CHAPTER I

Produced by Albert Laszlo and the Online Distributed

Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was

produced from images generously made available by The

Internet Archive)

PHILOSOPHIES ANCIENT AND MODERN

SCHOPENHAUER

NOTE

As a consequence of the success of the series of _Religions Ancient and

Modern_, Messrs. CONSTABLE have decided to issue a set of similar

primers, with brief introductions, lists of dates, and selected

authorities, presenting to the wider public the salient features of the

_Philosophies_ of Greece and Rome and of the Middle Ages, as well as of

modern Europe. They will appear in the same handy Shilling volumes, with

neat cloth bindings and paper envelopes, which have proved so attractive

in the case of the _Religions_. The writing in each case will be

confided to an eminent authority, and one who has already proved himself

capable of scholarly yet popular exposition within a small compass.

Among the first volumes to appear will be:--

=Early Greek Philosophy.= By A. W. BENN, author of _The Philosophy

of Greece, Rationalism in the Nineteenth Century_.

=Stoicism.= By Professor ST. GEORGE STOCK, author of _Deductive

Logic_, editor of the _Apology of Plato_, etc.

=Plato.= By Professor A. E. TAYLOR, St. Andrews University, author

of _The Problem of Conduct_.

=Scholasticism.= By Father RICKABY, S.J.

=Hobbes.= By Professor A. E. TAYLOR.

=Locke.= By Professor ALEXANDER, of Owens College.

=Comte and Mill.= By T. WHITTAKER, author of _The Neoplatonists,

Apollonius of Tyana and other Essays_.

=Herbert Spencer.= By W. H. HUDSON, author of _An Introduction to

Spencer's Philosophy_.

=Schopenhauer.= By T. WHITTAKER.

=Berkeley.= By Professor CAMPBELL FRASER, D.C.L., LL.D.

=Bergsen.= By Father TYRRELL.

SCHOPENHAUER

By

THOMAS WHITTAKER

AUTHOR OF 'COMTE AND MILL,' ETC.

LONDON

ARCHIBALD CONSTABLE & CO LTD

1909

CONTENTS

CHAP. PAGE

I. LIFE AND WRITINGS, 1

II. THEORY OF KNOWLEDGE, 15

III. METAPHYSICS OF THE WILL, 29

IV. AESTHETICS, 49

V. ETHICS, 65

VI. HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE, 86

SELECTED WORKS, 93

SCHOPENHAUER

CHAPTER I

LIFE AND WRITINGS

Arthur Schopenhauer may be distinctively described as the greatest

philosophic writer of his century. So evident is this that he has

sometimes been regarded as having more importance in literature than in

philosophy; but this is an error. As a metaphysician he is second to no

one since Kant. Others of his age have surpassed him in system and in

comprehensiveness; but no one has had a firmer grasp of the essential

and fundamental problems of philosophy. On the theory of knowledge, the

nature of reality, and the meaning of the beautiful and the good, he has

solutions to offer that are all results of a characteristic and original

way of thinking.

In one respect, as critics have noted, his spirit is different from that

of European philosophy in general. What preoccupies him in a special way

is the question of evil in the world. Like the philosophies of the

East, emerging as they do without break from religion, Schopenhauer's

philosophy is in its outcome a doctrine of redemption from sin. The name

of pessimism commonly applied to it is in some respects misleading,

though it was his own term; but it is correct if understood as he

explained it. As he was accustomed to insist, his final ethical doctrine

coincides with that of all the religions that aim, for their adepts or

their elect, at deliverance from 'this evil world.' But, as the

'world-fleeing' religions have their mitigations and accommodations, so

also has the philosophy of Schopenhauer. At various points indeed it

seems as if a mere change of accent would turn it into optimism.

This preoccupation does not mean indifference to the theoretical

problems of philosophy. No one has insisted more strongly that the end

of philosophy is pure truth, and that only the few who care about pure

truth have any concern with it. But for Schopenhauer the desire for

speculative truth does not by itself suffice to explain the impulse of

philosophical inquiries. On one side of his complex character, he had

more resemblance to the men who turn from the world to religion, like

St. Augustine, than to the normal type of European thinker, represented

pre-eminently by Aristotle. He was a temperamental pessimist, feeling

from the first the trouble of existence; and here he finds the deepest

motive for the desire to become clear about it. He saw in the world,

what he felt in himself, a vain effort after ever new objects of desire

which give no permanent satisfaction; and this view, becoming

predominant, determined, not indeed all the ideas of his philosophy, but

its general complexion as a 'philosophy of redemption.'

With his pessimism, personal misfortunes had nothing to do. He was, and

always recognised that he was, among the most fortunately placed of

mankind. He does not hesitate to speak sometimes of his own happiness in

complete freedom from the need to apply himself to any compulsory

occupation. This freedom, as he has put gratefully on record, he owed to

his father, Heinrich Floris Schopenhauer, who was a rich merchant of

Danzig, where the philosopher was born on the 22nd of February 1788.

Both his parents were of Dutch ancestry. His mother, Johanna

Schopenhauer, won celebrity as a novelist; and his sister, Adele, also

displayed some literary talent. Generalising from his own case,

Schopenhauer holds that men of intelligence derive their character from

their father and their intellect from their mother. With his mother,

however, he was not on sympathetic terms, as may be read in the

biographies. His father intended him for a mercantile career, and with

this view began to prepare him from the first to be a cosmopolitan man

of the world. The name of Arthur was given to him because it is spelt

alike in the leading European languages. He was taken early to France,

where he resided from 1797 to 1799, learning French so well that on his

return he had almost forgotten his German. Portions of the years 1803 to

1804 were spent in England, France, Switzerland, and Austria. In England

he was three months at a Wimbledon boarding-school kept by a clergyman.

This experience he found extremely irksome. He afterwards became highly

proficient in English: was always pleased to be taken for an Englishman,

and regarded both the English character and intelligence as on the whole

the first in Europe; but all the more deplorable did he find the

oppressive pietism which was the special form taken in the England of

that period by the reaction against the French Revolution. He is never

tired of denouncing that phase of 'cold superstition,' the dominance of

which lasted during his lifetime; for the publication of Mill's

_Liberty_ and of Darwin's _Origin of Species_, which may be considered

as marking the close of it, came only the year before his death.

The only real break in the conformity of Schopenhauer's circumstances to

his future career came in 1805, when he was placed in a merchant's

office at Hamburg, whither his father had migrated in disgust at the

annexation of his native Danzig, then under a republican constitution of

its own, by Prussia in 1793. Soon afterwards his father died; but out of

loyalty he tried for some time longer to reconcile himself to commercial

life. Finding this at length impossible, he gained permission from his

mother, in 1807, to leave the office for the gymnasium. At this time he

seems to have begun his classical studies, his education having hitherto

been exclusively modern. They were carried on first at Gotha and then at

Weimar. In 1809 he entered the university of Goettingen as a student of

medicine. This, however, was with a view only to scientific studies, not

to practice; and he transferred himself to the philosophical faculty in

1810. Generally he was little regardful of academical authority. His

father's deliberately adopted plan of letting him mix early with the

world had given him a certain independence of judgment. At Goettingen,

however, he received an important influence from his teacher, G. E.

Schulze (known by the revived scepticism of his _AEnesidemus_), who

advised him to study Plato and Kant before Aristotle and Spinoza. From

1811 to 1813 he was at Berlin, where he heard Fichte, but was not

impressed. In 1813 the degree of Doctor of Philosophy was conferred on

him at Jena for the dissertation _On the Fourfold Root of the Principle

of Sufficient Reason_ (_Ueber die vierfache Wurzel des Satzes vom

zureichenden Grunde_, 2nd ed., 1847). This was the first result of his

Kantian studies. In the same year he began to be acquainted with Goethe

at Weimar, where his mother and sister had gone to reside in 1806. A

consequence of this acquaintance was that he took up and further

developed Goethe's theory of colours. His dissertation _Ueber das Sehen

und die Farben_ was published in 1816. A second edition did not appear

till 1854; but in the meantime he had published a restatement of his

doctrine in Latin, entitled _Theoria Colorum Physiologica_ (1830). This,

however, was an outlying part of his work. He had already been seized by

the impulse to set forth the system of philosophy that took shape in

him, as he says, by some formative process of which he could give no

conscious account. His great work, _Die Welt als Wille und Vorstellung_,

was ready for publication before the end of 1818, and was published with

the date 1819. Thus he is one of the most precocious philosophers on

record. For in that single volume, written before he was thirty, the

outlines of his whole system are fixed. There is some development later,

and there are endless new applications and essays towards confirmation

from all sources. His mind never rested, and his literary power gained

by exercise. Still, it has been said with truth, that there never was a

greater illusion than when he thought that he seldom repeated himself.

In reality he did little but repeat his fundamental positions with

infinite variations in expression.

After completing his chief work, Schopenhauer wrote some verses in which

he predicted that posterity would erect a monument to him. This

prediction was fulfilled in 1895; but, for the time, the work which he

never doubted would be his enduring title to fame seemed, like Hume's

_Treatise_, to have fallen 'deadborn from the press.' This he attributed

to the hostility of the academical philosophers; and, in his later

works, attacks on the university professors form a characteristic

feature. The official teachers of the Hegelian school, he declared, were

bent only on obtaining positions for themselves by an appearance of

supporting Christian dogma; and they resented openness on the part of

any one else. Yet on one side he maintained that his own pessimism was

more truly Christian than their optimism. The essential spirit of

Christianity is that of Brahmanism and Buddhism, the great religions

that sprang from India, the first home of our race. He is even inclined

to see in it traces of Indian influence. What vitiates it in his eyes is

the Jewish element, which finds its expression in the flat modern

'Protestant-rationalistic optimism.' As optimistic religions, he groups

together Judaism, Islam, and Graeco-Roman Polytheism. His antipathy,

however, only extends to the two former. He was himself in great part a

child of Humanism and of the eighteenth century, rejoicing over the

approaching downfall of all the faiths, and holding that a weak religion

(entirely different from those he admires) is favourable to

civilisation. Nothing can exceed his scorn for nearly everything that

characterised the Middle Ages. With Catholicism as a political system he

has no sympathy whatever; while on the religious side the Protestant

are as sympathetic to him as the Catholic mystics. What is common to all

priesthoods, he holds, is to exploit the metaphysical need of mankind

(in which he also believes) for the sake of their own power.

Clericalism, 'Pfaffenthum,' whether Catholic or Protestant, is the

object of his unvarying hatred and contempt. If he had cared to

appreciate Hegel, he would have found on this point much community of

spirit; but of course there was a real antithesis between the two as

philosophers. No 'conspiracy' need be invoked to explain the failure of

Schopenhauer to win early recognition. Belief in the State and in

progress was quite alien to him; and Germany was then full of political

hopes, which found nourishment in optimistic pantheism. What at length

gave his philosophy vogue was the collapse of this enthusiasm on the

failure of the revolutionary movement in 1848. Once known, it contained

enough of permanent value to secure it from again passing out of sight

with the next change of fashion.

The rest of Schopenhauer's life in its external relations may be briefly

summed up. For a few years, it was diversified by travels in Italy and

elsewhere, and by an unsuccessful attempt at academical teaching in

Berlin. In 1831 he moved to Frankfort, where he finally settled in

1833. He lived unmarried there till his death on the 21st of September

1860. The monument, already spoken of, was unveiled at Frankfort on the

6th of June 1895.

The almost unbroken silence with which his great work was received,

though it had a distempering effect on the man, did not discourage the

thinker. The whole series of Schopenhauer's works, indeed, was completed

before he attained anything that could be called fame. Constantly on the

alert as he was to seize upon confirmations of his system, he published

in 1836 his short work _On the Will in Nature_, pointing out

verifications of his metaphysics by recent science. In 1839 his prize

essay, _On the Freedom of the Human Will_ (finished in 1837), was

crowned by the Royal Scientific Society of Drontheim in Norway. This and

another essay, _On the Basis of Morality_, _not_ crowned by the Royal

Danish Society of Copenhagen in 1840, he published in 1841, with the

inclusive title, _Die beiden Grundprobleme der Ethik_. In 1844 appeared

the second edition of his principal work, to which there was added, in

the form of a second volume, a series of elucidations and extensions

larger in bulk than the first. This new volume contains much of his

best and most effective writing. His last work, _Parerga und

Paralipomena_, which appeared in 1851 (2 vols.), is from the literary

point of view the most brilliant. It was only from this time that he

began to be well known among the general public; though the philosophic

'apostolate' of Julius Frauenstaedt, who afterwards edited his works, had

begun in 1840. His activity was henceforth confined to modifying and

extending his works for new editions; an employment in which he was

always assiduous. In consequence of this, all of them, as they stand,

contain references from one to another; but the development of his

thinking, so far as there was such a process after 1818, can be easily

traced without reference to the earlier editions. There is some growth;

but, as has been said, it does not affect many of the chief points. A

brief exposition of his philosophy can on the whole take it as something

fixed. The heads under which it must fall are those assigned to the

original four books of _Die Welt als Wille und Vorstellung_.

Although Schopenhauer discountenanced the attempt to connect a

philosophers biography with his work, something has to be said about his

character, since this has been dwelt on to his disadvantage by

opponents. There is abundant material for a personal estimate in the

correspondence and reminiscences published after his death by his

disciples Julius Frauenstaedt and Wilhelm Gwinner. The apparent

contradiction is at once obvious between the ascetic consummation of his

ethics and his unascetic life, carefully occupied in its latter part

with rules for the preservation of his naturally robust health. He was

quite aware of this, but holds it absurd to require that a moralist

should commend only the virtues which he possesses. It is as if the

requirement were set up that a sculptor is to be himself a model of

beauty. A saint need not be a philosopher, nor a philosopher a saint.

The science of morals is as theoretical as any other branch of

philosophy. Fundamentally character is unmodifiable, though knowledge,

it is allowed, may change the mode of action within the limits of the

particular character. The passage to the state of asceticism cannot be

effected by moral philosophy, but depends on a kind of 'grace.' After

all, it might be replied, philosophers, whether they succeed or not, do

usually make at least an attempt to live in accordance with the moral

ideal they set up. The best apology in Schopenhauer's case is that the

fault may have been as much in his ideal as in his failure to conform

to it. The eloquent pages he has devoted to the subject of holiness only

make manifest the inconsequence (which he admits) in the passage to it.

For, as we shall see, this has nothing in common with the essentially

rational asceticism of the schools of later antiquity; which was a rule

of self-limitation in view of the philosophic life. He did in a way of

his own practise something of this; and, on occasion, he sets forth the

theory of it; but he quite clearly sees the difference. His own ideal,

which he never attempted to practise, is that of the self-torturing

ascetics of the Christian Middle Age. Within the range of properly human

virtue, he can in many respects hold his own, not only as a philosopher

but as a man. If his egoism and vanity are undeniable, he undoubtedly

possessed the virtues of rectitude and compassion. What he would have

especially laid stress on was the conscientious devotion to his work.

With complete singleness of purpose he used for a disinterested end the

leisure which he regarded as the most fortunate of endowments. As he

said near the close of his life, his intellectual conscience was clear.

Of Schopenhauer's expositions of his pessimism it would be true to say,

as Spinoza says of the Book of Job, that the matter, like the style, is

not that of a man sitting among the ashes, but of one meditating in a

library. This of course does not prove that they are not a genuine, if

one-sided, rendering of human experience. All that can be said is that

they did not turn him away from appreciation of the apparent goods of

life. His own practical principle was furnished by what he regarded as a

lower point of view; and this gives its direction to the semi-popular

philosophy of the _Parerga_. From what he takes to be the higher point

of view, the belief that happiness is attainable by man on earth is an

illusion; but he holds that, by keeping steadily in view a kind of

tempered happiness as the end, many mistakes may be avoided in the

conduct of life, provided that each recognises at once the strength and

weakness of his own character, and does not attempt things that, with

the given limitations, are impossible. Of the highest truth, as he

conceived it, he could therefore make no use. Only by means of a truth

that he was bound to hold half-illusory could a working scheme be

constructed for himself and others. This result may give us guidance in

seeking to learn what we can from a thinker who is in reality no

representative of a decadence, but is fundamentally sane and rational,

even in spite of himself.

Schopenhauer(#38283) · 第 1 / 6 章