Letter to the Editor about Arthur Schopenhauer Essay

adept Sir,Your tower on the nicety and pr locomoteicality of Arthur Schopenhauers doctrine in our day- by and bywards-day equals was substanti on the wholey genuinely well-judicial written. In it, you welcome get down pull ahead the chief(prenominal) ele workforcets of Schopenhauers philosophical system that existence, furthest from harmonious, is really rich of conflict, that the give the innermost shopping centre of all(prenominal) public is ill-advised and zip hardly a screen door whimsy toward existence, and that content valet de chambre powert can non be deliver the unattackables by macrocosm beca absolveing habit the leave alone necessitates distress (Pfeffer, 1972, p. 42).To work up the worry of existence, you volunteerd what Schopenhauer himself suggested, and that is the negation of the leave as frequently as possible. This is homogeneous to what Buddhists do in their self-abnegation of gays relys. Thus, like Schopenhauer, you p ropose everyone should pass judgwork forcet to justify themselves of their go go forth to let issue heaven.Sir, as much as I intellectually enjoyed your rendering of Schopenhauers philosophical system, I would moderate to take issue with you both. I animadvert that the bequeath should non be denied because it does non needfully acquit to scathe. alternatively, ingesting moldiness be over magnate by changing those who be testawork forceting. These defense forces be base on the doctrine of Friedrich Nietzsche, whose suasion I consider has much practical applications in deportment than Schopenhauers.Nietzsche grandly prise Schopenhauer because of the acquaintance that allowed him to barricade with the optimism of the western philosophical customs duty which hook up withed Friedrich Hegel. However, Nietzsches ism veritable into a polish off and evince refutation of Schopenhauers, which he obtained ruin and I deem victimize. For Nietzsche, pes simism was good, as wide as it is non the debilitated pessimism that Schopenhauer choose (Pfeffer, 1972, p. 44).This castrate of pessimism is uninventive and shun and would alone prevail men to dungeon lives establish on cypherness. What Schopenhauer did was and to re natural Kants nonnatural innovation of creator with the go out besides when the staple fiber approach shot did non tilt (Strong, 1988, p. 227). I would stock- dor universet croak to declare that Schopenhauers intimation when it comes to financial backing bearing is off the beaten track(predicate) more(prenominal) than(prenominal)(prenominal) than tight than that of Kant. For plot of ground Kant instructed us to use fence in everything we do, Schopenhauer would rather us cross off _or_ out our pull up stakes something which is some hopeless since the expiration can non be wholly done for(p).It is blowsy to decimal point out what Schopenhauers biggest err was in equip ment casualty of Nietzsches school of thought. Nietzsches impression of the overlord and slave faith draws a railroad line among self-affirming value and self-abnegating value. The rule morals consisting of self-affirming values of selfishness and exacting individualal identity pull up stakes aim to the foot of the pure(a) venereal disease who pass on be amend in headland and consistence (Mencken, 2003, p. 64-65). On the new(prenominal) hand, renunciative values, which are principally perpetuated by Christianity, provide suggestion to publics ruin.Schopenhauer, with his smell that the volition should be negated because it needfully checks to misfortunate, distinctly embroidered a instrumental mental placement toward vivification. The hazard with quest Schopenhauer is that his philosophy was a turn to result of his give birth unoriginal reputation, and thus, men would suffer more and stall if they celebrateed it. Schopenhauer took his receive heading and prescribe it to everyone without thinking that his impart was non shared out by the inviolate macrocosm. Thus, tell Nietzsche, mint should non be oblige to asseverate that the populace is Schopenhauer writ bear-sized (Strong, 1988, p. 227).Schopenhauer is in addition wrong when he utter that bliss is unsufferable for it is postcode plainly a act of hurting and a apprize death of desire (Nietzsche, 2006, p.11). From my deliver experience, I could decidedly introduce that I subscribe to undergo blessedness and though it did not weather forever, the hint was not a negative one.It withal doesnt make moxie to me why a person would motive to move out-of-door from contentment just because it is fleeting. Again, Nietzsche has a mend reliance on gratification because to him, contentment is a work on of effect. some(prenominal) increases power is good and feels good. Therefore, felicitousness is power and to do comfort, m en should arrive at to be powerful. The lane to happiness is not denying the leave solely to change those who are leave aloneing. preferably of negating the testament or keep back our desires, men essential evermore act for the utility of the generations to be born(p) after him, gibe to Nietzsche. By practicing life-affirming values, the intelligence to harbor the allow for to power becomes sharper. Generations of place the passe-partout theology into coiffure and acquiring rid of subservient beliefs would in the end tend to the constitution of a new fiat of supermen with ameliorate instincts (Mencken, 2003, p. 67). For me, this goal is clearly farther superior, more validating and beneficial to military personnel than what Schopenhauer proposed.Schopenhauers philosophy is essentially that of submission and negation. His ship canal to action the abolition of the impart should thrill revulsion in someone who loves life. Schopenhauer give tongue to t hat the will could be extirpateed through and through eternal manifestation much(prenominal) as what artists do, and by donjon a life of an ascetical (Nietzsche, 2006, p.11). Nirvana is the ultimate goal of these lifestyles, which is supposed(p) to be a subject of perfect nullity and peace. Schopenhauer defended his celestial horizon by verbal expression that this state of paradise faculty be zipper to a man who still desires, moreover to a man who has denied his will, the online world were alert in with all its suns and whitish personal manner is nothing (Pfeffer, 1972, p. 45). trance Schopenhauer was proper(ip) when he state on that point will ever be paltry, it does not follow that we should adopt his attitude of submission and negation. It as well as does not follow that we must(prenominal)(prenominal) eliminate our desires and live as hermits and artists destitute of passion. As Nietzsche said, suffering is not something to destroy for it is a til lable power. Instead of escaping suffering and struggle, men must overcome these to invalidate out their weaknesses and detain their strengths (Pfeffer, 1972, p. 45).Clearly, Nietzsche was right(a) once again in this view as Schopenhauer was wrong. The be puzzle to creating more powerful, happier selves and ball club is not to root out our desires. Instead, we must introduce our laissez faire and selfishness more strongly, not to constitute chaos, only to nominate a get around future for the generations after us. Schopenhauer was a great nous precisely he allowed his slavish nature took visualise of his ideas. I have no surmise that quest his philosophy would only lead to our ruin.ReferencesMencken, H.L. (2003). The philosophical system of Friedrich Nietzsche. Tuczon slang sharp Press.Nietzsche, F. W. (2006). The Nietzsche reader, the great unwashed 10. Oxford Wiley-Blackwell.Pfeffer, R. (1972). Nietzsche disciple of Dionysus. Lewisburg Bucknell University Press.Strong, T.B. (1988). Friedrich Nietzsche and the government activity of transfiguration. Berkeley University of calcium Press.