University of Calgary PRISM: University of Calgary's Digital Repository Werklund School of Education Werklund School of Education Research & Publications 2019-06-20 Schopenhauer on Fear Fisher, Robert Michael Fisher, R. M. (2019). Schopenhauer on Fear. 1-24. http://hdl.handle.net/1880/110516 technical report Unless otherwise indicated, this material is protected by copyright and has been made available with authorization from the copyright owner. You may use this material in any way that is permitted by the Copyright Act or through licensing that has been assigned to the document. For uses that are not allowable under copyright legislation or licensing, you are required to seek permission. Downloaded from PRISM: https://prism.ucalgary.ca Schopenhauer on Fear R. Michael Fisher © 2019 Technical Paper No. 84 In Search of Fearlessness Research Institute 2 Schopenhauer on Fear Copyright 2019 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, without permission in writing from the pub- lisher/author. No permission is necessary in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical articles and reviews, or other educational or research purposes. For information and permission address correspond- ence to: In Search of Fearlessness Research Institute 920A- 5 Ave. N. E., Calgary, AB T2E 0L4 Contact author(s): [email protected] First Edition 2019 Cover and layout by R. Michael Fisher ISOF Logo (original 1989) designed by RMF Printed in Canada The In Search of Fearlessness Institute is dedicated to research and publishing on fear, fearlessness and emotions and motiva- tional forces, in general, as well as critical reviews of such works. Preference is given to works with an integral theoretical perspective. 2 3 Schopenhauer On Fear - R. Michael Fisher,1 Ph.D. ©2019 Technical Paper No. 84 Abstract In continual search for the various roots (and routes) of W. thought in re- gard to making sense of “fear,” the author pursues a preliminary investiga- tion of the great German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860). He concludes that Schophenhauer’s work is a critical philosophy: (a) un- derestimated in importance overall in the philosophical canon of W. think- ing, (b) it is largely (mis-)interpreted on some important points, especially the stereotyping of its “pessimism” and (c) it is a philosophy ready (with some re-adaptations) for the Anthropocene era of dangerous collapse of ecological and social systems. The author suggests a much larger work of study and writing is still required to bring Schopenhauer’s work alive and in preparation for the 21st century and this technical paper barely touches on the surface of such an exploration. 1 Fisher is an Adjunct Faculty member of the Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary, AB, Canada. He is fearologist and co-founder of In Search of Fearlessness Project (1989- ) and Research Institute (1991- ) and lead initiator of the Fearlessness Movement ning (2015- ). The Fearology Institute was created by him recently to teach international students about fearology as a legitimate field of studies and profession. He is also founder of the Center for Spiritual Inquiry & Integral Education and is Department Head at CSIIE of Integral & 'Fear' Studies. Fisher is an independent scholar, public intellectual and peda- gogue, lecturer, author, consultant, researcher, coach, artist and principal of his own compa- ny (http://loveandfearsolutions.com). He has four leading-edge books: The World’s Fear- lessness Teachings: A critical integral approach to fear management/education for the 21st century (University Press of America/Rowman & Littlefield), Philosophy of fearism: A first East-West dialogue (R. Michael Fisher & Desh Subba) (Xlibris) and Fearless engagement of Four Arrows: The true story of an Indigenous-based social transformer (Peter Lang), Fear, law and criminology: Critical issues in applying the philosophy of fearism (Xlibris), India, A Nation of Fear and Prejudice (B. Maria Kumar, R. Michael Fisher, Desh Subba) (Xlibris). Currently, he is developing The Fearology Institute to teach courses. He can be reached at: [email protected] 3 4 Preamble The philosophy of fear, fearism, fearlessness, all of which have occupied my life for three decades now, are more or less a recent branch (spin-off) from a tradition in W. philosophy called existentialism (starting with Kier- kegaard, to Nietzsche to Heiddegger, as a few outstanding figures). It has been intriguing to study Arthur Schopenhauer’s work recently to see that he wasn’t recognized as an existential philosopher per se but that he influ- enced the existentialists, more or less. Such influence, good or bad, perhaps more neutral in some cases, is diverse. However, I cannot pass over the most interesting influence right at the start of understanding Schopenhauer and existentialism. It is known that “Kierkegaard once called,” the Schopenhauerian philosophy of pessimism (a mistanthropic worldview2) “’the most fearful’ philosophy of all.”3 What? Even the father of existen- tialism, Kierkegaard, cast this gruesome stereotypic label on Schopenhauer and went one step further to scare himself, to scare others, and future gen- erations—in his warning, that this is a philosophy “most fearful” of all phi- losophies. Are we all then to avoid touching this man and his philosophy, forever? It could poison, infect, and taint us? Is that the fear of Schopen- hauer that saturates and provokes Kierkegaard’s critique and his own phi- losophy of faith? Is that the fear that has been passed across boundaries of time, cultures, history, since Kierkegaard? What exactly Kierkegaard means could be interpreted and debated but I ask if it is Kierkegaard’s intention to say one of two things: (a) Schopen- hauer is filled with fear, thus fearful, as is his philosophy that comes from that fear—in other words, it is a fear-based philosophy or, (b) is Schopen- hauer’s philosophy fear-invoking in those who read it? One could write a long treatise on this, which I will not here; because as yet, I have insuffi- cient background to proceed confidently. It is nonetheless a fascinating introduction to Schopenhauer and our topic fear. 2 Wyllie (2016) is analyzing a binary character-opposition in McCarthy’s novel The Sunset Limited” and discussing philosophical dialogue, one is thought (for Wyllie) to be Kierke- gaard and one Schopenhauer (or, at least, their philosophies are represented in the novel and two primary characters). Wyllie asserts the one character (“White”) in the novel is the artic- ulation of the Schopenhauerian view, which he calls “misanthropic worldview”—and, Wil- ley citing from McCarthy quotes: “White: Evolution cannot avoid bringing intellectual life ultimately to an awareness of one thing above all else and that is futility.... If people saw the world for what it truly is. Saw their lives for what they truly are. Without dreams or illu- sions [i.e., without fear of the Real]. I don’t believe they could offer the first reason why they should not elect to die as soon as possible” (p. 187). 3 Ibid., p. 186. 4 5 That to me is one good reason to find out why he was (or is) attractive (and/or revulsive) to the existentialists, and explore why he might be attrac- tive to us involved in a philosophy of fear, fearism and fearlessness today. It is particularly interesting to me, although a topic beyond the scope of this technical paper, that I cannot find any professional or academic educators (but a rare few brief mentions) that have given attention to the nature and role of Schopenhauer’s philosophy in the field of Education. Is it because educators are so fearful of something so fundamental that Schopenhauer is investigating in his work and proclaiming? What could be so fearful? Anyways, that’s very troubling to me as a professional educator and some- day worth exploring in another technical paper of analysis. I think a big reason is that Education as a field is overly hung-up on trying to be light and positive (optimistic) and glosses over the really important aspects of reality, truth, and life that ought to be central in socialization, parenting, curriculum and teaching. That said, let’s move on... [Nietzsche] thought [inspirationally] of Schopenhauer as a man who wasn’t content with the superficial view of things but looked underneath and wasn’t afraid to look at the world and history in the face, and didn’t try and gloss over everything....4 I am always interested in the truth—that is, the deeper truths beneath the tip of the iceberg of consensual truths—that’s what really appeals to me. Small conventional reality is only part of what is important to understand and work with. That alone is inadequate and has to be connected to explorations of big Reality. Our fully human potential depends on this expansion of knowledge, knowing and understand- ing. Our sense of small self, with this expansion, becomes a larger Self, as many psychologists and teachers of wisdom have argued throughout the ages, E-W, N-S. One ought not let fear inhibit this searching and learning because the world in its complexity today needs more than ever people and groups and institutions that can take larger perspectives and see larger realities and embrace diversity and make better decisions based on more inputs from this diversity. We’ll be a lot more intelligent. 4 Pattison (1898), p. 727. 5 6 It is with those who are not afraid to tread where others do not, and where those who go deep into things, that’s where I am most attract- ed to learn from. It’s in this commitment to not glossing over every- thing and trying to be light and positive all the time because it is comfortable, that I research, write and teach about fear (and fearless- ness) as a central topic of human concern.