichte ; hence ^ He died September 21st. " xii translator's introduction. it is easy to imagine with what ruffled, not to say, scandalised feelings the Academy must have risen from its perusal of the work. Moreover, putting Hegel and Fichte out of the question, the position advanced was in 1840 so new, indeed so paradoxical (as Schopenhauer himself admits) ; there is at times such an aggressiveness in the style ; the whole essay is so much more calculated to startle than to con- ciliate ; that we cannot feel much surprise at the official decision. In the Judgment published by the Society three reasons are given for its unfavourable attitude. The second is declared to be not only dissatisfaction with the mode of discussion (ipsa disserendi forma), but also inability to see that Schopenhauer proves his case. x\s the third is alleged the " unseemly language employed in connection with certain '^summi philosophV (Hegel and Fichte). These two objec- tions are of course in themselves perfectly legitimate, and how far the Academy was right or wrong may be left for the reader to determine. But the first reason stated is of a different kind, and affords as neat an instance of self-stultification proceeding ex cathedra as can well be found. It is true that the question is worded vaguely enough, but if it means anything, it asks where the " philosophiae moralis fons et fundamentum"— the foundation of moral science— is to be sought for, i.e., where it is to be found. Turning to the Judgment we read : " He " (Schopenhauer) " has omitted to deal with the essential part of the question, apparently thinking that he was required to establish some fundamental TRANSLATORS INTRODUCTION. Xlll " principle of Ethics : which he was required to do, unless the Society's Latin is borrowed from NetjjaXo- KOKKvyia. And then it goes on to declare that he treated as secondary, indeed as an opus supererogationis, the very thing which the Academy intended should occupy the first place, namely, the connection between Metaphysics and Ethics.^ But the " metaphysicae et etkicae nexus,^' so far from being formulated in the question as the chief point to be considered, is not even mentioned ! The Society thus denies having asked what it actually did ask, while the discussion, which it asserts was specially indicated, is not suggested by a single word. Its embarrassment is sufficiently shown by this unworthy shifting, to enlarge upon which would here be out of place.^ It is not intended to offer any criticism either on Schopenhauer's main position in this essay, or on the various side-issues involved. The reader is supposed to be accurately acquainted with the funda- mentals of his philosophy, as contained in Die Welt als Wille unci Vorstellmiff, and is invited to be the critic himself. But perhaps a few remarks on the structure and general trend of the work may not be amiss. After preliminary considerations, partly to show ' It should be noticed that this " essential part of the question," a few lines before, is said to have been passed over altogether (pmisso enim eo, quod }X)tissimum posttdabatur). * Any one who cares to see how this Judgment, the Danish Royal Society of Sciences, Hegel, Fichte, and " Professors of Philosophy" in general, are all pulverised together under our sage's withering wrath and trenchant irony, should read his Introduction to each Edition. xiv translator's introduction. the difficulty of the subject, partly to clear the ground (Part I.), the treatise opens with a searching critique of Kant's Ethical Basis, of the Leading Principle of his system, and of its derived forms. (Part II., Chapters I. -VI.) ^ Schopenhauer's conclusion is that the Categorical Imperative is a very cleverly woven web, yet in reality nothing but the old theological basis in disguise, the latter being the indispensable, if invisible, clothes' peg for the former ; and that Kant's tou7- de main of deducing his Moral Theology from Ethics is like inverting a pyramid. The theory of Conscience is next discussed (Chapter VII.). The half- supernatural element which Kant introduced under the highly dramatic form of a court of justice holding ing secret session in the breast, is examined, and eliminated ; and Conscience is defined as the know- ledge that we have of ourselves through our acts. But if, so far, the result obtained is distinctly unfavourable to Kant, Schopenhauer is glad to agree with him on one point, namely, the theory of Freedom, to a brief notice of which he now passes (Chapter VIII.).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 'The Supreme Principle of Morality'? in the Preface to His Best
    The Supreme Principle of Morality Allen W. Wood 1. What is ‘The Supreme Principle of Morality’? In the Preface to his best known work on moral philosophy, Kant states his purpose very clearly and succinctly: “The present groundwork is, however, nothing more than the search for and establishment of the supreme principle of morality, which already constitutes an enterprise whole in its aim and to be separated from every other moral investigation” (Groundwork 4:392). This paper will deal with the outcome of the first part of this task, namely, Kant’s attempt to formulate the supreme principle of morality, which is the intended outcome of the search. It will consider this formulation in light of Kant’s conception of the historical antecedents of his attempt. Our first task, however, must be to say a little about the meaning of the term ‘supreme principle of morality’. For it is not nearly as evident to many as it was to Kant that there is such a thing at all. And it is extremely common for people, whatever position they may take on this issue, to misunderstand what a ‘supreme principle of morality’ is, what it is for, and what role it is supposed to play in moral theorizing and moral reasoning. Kant never directly presents any argument that there must be such a principle, but he does articulate several considerations that would seem to justify supposing that there is. Kant holds that moral questions are to be decided by reason. Reason, according to Kant, always seeks unity under principles, and ultimately, systematic unity under the fewest possible number of principles (Pure Reason A298-302/B355-359, A645- 650/B673-678).
    [Show full text]
  • Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Arthur Schopenhauer
    03/05/2017 Arthur Schopenhauer (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Arthur Schopenhauer First published Mon May 12, 2003; substantive revision Sat Nov 19, 2011 Among 19th century philosophers, Arthur Schopenhauer was among the first to contend that at its core, the universe is not a rational place. Inspired by Plato and Kant, both of whom regarded the world as being more amenable to reason, Schopenhauer developed their philosophies into an instinct­recognizing and ultimately ascetic outlook, emphasizing that in the face of a world filled with endless strife, we ought to minimize our natural desires for the sake of achieving a more tranquil frame of mind and a disposition towards universal beneficence. Often considered to be a thoroughgoing pessimist, Schopenhauer in fact advocated ways — via artistic, moral and ascetic forms of awareness — to overcome a frustration­filled and fundamentally painful human condition. Since his death in 1860, his philosophy has had a special attraction for those who wonder about life's meaning, along with those engaged in music, literature, and the visual arts. 1. Life: 1788–1860 2. The Fourfold Root of the Principle of Sufficient Reason 3. Schopenhauer's Critique of Kant 4. The World as Will 5. Transcending the Human Conditions of Conflict 5.1 Aesthetic Perception as a Mode of Transcendence 5.2 Moral Awareness as a Mode of Transcendence 5.3 Asceticism and the Denial of the Will­to­Live 6. Schopenhauer's Later Works 7. Critical Reflections 8. Schopenhauer's Influence Bibliography Academic Tools Other Internet Resources Related Entries 1. Life: 1788–1860 Exactly a month younger than the English Romantic poet, Lord Byron (1788–1824), who was born on January 22, 1788, Arthur Schopenhauer came into the world on February 22, 1788 in Danzig [Gdansk, Poland] — a city that had a long history in international trade as a member of the Hanseatic League.
    [Show full text]
  • Human Beings and the Moral Law: Moral Precariousness in Kant's Ethical Philosophy
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations 2014 Human Beings and the Moral Law: Moral Precariousness in Kant's Ethical Philosophy Bradley Taylor University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations Part of the Philosophy Commons Recommended Citation Taylor, Bradley, "Human Beings and the Moral Law: Moral Precariousness in Kant's Ethical Philosophy" (2014). Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations. 1468. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/1468 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/1468 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Human Beings and the Moral Law: Moral Precariousness in Kant's Ethical Philosophy Abstract ABSTRACT HUMAN BEINGS AND THE MORAL LAW: MORAL PRECARIOUSNESS IN KANT'S ETHICAL PHILOSOPHY Bradley M. Taylor Dr. Paul Guyer This dissertation is an examination of human moral precariousness in Kant's ethics. Human beings are in a state of moral precariousness insofar as they are ever-capable of transgressing the moral law and are often uncertain of the moral worth of their actions. Put another way, in this dissertation I argue that the basic relationship between human beings and the moral law, in Kant's moral philosophy, is, most fundamentally, one of tenuousness and vacillation. This relation is the fundamental characteristic of the human moral condition because such a relation is built into Kant's account of human moral agency. We have a tenuous relation to the moral law because we always have at least the possibility of conflict between our desire for happiness (i.e. the satisfaction of our inclinations) and the requirements of the moral law.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Genealogy of Morality. the Birth of Pessimism in Zapffe’S on the Tragic
    On the Genealogy of Morality... 75 ON THE GENEALOGY OF MORALITY. THE BIRTH OF PESSIMISM IN ZAPFFE’S ON THE TRAGIC SILVIYA SERAFIMOVA Institute for the Study of Societies and Knowledge, BAS [email protected] Abstract This article examines the genealogy of morality, as represented by the Norwegian philosopher and writer Peter Wessel Zapffe, as well as the way it affected the justification of his pessimism, which made him one of the most influential existentialists of the 20th century. Analyzing the complex relationships between so-called biological, social and (autotelic) metaphysical morality, which are explored against the background of four interest fronts (biological, social, autotelic and metaphysical fronts), I will clarify why Zapffe’s pessimism is irreducible to the one displayed by Schopenhauer since Zapffe provides a critical reception of Schopenhauer’s theory of tragic. Key words: Peter Wessel Zapffe, morality, existentialism, pessimism, On the Tragic Regardless of the fact that the conceptions of the Norwegian mountaineer, lawyer, writer and philosopher Peter Wessel Zapffe are not as well-known as the theories of Arne Naess, they had a significant influence on the development of Norwegian existentialism. In this context, we should specify why one should talk about Zapffe’s pessimism rather than Zapffe’s nihilism regardless of Nietzsche’s influence on his views of cultural degrowth, as well as of the possibility to draw some parallels with Nietzsche’s ‘melancholic metaphysics’ [1], as Haave suggests (Haave, 1999, pp. 236-237). Zapffe himself describes Nietzsche’s theory of tragic arguing that his “aesthetic-tragic desire” (“aestetisk-tragiske lyst”) is imprecisely interpreted (Zapffe, 1941, p.
    [Show full text]
  • Two Fundamental Problems of Ethics
    Great Clarendon Street, Oxford Ox2 6DP Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide in Oxford New York Auckland Cape Town Dar es Salaam Hong Kong Karachi Kuala Lumpur Madrid Melbourne Mexico City Nairobi New Delhi Shanghai Taipei Toronto With oces in Argentina Austria Brazil Chile Czech Republic France Greece Guatemala Hungary Italy Japan Poland Portugal Singapore South Korea Switzerland Thailand Turkey Ukraine Vietnam Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries Published in the United States by Oxford University Press Inc., New York Translation, Note on the Text and Translation, Select Bibliography, Chronology, Explanatory Notes © David E. Cartwright and Edward E. Erdmann 2010 Introduction © Christopher Janaway 2010 The moral rights of the authors have been asserted Database right Oxford University Press (maker) First published as an Oxford World’s Classics paperback 2010 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the address above
    [Show full text]
  • Schopenhauer's Ethics
    Schopenhauer’s Ethics: A Metaphysics in Action Department of Education Ivan Brian L. Inductivo, M.A. Abstract: Disputations whether Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860) assent to a certain normative system of Ethics in his philosophy has been an interminable topic. Despite his dispiriting claim that philosophy can never ‘guide conduct’ as well as the determinability of character raises the question of how there exists a moral dimension in his works. Indeed, he states explicitly that his views on morality are entirely in the spirit of Christianity, as well as being consistent with the doctrines and ethical precepts of the sacred books of India (The World as Will and Representation, Section 68). Through this, by way of synoptic assessment, many works on Schopenhauer focused on compassion as the basis of his ethics. This paper will then seek to underscore a different vantage point on the grounding Inductivo... of his ethics, i.e., one which is emerging from metaphysics and achieves its embodiment in action. Hence, the principal intent of this paper is to ascertain a possible normative exposition of Schopenhauer’s moral philosophy. This entails an elucidation on whether there is a framework of Ethics embedded in his metaphysics and a critical analysis on the plausibility of this moral philosophy. Keywords: Arthur Schopenhauer, Metaphysics, Ethics, Will-to-Live, Compassion, Virtue “It is just as little necessary for the saint to be a philosopher as for the philosopher to be a saint; just as it is not necessary for a perfectly beautiful, person to be a great sculptor, or for a great sculptor to be himself a beautiful person.
    [Show full text]
  • |||GET||| Arthur Schopenhauer: the World As Will and Presentation 1St
    ARTHUR SCHOPENHAUER: THE WORLD AS WILL AND PRESENTATION 1ST EDITION DOWNLOAD FREE Arthur Schopenhauer | 9781315507880 | | | | | Schopenhauer: 'The World as Will and Representation': Volume 1 I can say this was add-on because they really don't flow with how he dealt with Christianity anywhere else within the Volume. This volume is divided into four books. Essentially all of philosophy. The book is easy to read and assimilate compared to the works of other philosophers I have read. To be blunt: I cannot recommend this work to anyone. The Will wills, and the character and motivation of the person make it possible to learn, to gain knowledge, and this might alter the way the Will objectifies itself in us. If the whole world as representation is only the visibility of the will, then art is the elucidation of this visibility, the camera obscura which shows the objects more purely, and enables us to survey and comprehend them better. The happiness that we seek is more inclined towards self preservation and satisfaction of vanity. True, compared to Kant, Schopenhauer developed a more consistent and complete philosophy. With Schop, the Will, the thing-in-itself, is in you as much as it is in anything else. More generally, although S was an atheist, there is a lot of religion in the book, more of the order of religion as philosophy. Conceived and published before the philosopher was 30 and expanded 25 years later, it is the summation of a lifetime of thought. The only hope for the individual is to save his own soul; and even this he can do only by avoiding worldly entanglements.
    [Show full text]
  • Schopenhauer on the Values of Aesthetic Experience
    Schopenhauer on the Values of Aesthetic Experience The Southern Journal of Philosophy (2007) Vol. XLV Schopenhauer on the Values of Aesthetic Experience Bart Vandenabeele Ghent University (Belgium) Abstract In this essay, I argue that Schopenhauer’s view of the aesthetic feelings of the beautiful and the sublime shows how a “dialectical” interpre- tation that homogenizes both aesthetic concepts and reduces the discrepancy between both to merely quantitative differences is flawed. My critical analysis reveals a number of important tensions in both Schopenhauer’s own aesthetic theory—which does not ultimately succeed in “merging” Plato’s and Kant’s approaches—and the interpretation that unjustly reduces the value of aesthetic experience to a merely preliminary stage of ethical will-less salvation. Art does not hurt us. The tears that we shed at a play are a type of the exquisite sterile emotions that it is the function of art to awaken. We weep, but we are not wounded. Oscar Wilde The Critic as Artist In the traditional interpretation of Schopenhauer’s aesthetic theory, the thought prevails that aesthetic pleasure is rooted in the subject’s release from the claws of the blind will and that such a (negative) feeling of relief forms a preparation to the Bart Vandenabeele is Professor of Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art at Ghent University (Belgium). He is the author and editor of several books in aesthetics, philosophy of art, and philosophy of culture. He has published several contributions in books and international journals on aesthetics, the history of philosophy, and the philosophy of language in English, German, Portuguese, and Dutch.
    [Show full text]
  • On Nietzsche's Schopenhauer, Illich's
    Fordham University Masthead Logo DigitalResearch@Fordham Articles and Chapters in Academic Book Philosophy Collections Spring 2014 “Who do you think you are?” On Nietzsche’s Schopenhauer, Illich’s Hugh of St. Victor, and Kleist’s Kant Babette Babich Fordham University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://fordham.bepress.com/phil_babich Part of the Continental Philosophy Commons, History of Philosophy Commons, and the Social and Philosophical Foundations of Education Commons Recommended Citation Babich, Babette, "“Who do you think you are?” On Nietzsche’s Schopenhauer, Illich’s Hugh of St. Victor, and Kleist’s Kant" (2014). Articles and Chapters in Academic Book Collections. 68. https://fordham.bepress.com/phil_babich/68 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Philosophy at DigitalResearch@Fordham. It has been accepted for inclusion in Articles and Chapters in Academic Book Collections by an authorized administrator of DigitalResearch@Fordham. For more information, please contact [email protected]. J P S E Journal for the Philosophical Study of Education Vol. 2 (2014) Editors: Allan Johnston, DePaul University and Columbia College Chicago Guillemette Johnston, DePaul University Outside Readers: Charles V. Blatz, University of Toledo (emeritis) Tom Falk, University of Dayton Tom Friedrich, SUNY Plattsburgh Charles Howell, Youngstown State University Emery Hyslop-Margison, Florida Atlantic University Cheu-jey Lee, Indiana University-Purdue University, Fort Wayne Alexander Makedon, Arellano University David Mosley, Bellarmine University Linda O’Neill, Northern Illinois University Sam Rocha, University of North Dakota Zachary Rohrbach, Independent Scholar Elias Schwieler, Stockholm University The Society for the Philosophical Study of Education JPSE: Journal for the Philosophical Study of Education II (2014) “Who do you think you are?” On Nietzsche’s Schopenhauer, Illich’s Hugh of St.
    [Show full text]
  • Wicks (2015), Schopenhauer (SEP).Pdf
    pdf version of the entry Arthur Schopenhauer http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2015/entries/schopenhauer/ Arthur Schopenhauer from the Spring 2015 Edition of the First published Mon May 12, 2003; substantive revision Sat Nov 19, 2011 Stanford Encyclopedia Among 19th century philosophers, Arthur Schopenhauer was among the first to contend that at its core, the universe is not a rational place. Inspired of Philosophy by Plato and Kant, both of whom regarded the world as being more amenable to reason, Schopenhauer developed their philosophies into an instinct-recognizing and ultimately ascetic outlook, emphasizing that in the face of a world filled with endless strife, we ought to minimize our natural desires for the sake of achieving a more tranquil frame of mind and Edward N. Zalta Uri Nodelman Colin Allen R. Lanier Anderson a disposition towards universal beneficence. Often considered to be a Principal Editor Senior Editor Associate Editor Faculty Sponsor thoroughgoing pessimist, Schopenhauer in fact advocated ways — via Editorial Board artistic, moral and ascetic forms of awareness — to overcome a http://plato.stanford.edu/board.html frustration-filled and fundamentally painful human condition. Since his Library of Congress Catalog Data death in 1860, his philosophy has had a special attraction for those who ISSN: 1095-5054 wonder about life's meaning, along with those engaged in music, Notice: This PDF version was distributed by request to mem- literature, and the visual arts. bers of the Friends of the SEP Society and by courtesy to SEP content contributors. It is solely for their fair use. Unauthorized 1. Life: 1788–1860 distribution is prohibited.
    [Show full text]
  • A Comparison of the Works of Kant, Schopenhauer, and Nietzsche Jane Elizabeth Edwards
    University of Richmond UR Scholarship Repository Master's Theses Student Research 8-1986 A genealogy of the will : a comparison of the works of Kant, Schopenhauer, and Nietzsche Jane Elizabeth Edwards Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.richmond.edu/masters-theses Recommended Citation Edwards, Jane Elizabeth, "A genealogy of the will : a comparison of the works of Kant, Schopenhauer, and Nietzsche" (1986). Master's Theses. Paper 501. This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Research at UR Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of UR Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A GENEALOGY OF THE WILL: A COMPARISON OF THE WORKS OF KANT, SCHOPENHAUER, AND NIETZSCHE By JANE ELIZABETH EDWARDS B.A., Muskingum College, 1974. A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the University of Richmond in Candidacy for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS in History August, l986 Richmond, Virginia Abstract A Genealogy of the 14i 11 : A Comparison of the ~lo rks of Kant, Schopenhauer, and Nietzsche Author: Jane Elizabeth Edwards Thesis Director: Dr. Hugh West Degree: Master of Arts in History University of Richmond, 1986 This study investigates the development of the notion of man's will upon which Kant, Schopenhauer, and Nietzsche based their theories. Al­ though this topic had been virtually neglected in the great intellectual debates of the first to the eighteenth centuries, by the nineteenth cen­ tury the question of man 1s vii 11--i ts origin, function, and va 1 ue--domi - nated such philosophical discussions.
    [Show full text]
  • Petrarch and Schopenhauer: Elective Affinities
    Humanist Studies & the Digital Age, 1.1 (2011) ISSN: 2158-3846 (online) http://journals.oregondigital.org/hsda/ DOI: 10.5399/uo/HSDA.1.1.1191 Quanto piace al mondo è breve sogno. Petrarch and Schopenhauer: Elective Affinities Enrico Vettore, California State University, Long Beach Abstract: Art plays a fundamental role in Arthur Schopenhauer’s philosophical system, and among the many artists who Schopenhauer cites, Francis Petrarch may be considered the most significant. Schopenhauer includes Petrarch among his favorite authors, referring to him as “the poet of [his] heart” and quoting him in those parts of The World as Will and Representation and Parerga and Paralipomena that center on the topics of ethics and the art of living. In this essay, I analyze Schopenhauer’s most significant passages on Petrarch, suggest connections between those passages, and conclude that, for Schopenhauer, the Italian poet is much more than a poet; he is a true sage whose words one can turn to for comfort. Petrarch is a thinker, a promoter of solitary life and the love of knowledge, a writer of philosophy and, although only in part, even an ascetic man. From Schopenhauer’s writing, it appears that Petrarch encompasses many of the features of the ideal Schopenhauerian man: someone who understands the senselessness of life, who has succeeded in denying the Will and has been able to express it through his poetry, his philosophical writings and his life choices. Petrarch’s verses foreshadow the basic ideas of Schopenhauer’s philosophy; his actions and his example serve not only as a model and inspiration for the readers of Schopenhauer but also for the German philosopher himself.
    [Show full text]