The World as Will and Representation, Vol. 1
- Downloads：1250
- Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
- Create Date：2022-10-05 05:52:25
- Update Date：2025-09-07
- Status：finish
- Author：Arthur Schopenhauer
- ISBN：0486217612
- Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
- Download
Summary
Arthur Schopenhauer's Die Welt als Wille und Vorstellung is one of the most important philosophical works of the nineteenth century， the basic statement of one important stream of post-Kantian thought。 It is without question Schopenhauer's greatest work。 Conceived and published before the philosopher was 30 and expanded 25 years later， it is the summation of a lifetime of thought。
For 70 years， the only unabridged English translation of this work was the Haldane-Kemp collaboration。 In 1958， a new translation by E。 F。 J。 Payne appeared that decisively supplanted the older one。 Payne's translation is superior because it corrects nearly 1，000 errors and omissions in the Haldane-Kemp translation， and it is based on the definitive 1937 German edition of Schopenhauer's work prepared by Dr。 Arthur Hübscher。 Payne's edition is the first to translate into English the text's many quotations in half a dozen languages。 It is thus the most useful edition for the student or teacher。
For 70 years， the only unabridged English translation of this work was the Haldane-Kemp collaboration。 In 1958， a new translation by E。 F。 J。 Payne appeared that decisively supplanted the older one。 Payne's translation is superior because it corrects nearly 1，000 errors and omissions in the Haldane-Kemp translation， and it is based on the definitive 1937 German edition of Schopenhauer's work prepared by Dr。 Arthur Hübscher。 Payne's edition is the first to translate into English the text's many quotations in half a dozen languages。 It is thus the most useful edition for the student or teacher。
Reviews
Mohammed omran
，
لقد وضع شوبنهاور قيمة الجمال في أعلى مرتبة ممكنة لأنه كان يتغيا بواسطتها الوصول إلى ما يشبه “الفناء التام” التي تحققه إرادة الفنان، يقول شوبنهاور:” لو استطاع الإنسان، مدفوعاً بقوة العقل أن يطلق الطريق المألوف في رؤية الأشياء… لو توقف عن اعتبار ما في الأشياء من متى وأين ولماذا، وتطلّع إليها ببساطة كما هي فقط، لو حال بين فكره المجرد وفكر التصورات… فترك وعيه في تأمل هادئ للموضوع المتمثل أمامه، منظراً كان أو شجرة أو جبلاً أو بناية … الخ 。 فلو كان له ذلك لتخلص الموضوع من كل رابط يشدّه إلى غيره، ولتخل لقد وضع شوبنهاور قيمة الجمال في أعلى مرتبة ممكنة لأنه كان يتغيا بواسطتها الوصول إلى ما يشبه “الفناء التام” التي تحققه إرادة الفنان، يقول شوبنهاور:” لو استطاع الإنسان، مدفوعاً بقوة العقل أن يطلق الطريق المألوف في رؤية الأشياء… لو توقف عن اعتبار ما في الأشياء من متى وأين ولماذا، وتطلّع إليها ببساطة كما هي فقط، لو حال بين فكره المجرد وفكر التصورات… فترك وعيه في تأمل هادئ للموضوع المتمثل أمامه، منظراً كان أو شجرة أو جبلاً أو بناية … الخ 。 فلو كان له ذلك لتخلص الموضوع من كل رابط يشدّه إلى غيره، ولتخلصت الذات من كل رابط يشدها إلى الإرادة، وما سندركه حين ذلك لن يكون هذا الشيء الجزئي أو ذلك، وانما هي فكرة الصورة السرمدية، والتمثل المباشر للإرادة في درجة ما، وفي إدراك كهذا يتخلص الإنسان من كل فردية، فيغدو ذاتاً من المعرفة الخالصة وأعلى من الإرادة والألم والزمن”。 。。。more
AJ
，
Buddhism， Western style。 Asceticism as renunciation of the will， our being-in-itself projected through objectification of the Idea in the world as representation; phenomena as forms of this representation in space and time—the vessel by which everything appears， existing a priori according to the principle of sufficient reason。Whew。 Not as challenging as it seems。Plainly written， refreshingly so for a work of philosophy， and built upon step by step until the structure of whole stands clearly at Buddhism， Western style。 Asceticism as renunciation of the will， our being-in-itself projected through objectification of the Idea in the world as representation; phenomena as forms of this representation in space and time—the vessel by which everything appears， existing a priori according to the principle of sufficient reason。Whew。 Not as challenging as it seems。Plainly written， refreshingly so for a work of philosophy， and built upon step by step until the structure of whole stands clearly at the end， the number of cracks in the foundation dependent upon the eye of the observer。 For me Schopenhauer shines in his arrogance and at times vitriolic tone， especially when speaking about Hegel （which if philosophy is not your thing I urge you to at least read those parts）， his discussion on the illusion of free will， and finally is at his very best when discussing the misery and suffering of existence。 I am not generally one to include quotes in reviews， but some passages were so brilliant and beautifully rendered， I can’t resist。“Ultimately death must triumph， for by birth it has already become our lot， and it plays with its prey only for a while before swallowing it up。 However， we continue our life with great interest and much solicitude as long as possible， just as we blow out a soap-bubble as long and as large as possible， although with the perfect certainty that it will burst。”“Life itself is a sea full of rocks and whirlpools that man avoids with the greatest caution and care， although he knows that， even when he succeeds with all his efforts and ingenuity in struggling through， at every step he comes nearer to the greatest， the total， the inevitable and irremediable shipwreck， indeed even steers right on to it， namely death。 This is the final goal of the wearisome voyage， and is worse for him than all the rocks that he has avoided。”“Accordingly， the shortness of life， so often lamented， may perhaps be the very best thing about it。 If， finally， we were to bring to the sight of everyone the terrible suffering and afflictions to which his life is constantly exposed， he would be seized with horror。 If we were to conduct the most hardened and callous optimist through hospitals， infirmaries， operating theatres， through prisons， torture-chambers， and slave-hovels， over battlefields and to places of execution; if we were to open to him all the dark abodes of misery， where it shuns the gaze of cold curiosity， and finally were to allow him to glance into the dungeon of Ugolino where prisoners starved to death， he too would certainly see in the end what kind of a world is this ‘best of all possible worlds。’”On the negative side of things， a large portion of his aesthetics， covered in Book Three， has not aged well and becomes tedious。 His rejection of materialism is the most fascinating to me， since it seems he had no great argument for why he rejected it other than it would do damage to his own philosophy。 I wonder today， after having the electromagnetic spectrum （the idea of which he laughingly scoffed at）， Einstein’s special and general relativity， Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle， quantum physics and string theory in general explained to him， if he would revise his philosophy accordingly。 Because some of his premises are by no means affected by the acceptance of materialism。 Something tells me he would not be receptive initially， but would ultimately grudgingly accept if his claim to his honest commitment to truth is genuine。 There is validity， however， to his assertion that there may be limitations on what science can ultimately explain about our existence， as it seems sometimes that the closer it gets， the further away it gets。 The ultimate question is whether or not these limits on our capacity for understanding will prevent us from a universal theory of everything。 This doesn’t mean materialism should be rejected as Schopenhauer argues， only that we may not ever be able to fully comprehend and explain it if it is in fact the truth。 。。。more
Emre
，
mad schizo
Victor Fiodorov
，
Sec， sumbru， lipsit de lumina si prea vechi。
Yamal
，
Schopenhauer lo dijo claro （de muchas formas y con gran cantidad de palabras）: el mundo y todo cuanto acontece en él， incluidas las demás personas， es una proyección de la voluntad， entendida como una fuerza ajena a las ilusiones del tiempo， del espacio y de la individualidad。 Una voluntad única que lo proyecta todo， incluso nuestro propio cuerpo， en el tapiz del mundo material。 Pero el individuo， una vez atrapado en la telaraña de la ilusión， no es consciente de esto， salvo que alcance un nivel Schopenhauer lo dijo claro （de muchas formas y con gran cantidad de palabras）: el mundo y todo cuanto acontece en él， incluidas las demás personas， es una proyección de la voluntad， entendida como una fuerza ajena a las ilusiones del tiempo， del espacio y de la individualidad。 Una voluntad única que lo proyecta todo， incluso nuestro propio cuerpo， en el tapiz del mundo material。 Pero el individuo， una vez atrapado en la telaraña de la ilusión， no es consciente de esto， salvo que alcance un nivel de conocimiento tal que le permita levantar el velo de Maya。 Esto implica destapar el error que nos hace creer que algo externo a nosotros mismos provoca el mundo， esa creencia que nos sitúa fuera de toda responsabilidad y que señala hacia fuera， en lugar de hacia uno mismo。 Para todo aquél que desee adentrarse en esta verdad yo recomendaría leer La Desaparición del Universo， de Gary Renard， que viene a decir gran parte de lo que dice Schopenhauer （y mucho más）， pero de una forma más coloquial。 En este libro y en los sucesivos del autor （Renard）， se responden a muchas otras preguntas a las que Schopenhauer no pudo dar cabida en su filosofía。 Sin embargo， no puedo dejar de admirar a Schopenhauer por su lucidez。 FUE UN PUTO GENIO。 Ya sólo por eso tengo que darle a este libro los 5 estrellas， aunque reconozca que partes del mismo son difíciles de digerir。 Creo que realmente pocos entienden la esencia del mundo que Schopenhauer configuró， pero no por falta de claridad， sino por sus implicaciones。 La vida es sueño， decía Shakespeare。 Otro que acabó por destapar la mentira que nos contamos a nosotros mismos。 Termino citando brevemente una parte del pensamiento de Schopenhauer: "。。。sólo en lo más profundo de su consciencia vive el muy oscuro presentimiento de que todo eso [el mundo] no le es propiamente tan ajeno， sino que tiene con él una conexión ante la cual no le puede salvaguardar el principio de individuación。 De este presentimiento dimana ese indeleble espanto común a todos los hombres。。。y así， clava con vehemencia los dientes en su propia carne， sin saber que siempre se hiere sólo a sí mismo， de tal modo que por medio de la individuación se revela el conflicto consigo mismo， que porta en su interior。 El verdugo y la víctima son uno"。De 10 su análisis sobre la maldad， la bondad， el amor y la compasión ❤ 。。。more
Deo Gochava
，
This is by far the best book I have NEVER read。
Arash Oshaei
，
مرکز
Mario
，
Antes de leer este libro lo tenía en muy alta estima y demasiado idealizado， enseguida me di cuenta cuando lo empecé de que， aunque tenga partes realmente interesantes， se hace muy difícil avanzar en él y el autor divaga tanto que ello aun complica todavía más la tarea de lectura。 No llegué a terminarlo， me quedé por la mitad （era eso o tirarme por la ventana）。En resumen: contiene partes muy interesantes que cuestionan la percepción establecida y los conceptos y es una obra fundamental de la fil Antes de leer este libro lo tenía en muy alta estima y demasiado idealizado， enseguida me di cuenta cuando lo empecé de que， aunque tenga partes realmente interesantes， se hace muy difícil avanzar en él y el autor divaga tanto que ello aun complica todavía más la tarea de lectura。 No llegué a terminarlo， me quedé por la mitad （era eso o tirarme por la ventana）。En resumen: contiene partes muy interesantes que cuestionan la percepción establecida y los conceptos y es una obra fundamental de la filosofía， pero su lectura y comprensión son complicadas， al menos para mí。 No pretendo en ningún caso desalentar su lectura， ya que al final cada uno debe juzgar la obra por su propia cuenta。 。。。more
Coy Hobson
，
Schopenhauer’s argument is simple: life is a pendulum swinging back and forth between boredom and suffering。 Existence must be a mistake。 Would it not be better to simply not exist at all？ Schopenhauers’s argument put into focus the terrors of atheism taken to fullness of its conclusions。 For the Christian， Schopenhauer pessimism stands in relief to the good news of the Gospels。
Jose Angelo
，
Read this because Schopenhauer is FUN！
X 937
，
These three volumes are priceless in that they reveal so much about the white， Victorian mindset that shaped our current failed civilization that it is difficult to dismiss them， despite their utter speciousness。 I had a philosophy professor who once told me that "philosophy is in its infancy。" After reading these three exhausting tomes， I can understand why。 There is SO MUCH wrong with Schopenhauer's world view， that I can't tell where to begin。 But， I think I can sum it up best like this: the These three volumes are priceless in that they reveal so much about the white， Victorian mindset that shaped our current failed civilization that it is difficult to dismiss them， despite their utter speciousness。 I had a philosophy professor who once told me that "philosophy is in its infancy。" After reading these three exhausting tomes， I can understand why。 There is SO MUCH wrong with Schopenhauer's world view， that I can't tell where to begin。 But， I think I can sum it up best like this: the weakness of this manifesto is the weakness of ALL pre-twentieth-century philosophy （and much after it）。 That is to say that it is a loose collection of rhetorical statements of sentiment and belief with no logical structure to speak of。This is a huge problem because philosophers have known about syllogistic logic for thousands of years。 Schopenhauer himself even claims to have gained complete mastery over logic in all its forms （as he claims to have gained mastery over just about all other intellectual persuits -- dude was a professional braggart）。 In a post-logic， post-science world， it is simply unacceptable to bend the facts of your argument towards the will of your religious belief system。 Make no mistake about it: Schopenhauer was a devout Christian。 And， like any good Christian， he picks and chooses his logic to support the particular whims of the congregation he serves。 In this way， he is more of a preacher than a philosopher。However， that is presuming that there is such a thing as a logical philosopher。 And， as far as I can tell， in my many years reading philosophy， those are few and far between。 The real advent of reason-based philosophy occurred in the twentieth century， after philosophy was forced to admit that it had nothing of value to say about neurology， psychology， sociology， or physics: all subjects it used to concern itself with almost exclusively。 Schopenhauer illustrates this fact in painful detail as he propounds on nearly all subjects of human learning。 He is at his most ridiculous when he repeatedly attacks Isaac Newton's theory of gravity。 But these volumes are filled with similar instances where history has not been so kind to either Schopenhauer or Western Philosophy itself。 These tomes are filled with so much disproved bunkus， so much misogyny and naked-faced white supremacy， that it is hard to find anything of value in them at all。Perhaps the most offensive thing about this series is Schopenhauer's constant insistence on his own greatness。 He never mentions one of his own essays without first calling it "my prize essay"。 He never discusses another philosopher's work without demeaning it or referring to it in a condescending tone。 He boasts obsessively。 The only writer he appears to have any compliments for at all， other than himself， is the great and greatly-contradictory Immanuel Kant， who he praises and razes with equal vigor。 The gall of Schopenhauer as a writer becomes doubly infuriating when you finish the book and realize that his "world as will and representation" schema is nothing but a disjointed， contrived attempt at make the developments of science and industry more palatable for the mystical Christian mindset of his aristocratic， benighted， white supremacist audience。 The idea itself is so lacking in cohesion as to make it almost as nonsensical as the Hegelian dialectic that he takes such joy in vituperating。 As a philosopher， Schopenhauer has nothing cogent to say。So what then is the value of this series？ The value is primarily historical: Schopenhauer bends the rules of logic to force the growing uncertainty of scientific revelation into a neat and tidy hierarchy that white aristocrats can support without fear。 At the top of his hierarchy is the Victorian philosopher， who poses no threat to either the peerage or the church and soothes their agitated conscience by reassuring them that all other non-European peoples of the world are savages with only the notable exception of Indians， who he venerates and tries （unsuccessfully） to unite with Christianity while conveniently ignoring the devastating effects of contemporary colonial efforts in that country and others like it。 The real value of this series is that it shows you how Victorians really thought。 And those thoughts are backwards， racist， unchallenging， incoherent， and disgustingly obsequious。But， in this one regard， the series is a wild success。 I can think of no other collection of essays that more exhaustively accounts the various bigotries of European culture than World As Idea And Representation。 If you want to know why the world is such a messed up place， if you want to know why white supremacy is so widespread， this book will lay it all out for you over and over again， in a thousand unhappy facets。For me， Schopenhauer typifies a consistently ignoble tendency of human nature: the obsessive need to twist the facts of human experience to meet our own worldview， regardless of how inconsistent the results are， regardless of the atrocities that must be ignored in order to do so。 This is， ultimately， the real legacy of Western Philosophy。 It is one long attempt at justifying the self-interest of the ruling class。 If there is any hope for human progress going forward， we MUST learn to use logic and reason to develop ALL of our philosophical theories。 And， we MUST learn that philosophy has it's limits。 If this book doesn't convince you of this crucial humbling fact， I'm afraid nothing else will！ And shame on all of us so-called lovers of wisdom for not learning this lesson！A philosopher has no business telling the world how the human mind works。 There are numerous scientific fields that do a much better job of that， thank you。 Likewise， a philosopher has no business pontificating on the essential nature of reality。 Physicists have been doing that much more rigorously for much longer and with much greater success than anyone else。 When a philosopher speaks， he or she must humble themselves and learn to allow logic and reason to limit and control their ideas at every turn。 Philosophy should not be about your own unique brand of genius and it's ability to synthesize systems of staggering brilliance: let the physicists do that。 If we want to bring philosophy out of its infancy， perhaps we need to go back to the roots of philosophy: the syllogism。 Perhaps we need to treat philosophy with the method and rigor of a mathematician and confine ourselves to questions of ethics and human governance bounded at all times by the empirical evidence backing our premises and the logically-valid conclusions that MUST follow discretely from them。 Lest we embarrass ourselves， and underline our own uselessness yet again， by producing yet another narcissistic， cowardly soothsaying blowhard like Arthur Schopenhauer！ 。。。more
Esioan
，
Epic vegan philosophy 😎
Dillon Shipley
，
HARD AS FUCK TO READ BUT SO FIRE
Will
，
Once you wade through the BS metaphysics， there's some nice insights well-worded in here。 E。g。， "Everything is beautiful because everything is subject to aesthetic contemplation。 But some things are more beautiful than others。" Once you wade through the BS metaphysics， there's some nice insights well-worded in here。 E。g。， "Everything is beautiful because everything is subject to aesthetic contemplation。 But some things are more beautiful than others。" 。。。more
Alex Kalinske
，
I'm buying。 I'm buying。 。。。more
Giuseppe
，
Saggio filosofico molto chiaro。 Libro più importante per capire la filosofia di Schopenhauer。
Negoesq
，
as it happens， this was my philosophy baptism。 recommended by a brother， read it as a novice with a philo dictionary by my side， once you get over a couple hundred pages the world will start unraveling before your very eyes in ways you always felt in your soul but you were never able to grasp as rational ideas。 now you can。 you slowly understand it s meaning， don t be afraid to be in the grey， it gets better。 must read for every one that wants to lift the veil， only if just for a little （spoiler as it happens， this was my philosophy baptism。 recommended by a brother， read it as a novice with a philo dictionary by my side， once you get over a couple hundred pages the world will start unraveling before your very eyes in ways you always felt in your soul but you were never able to grasp as rational ideas。 now you can。 you slowly understand it s meaning， don t be afraid to be in the grey， it gets better。 must read for every one that wants to lift the veil， only if just for a little （spoiler alert: it s dark on the other side） 。。。more
Jimena
，
Acojonante。
Ura
，
One of the largest philosophical works of pessimism。 Schopenhauer's arguments for his perspectives are formulated from a basis of onthology， ethics， metaphysics， and other areas of philosophy。 I don't give it a higher rating because apart from the philosophical disagreements， especially Schopenhauer' use of physical phenomena like orbital mechanics as "evidence" of his views about will and idea， it's also the case that out of the four books comprising this first volume， only the fourth book is w One of the largest philosophical works of pessimism。 Schopenhauer's arguments for his perspectives are formulated from a basis of onthology， ethics， metaphysics， and other areas of philosophy。 I don't give it a higher rating because apart from the philosophical disagreements， especially Schopenhauer' use of physical phenomena like orbital mechanics as "evidence" of his views about will and idea， it's also the case that out of the four books comprising this first volume， only the fourth book is worth reading， and even then， it's painfully verbose。 Succintness was not one of Schopenhauer's strengths， regrettably。 。。。more
Esther Greenwood
，
Science was Schopenhauer's weak point so skip those parts， especially his comments about women， because they aren't worth reading。 His best skills are criticizing others and interpreting Kant。 Science was Schopenhauer's weak point so skip those parts， especially his comments about women， because they aren't worth reading。 His best skills are criticizing others and interpreting Kant。 。。。more
Paige McLoughlin
，
This book put me in a psychotic state in which I ended up in a hospital in the fall of 2002。 Tread lightly。https://youtu。be/MpMkXyBWpl8 This book put me in a psychotic state in which I ended up in a hospital in the fall of 2002。 Tread lightly。https://youtu。be/MpMkXyBWpl8 。。。more
Ariel Nikitovic
，
Stani malo nemoj tako
Sananab
，
At one point he goes into a rant about how foolish anyone would be to believe in Newton's theory of light when Goethe's is available。 He is extremely haughty and condescending about it and goes on and on。 He doesn't offer any good， clear reason why， he just considers Goethe's theory self-evident， and anyone who believes otherwise a childish moron。 Yikes， it is cringey。I should have taken the Goethe comment as an omen。 This book starts out pretty good （as a modified version of Kant's philosophy）， At one point he goes into a rant about how foolish anyone would be to believe in Newton's theory of light when Goethe's is available。 He is extremely haughty and condescending about it and goes on and on。 He doesn't offer any good， clear reason why， he just considers Goethe's theory self-evident， and anyone who believes otherwise a childish moron。 Yikes， it is cringey。I should have taken the Goethe comment as an omen。 This book starts out pretty good （as a modified version of Kant's philosophy）， but then it just gets sillier and sillier。 You can tell Goethe's pseudo-science is a major influence， because of how he anthropomorphizes everything that exists， his wildly inconsistent approach to evidence， and his tendency to assume that if a phrase sounds nice， it must be an obvious truth。 He drills down on insignificant， tangential details for pages at a time， but makes big， dramatic statements without any justification， except maybe the occasional insult to anyone who might doubt him。I have to say， I've enjoyed some ancient philosophy， but all of the modern philosophy I have read so far has been pretty underwhelming。 I think I'm just about ready to not bother anymore。 。。。more
Bruno Dal Molin
，
Very cool。 Schopenhauer is a particularly clear writer and stylist。 His idea of the world as will was very interesting to me， as well as that of the world as music。 High praises of art on his part， something I always enjoy reading about。 Nietzsche has overshadowed this guy， but that’s a shame。 Highly recommended！
Steven Siswandhi
，
Another amazing philosophical work， one of the most influential in the 19th century。 Schopenhauer is a German philosopher influenced by Kant， starting a current of thought that is widely referred to as the continental approach of philosophy， focusing on the unseen and less exact but important aspect of the human experience namely will。 His contribution to philosophy is basically making a version of Buddhism that is consistent with western philosophy。 Sometimes I read Buddhist books and think "al Another amazing philosophical work， one of the most influential in the 19th century。 Schopenhauer is a German philosopher influenced by Kant， starting a current of thought that is widely referred to as the continental approach of philosophy， focusing on the unseen and less exact but important aspect of the human experience namely will。 His contribution to philosophy is basically making a version of Buddhism that is consistent with western philosophy。 Sometimes I read Buddhist books and think "all this is amazing and deep but I really wish there is more exploration of the ideas"。 That is not the blame of the Buddha who often remarked that he does not prefer lengthy theorization， instead preferring to talk about experience。 In one way， Schopenhauer accomplishes that。 The whole book is based on just one idea， one insight。 The train of thought goes like this:1。 Plato's Theory of Forms （the Idea as opposed to the shadow as explained in the cave allegory） and Kant's noumenon is actually the same thing。 An unchanged substance that is behind all manifestation of the world。 2。 Everything that exists in the world is an idea inside our head （ remember George Berkeley）。 The outside world exists but we can only experience them through ideas。 There is an eternal Idea which determines its representation in the form of objects。 3。 This idea is will。 The will exists in the form of objectification in us （the human mind） and exist in varying degree of self-consciousness （e。g。 in animals， plants， inanimate objects）。 All things are manifestations of the same will the way copies are inferior manifestation of the original blueprint。 They manifest this in the struggle of one against another， in the existence of multiple laws of nature working on the same object （maybe its all one law， but we don't know of it yet）。 4。 The will is unchangeable， and they exist in a purer form in the human thought。 This will is not subject to the laws of causality。 We can choose something because we want it， but we cannot want as we want。 Somehow the details of how we came to want what we want is mysterious。 It is subject to unconscious influence （yes， he used that term before Freud came along） that lies in the unfathomable depth of humanity。 One's will， according to Schopenhauer， cannot change。 One has the so called character （we call this personality trait） that is so consistent throughout one's life that regardless of experience， the will stays the same。 What can change is only one's knowledge， which informs the will to make decisions。 The Christians have a concept of original sin， and surprisingly it's something that Schopenhauer applauds （although he's an atheist） because of the implication that humans are subject to ancestral forces which bounds their will to the wrong aim。 Schopenhauer also draws many conclusions about ethics， justice， and so on from this concept of will。5。 The purpose of human life is to transcend the will （just like Buddhism）。 The will cannot stop wanting。 Everytime it has not achieved what it wants， it will make one suffer， and once one achieves it， one finds that it gives a satisfaction that cannot last because the will will find new things to want。 One can achieve this through art， because through it one can escape the temporary and contemplates the eternal。 There are many great art forms， but one that Schopenhauer highlights particularly is music， because in it everything is free from worldly manifestation。 To Schopenhauer， music is the highest art form。 Another way to transcend the will is to adopt an ascetic lifestyle。What makes me amazed is the wide range of the philosophy arising from such a simple idea。 The basic idea is also amazing。 I grew up thinking that there is only one kind of atheism， the materialist kind。 Turns out there are many atheisms， just like there are many Christianities and Buddhisms。 Schopenhauer believes in a blind， cruel universe， but I don't think he is a materialist。 Throughout the book he belittles Democritus， thinking that the materialist position is absurd because 1。 One jumps over the unbridgeable gap between matter and consciousness when the relation between the two is not obvious， and 2。 It is far from obvious that matter is reducible ultimately to matter， that it makes equal sense to argue that matter is manifestation of idea， rather than the other way around。 Contrary to materialists， Schopenhauer argues that the world is reducible， fundamentally， to will， not atom， that is his great insight。 Personally， I find it hard to believe because my thinking is already so steeped in the western scientific method。 However， Schopenhauer's idea is surprisingly pretty coherent on its own， and you can't disprove it （nor can you prove it）。 Throughout the years， I've read many kinds of philosophies through introduction to philosophy books （Sophie's World， Bryan Magee's Story of Philosophy）， but it wasn't in enough depth to encounter it first hand and to wrestle with it for some period of time。 At some point I start to struggle with my Christian upbringing and start to question everything。 With this doubt came appreciation， because in one way or another these philosophies are attempts at answering life's biggest questions。 It is still my belief that one can only appreciate these philosophies， or any books for that matter， when one has wrestled with it， not just reading it， and take their claims seriously。 Schopenhauer is an example of a complete philosophical system。 His philosophy is not just little fragments on specific questions， but large life-embracing canvas trying to answer all the big questions。I'm also struck by Schopenhauer's grand vision。 He is a pessimistic thinker， but the solution he came up with and the tone he adopts， there is a kind of Buddhist/Hindu detachment about it， which gives it a sense of grandeur。 It's the feeling you can when you listen to Mahler's symphonies （particularly 2nd， 3rd， and 8th）， which is no surprise given that Mahler was deeply influenced by Schopenhauer。 Life is full of suffering。 The world is unfair to the good and the bad alike。 However， one must transcend this struggle for life to reach the higher and eternal world of contemplation and Idea。 。。。more
Ilaria Bagalini
，
Author asks to read the book twice，I've done it once only because reading Schopenhauer requires a lot of cultural basis and it is never easy。 Would love to read it once again when I'll have more knowledge and I'll be more mature Author asks to read the book twice，I've done it once only because reading Schopenhauer requires a lot of cultural basis and it is never easy。 Would love to read it once again when I'll have more knowledge and I'll be more mature 。。。more
Aaron
，
I described myself as Schopenhauerian to a girl once while reading this。 Don't think she approved ha。 This book is pretty awesome。 Just wanna make him and Hegel kiss and make up :'（ I described myself as Schopenhauerian to a girl once while reading this。 Don't think she approved ha。 This book is pretty awesome。 Just wanna make him and Hegel kiss and make up :'（ 。。。more
Danny
，
Ville Zum Lieben！！ Its interesting， but pack the Xanax。 Jesus！ There will be times of intense gloom that the edicts of Schopenhauer will seem like divine wisdom， but otherwise is just seems super bleak。 I buy into the Will to Life， though。 Especially the thought that it can be temporarily sated by indulging the arts。 I previously intuited this， though。 For years， I called the insatiable destructive beast in my brain Roscoe。
Theo
，
The proudest I’ve been about actually finishing a fat ol’ tome since Gravity’s Rainbow。 The philosophy in here is batshit， but the writing is incredible。
Zlatko Dimitrioski
，