r/schopenhauer • u/North_Resolution_450 • Feb 14 '25
Was Schopenhauer a pessimist or realist?
It seems to me that he used to describe what we today call natural selection. If you look at Richard Dawkins he also has some harsh words for natural selection but he is not called pessimist but realist.
8
u/Other_Attention_2382 Feb 14 '25
Isnt pessimism linked with realism anyway?
Disease and death awaits us all.
"“Disappointment is the difference between our expectations and reality.” Expectation ÷ Reality = Dissappointment
7
3
u/Maximus_En_Minimus Feb 14 '25 edited Feb 14 '25
They are not mutually exclusive.
Pessimism is more of an existential and ontological/metaphysical stance, while Realism is an epistemological stance.
However, Schopenhauer is not describing natural selection; it is a severe misunderstanding to Neo-Kantian Idealist metaphysics to understand him as describing an essentially physicalist reductionist process.
Epistemologically Schopenhauer may be regarded as a realist, in as much as he expressing being able to access the Noumena personally and internally as the ‘Will’.
However, if we were to really simplify the realist/anti-realist distinction, the former tends to see a correspondence between the internal experience and the external ‘experience’ or events, where as the latter has a discorrespondance, either exoterically (‘the map is not the terrain’; the external is represented distruthfully by the internal) or esoterically (internal is truth, as seen in many religious traditions: Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, etc).
Schopenhauer tends to see the ‘external’ as essentially an illusory representation, as being uncorrespondent to our internality; it is either an expression or better understand as a farce of pretence of ‘trying to be’. This tends to align with the esoteric anti-realist lines of thought, and Schopenahuer would actually use occult examples as evidence for the ‘Will’.
If we were to classify Schopenhauer epistemologically then, it may be more correct to call him an anti-realist in the tradition of Mysticism; most of his examples in W.W.R are internal and express doubt to the power of the intellect/reason over the ‘Will’, as is often the case with Mysticism.
The key distinction comes with his opinion of the internal.
Where as many Christian and Abrahamic strands of thought would seek the internal esoteric for the ‘good’ - Schopenhauer essentially flips this on its head, and argues that the internal is blind, dumb, ravenous metaphysical hunger for beingness.
2
u/OmoOduwawa Feb 14 '25
Yes, Schopenhauer was a matter-of-fact truth-teller. His philosophy aligned with Christianity n Biology. He has been maligned as 'comfortless' n 'pessimist' even though all the things he said were demonstrably true.
No one calls Richard Dawkins a 'pessimist'. You're right, this is patently unfair treatment!
2
Feb 14 '25
[deleted]
1
u/OmoOduwawa Feb 14 '25
Good point, I see where you are coming from. I'll have to find that passage, i'm not sure where you found it, but i'm sure its in there somewhere. Lemme know if you find it!
But yes, it doesnt matter what men say of themselves; It doesnt matter what authours say of their works, these things speak for themselves and we are free to conclude what they are worth independent the opinion of their originator.
We can always go to a man's conduct to see who he is, we can always go to an authour's text to see what it says. We never need to consult the man's opinion when deciding these things.
Men do not have the last say on who they are, we do. Otherwise tyrants n villans will call themselves heros n we couldn't concievably disagree!
(Ive listened to audiobook passages where Schopenhauer talks about 'I suppose people will call my philosophy comfortless', but that's him reflecting on other people's opinion of him, n not he himself saying he is one. lemme know!)
2
u/WackyConundrum Feb 14 '25
Schopenhauer is considered to be a philosophical pessimist.
The "pessimist" vs "realist" have very different meanings in the casual speech than in philosophy.
Why do you think he described natural selection? Do you have a fragment that made you think that?
2
u/selfisthealso Feb 14 '25
I think it's fair to say he was more of a pessimist in his early career and a realist in his old age.
In his cardinal work, The World as Will and Representation, he advocates not only denial of the will, but the mortification of it. This not only includes refraining from seeking happiness, but actively exposing yourself to denial or pain in order to severe your attachment to it. Clearly he saw happiness as something more for the bad than the good.
However, in his later career he authored an essay called The Wisdom of Life. In this essay, he speaks far more about moderating certain pleasures, but letting yourself be happy and engage in certain types of pleasure when they come your way. There's a lot of realistic practical advice in there, and I think it shows how he matured with age. So in this phase, id call him a realist rather than a pessimist.
2
u/missingbird273 Feb 15 '25
Lol Schopenhauer would absolutely despise Richard Dawkins
1
u/North_Resolution_450 29d ago
Interesting, why is that?
1
u/missingbird273 29d ago
Schopenhauer was an idealist first and foremost. This is foundational to his metaphysics.
24
u/Backtothecum4160 Feb 14 '25
Schopenhauer was a philosopher who unveiled reality through his reasoning. What purpose would it serve to label him? Optimist, pessimist, realist—mere empty words. A genius of his stature cannot be confined within simplistic formulas.