Schopenhauer’s pessimism: what it is and what it’s not

According to most philosophy books, Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860) was profoundly pessimistic. However, when you look into the details of his life and his works, you will see that the truth goes into the opposite direction.

Historians tell us that Schopenhauer was confronted with a series of personal tragedies that rendered him pessimistic, but is this really true?

Indeed, his father passed away when Arthur Schopenhauer was just seventeen. That’s an early death by any standards, but not an unheard tragedy.

Let us not forget that Schopenhauer received from his father an inheritance that enabled him to live without ever working. I do not know many people that are placed at such a favourable financial situation when they are just seventeen.

I am sure that Arthur Schopenhauer would have preferred that his father lived for another three decades, but that’s life. It gives you good cards and bad cards, and demands you to play the game right away. There is not much point in complaining.

One thing is sure when speaking about Schopenhauer. He is not someone that had to face terrible financial struggles. I don’t know why some biographers would invent such nonsense. The truth is that Schopenhauer inherited a sizeable share package in his father’s company. The shares threw an annual dividend that is equivalent to forty thousand USD in today’s terms.

Disappointments and Schopenhauer’s pessimism

Schopenhauer was not a millionaire in terms of income, but didn’t have to worry about his next meal. His father had placed him in a comfortable position. When his mother passed away, he inherited additional shares in the company.

Historians also exaggerate Schopenhauer’s disappointments in the romantic area. He did have a tumultuous affair with the opera singer Caroline Richter. They eventually split, but is this such a big deal? They were not even married. Why was it such a tragedy to break up with a girlfriend?

Schopenhauer also struggled in his academic career, but I find it difficult to call it “a career.” The truth is that he never put much effort into establishing himself as a professor.

He did publish a couple of good books, but that’s no reason to expect universities to offer you great jobs. Academic life is much more complicated than writing and publishing. Even for very talented people, it is hard to secure a tenured position at a prestigious university.

Professional struggles and Schopenhauer’s pessimism

Biographers also pity Schopenhauer because his ideas were mostly overlooked during his lifetime. Indeed, that is a realistic description of what happened to Schopenhauer, but why should it be otherwise?

He had no influence in academic or journalistic circles. His books are interesting and well-written but never sold more than a few hundred copies. Why on earth did Schopenhauer expect that the world would praise his works and his intellect, if those were unknown to most people.

Schopenhauer complained about his “intellectual isolation,” but that was a problem of his own making. Since he never put in the necessary efforts to establish himself, why did he expect to grow famous.

If he wanted to achieve an influential position in academia, literature or journalism, he should have exerted himself in that direction for years. It was naive for Schopenhauer to expect the world to put him on a pedestal.

That’s why the Schopenhauer story you read in philosophy books doesn’t make sense. They tell us that lack of recognition convinced Schopenhauer of the impossibility of conveying any deep truths in a world driven by superficiality, but the truth is less romantic and dramatic.

The truth is that few people paid attention to Schopenhauer because he devoted little effort to self-promotion. He was very unrealistic about the amount of effort it takes to grow famous.

I fail to see that Schopenhauer was ever disadvantaged by a superficial culture; he didn’t attain the level of being mistreated by critics because he was flying under the radar. He should not have wasted time complaining. Instead, he should have worked more intensely at promoting his works.

Adversities and Schopenhauer’s pessimism

Do you see why I am so sceptical about the great adversities allegedly faced by Schopenhauer? I regard the suffering, losses and disillusionment in Schopenhauer’s life as nothing special. I cannot give them enough weight to justify deep pessimism.

Take for instance the anecdotes around Schopenhauer’s deep dislike for academia. Since he did not conform to the academic requirements, he never obtained a job as professor. What is so surprising about that?

Schopenhauer had a philosophical rivalry with Hegel, but it was wrong for him to feel frustrated or alienated due to Hegel’s academic success? Why was Schopenhauer expecting Hegel to fail if he had deployed massive efforts to establish himself as a professor and endorsed mainstream ideas?

Schopenhauer loved solitude, but this did not have to lead to pessimism. Since he did not need to work for a living, he never made the effort to fit into a corporate environment and develop sales skills. If he had done so, he might have grown successful, instead of devoting so much time to complaining.

Lifestyle choices and Schopenhauer’s pessimism

There are also no reasons for pessimism in Schopenhauer’s choice of an ascetic lifestyle. Instead of working to increase his income, he chose a simple lifestyle and a simple diet. He didn’t chase money, but that was his personal decision.

I wouldn’t elevate his personal taste into a holy renunciation of all worldly pleasures. If Schopenhauer was satisfied with his modest income, so be it. There is not particular pessimism in a simple lifestyle. Many people (especially those who live in the countryside) choose to do so, and they are not pessimistic.

Philosophers talk of Schopenhauer’s pessimism by pointing to the theory of the will (“life force”) in his book “The world as will and representation,” published in 1918.

Schopenhauer theorizes that the will is a blind drive towards pleasure and reproduction, driving all human actions. The will will generate desires impossible to fulfil; failure and frustration cannot be avoided in life.

Does it mean that Schopenhauer viewed happiness as totally impossible and ephemeral? Did he consider it a waste of time to pursue one’s dreams, just because success is not guaranteed?

Not at all. Schopenhauer acknowledged the high likelihood of failure and disappointments, but advised readers to protect themselves. He did not ask them to give up, but to be clever in the way they pursue their dreams.

Happiness and Schopenhauer’s pessimism

The cycle of striving and craving is healthy. One should not forget that the alternative is death. Schopenhauer made sound recommendation to minimize one’s risks in life, inspired by his deep knowledge of Eastern philosophy (Buddhism, Hinduism).

Schopenhauer was right in stating that all accomplishments and possessions are temporary, because we will all eventually pass away, but that’s only an added reason to make the best out of your life and enjoy each day to the maximum.

Pessimism is a waste of time, and Schopenhauer did not like wasting time. He simply provided solid advice to reduce risks and make the best of one’s opportunities. Philosophers that call Schopenhauer deeply pessimistic should read his works more carefully.

If you are interested in applying rational philosophical ideas in everyday life, I recommend you my book “On becoming unbreakable.”

Related articles

Schopenhauer and the philosophy of time

Schopenhauer and the philosophy of history

Critique of Schopenhauer’s philosophy of history

Exaggeration and reality in Schopenhauer’s pessimism

Human flourishing and Schopenhauer’s pessimism

The myth of Schopenhauer’s pessimism


Categories:

,

Tags: