Critically Discuss Schopenhauer's Pessimism

2348 Words10 Pages
Critically Discuss Schopenhauer’s Pessimism and His Response to It When reading Schopenhauer’s philosophy, it’s easy to find yourself reaching a despairing conclusion about the value and satisfaction that can be gleaned from life. Whilst many humans would argue that they’re life is indeed a pleasurable one with meaning, Schopenhauer claims the contrary, positing ‘…pain as such is inevitable and essential to life; that nothing but the mere form in which it manifests itself depends on chance; that therefore our present suffering fills a place which without it would be at once occupied by some other suffering…’. I will evaluate the reasoning Schopenhauer gives for this conclusion, as well as discussing how Schopenhauer suggests we free ourselves from the suffering that’s apparently inherent in life. To understand Schopenhauer’s pessimism requires knowledge of his metaphysics. Schopenhauer claims that the ultimate nature of reality is a blind striving he calls ‘Will’. Everything’s a manifestation of Will; consequently this groundless striving can be found at the essence of all we can observe and experience, including our own bodily acts of will and motivations in the phenomena. At this point there should be a distinction made between the striving that occurs through willing in the phenomena and the blind striving of Will. This distinction is made very neatly by Mark Migotti, who classifies the two as either ‘empirical’ or ‘transcendental’ willing, describing the difference as ‘aiming at particular objects is empirical willing, and the absence of any object aimed at is the definitive of transcendental willing’. As we’re manifestations of transcendental willing, we are constantly subject to empirical willing. Merely the fact that we live our lives in a perpetual state of empirical willing doesn’t condemn us to accepting Schopenhauer’s pessimism. However, when
Open Document