Next
Dinesh

Dinesh club

Posted: 31 Jan 2023

Taken: 30 Jan 2023

1 favorite     1 comment    14 visits

See also...

Keywords

eXCERPT •
The Philosophy of Schopenhauer •
Author •
Bryan Magee •

Authorizations, license

Visible by: Everyone
All rights reserved
14 visits

W I L L

W I L L

Erhard Bernstein has particularly liked this photo

Comments
 Dinesh
Dinesh club
‘Will’ in Schopenhauer’s third sense is not conative at all, unless by coincidence. It has no necessary reference to anything to do with life, personality, consciousness, inner sence or aim. It is his name for the personality, consciousness, inner sence or aim. It is his name for the force exemplified in the constitution and motion of everything in the universe from the cosmic wheeling of the galaxies to the perpetual whirl of subatomic particles. He has given it the name ‘will’ for no other reason than that the nearest we are experiencing subjects can come to a direct apprehension of it is through the manifestation of primal energy that each one of us experiences in inner sense as the ordinary drive of life, the ongoing thrust, however weak, of being alive; or, if you like, simply the will ot live, to survive, to keep going. This is the most ordinary, everyday, directly experienced phenomena for each of us, and Schopenhauer’s central doctrine is quite simply that it is noumenally at one with the force that drives everything else in the universe. Understood in this way, what Schopenhauer is saying may be difficult to grasp imaginatively, but it is not intellectually bizarre. . . . .

. . . ‘The will as the thing-in-itself, constitutes the inner, true, and indestructible nature of man; yet in itself it is without consciousness.’ ‘Without the object, without the representation, I am not knowing subject but mere, blind will; in just the same way, without me as subject of knowledge, the thing known is not object, but mere will, blind impulse. In itself, that is to say outside the representation, the form of which is always at least subject and object, are we separated out as known and knowing individual. As soon as knowledge, the world as representation, is abolished, nothing in general is left but mere will, blind impulse. ~ Page 142/ 143

Chapter 21

Misunderstanding Schopenhauer

. . . Schopenhauer is always aware of the distinction between will as his name for the noumenon and ‘will’ as his name for its appearance or manifestation in the world of phenomena. Whenever he talks of will ‘appearing’, or of ‘the phenomena of the will’, it is the latter, not the former, that he is talking about. I believe that if he is red with empathy as well as care the distinction is clear to the reader.. . . . Page 443

THE PHILOSOPHY OF SCHOPENHAUER
16 months ago. Edited 15 months ago.

Sign-in to write a comment.