Was Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860) a subjectivist? Did he reject an objective philosophy, where the concepts of good and bad are universally defined? What’s the difference between Schopenhauer and subjectivist thinkers?
Schopenhauer wasn’t a subjectivist. His book “The world as will and representation” (1818) outlines the theory of the will, which sustains that all living entities are driven by a life force (“the will”) to ensure their survival and reproduction.
According to Schopenhauer, the will is a wild, irrational and eternal force. The will is objective in the sense that it exists before human consciousness. However, it is also subjective in the sense that it exerts relentless pressure on the thoughts and actions of each individual.
Schopenhauer built a philosophy that connects the objective and the subjective, identifying how they interact across time. It is wrong to say that he favoured subjectivism and arbitrariness, or that he encouraged people to elevate their feelings to ethical principles.
Subjectivism and Schopenhauer’s meaning of life
The comparison with a subjectivist thinker is the best way to present Schopenhauer’s views on the meaning of life; for the comparison, I have chosen the archetypical subjectivist thinker, namely, Emile Coué (1857-1926).
Coué belongs to the generation born after Schopenhauer but he inhabited a world that, to a large extent, inherited the ideals and habits from Schopenhauer’s time.
Geographically, Coué was not far away from the German- speaking area of Europe. Coué spent most of his life in a town located a few hundred kilometres from the German border.
I consider Coué the archetype of the subjectivist thinker due to his experiments in the field of suggestion. He was the first promoter of positive thinking and daily positive affirmations.
Schopenhauer was never confronted with ideas exactly like the ones developed by Coué, but was familiar with suggestion and affirmations in Buddhism, Hinduism and Christianity.
If Schopenhauer had met Coué, he wouldn’t have taken him seriously. Why not? Because he never took seriously positive thinking, suggestion and affirmation in religion. Schopenhauer didn’t give credence to theories that appear borderline magical.
Happiness and Schopenhauer’s meaning of life
Bear in mind however that Coué regarded himself as a true scientist and his theories as scientifically proven. Indeed, he had studied pharmacy and practised his profession for decades; his experience with patients convinced him that suggestion and positive affirmations can contribute to healing.
In contrast, Schopenhauer based his philosophical treatises mainly on history, personal observations and logical arguments that he elaborated in minute detail.
Schopenhauer employed the same reasoning method all his life. In this respect, his early book “On the fourfold root of the principle of sufficient reason” (1808) differs little from books he wrote decades later, such as “Two fundamental problems in ethics” (1843).
When it came to defining the meaning of life, Schopenhauer kept focused on the theory of the will. He acknowledged that happiness is the goal, but individuals can only prevent trouble and improve their lives if the counteract the will.
Schopenhauer’s work “Parerga and Paralipomena” (1851) is a compilation of essays providing practical advice about life’s meaning and the conquest of happiness. The recommendations are hundred per cent practical, tangible and hands-on. There is no positive thinking, suggestion or affirmations in his work.
The unconscious and Schopenhauer’s meaning of life
Like other subjectivists, Coué believed that he could shape reality through the power of the mind. He was convinced that human beings can influence events through auto-suggestion, positive affirmations, and positive thinking.
Schopenhauer had seen in his lifetime something similar to the so-called “Coué method,” which consists of repeating very often affirmations or positive statements. According to Coué, it is proven that those affirmations can influence the unconscious and the external world.
In Buddhism, Hinduism and Christianity, Schopenhauer had witnessed the faithful perform rituals or intone mantras that are reminiscent of Coué method. When rituals and mantras deliver the desired results, people categorize them as miracles. In the case of Coué, he called them science, not miracles.
Schopenhauer only acknowledged results caused through an action or omission. He rejected the idea that thoughts alone are able to cause results. Buddhists who perform rituals and intone chants need focused action if they want something to happen.
Realism in Schopenhauer’s meaning of life
The meaning of life predicated by Coué is almost magical. I would place it close to the miracles, wonders and faith healings witnessed in Buddhism, Hinduism and Christianity.
Schopenhauer’s meaning of life is hundred per cent realistic. It doesn’t contemplate or accept the possibility of magic. If you fail to adopt countermeasures, the will is going to control your life and lead you to ruin. It’s going to prompt you to take short-term actions without considering the cost, risk and side effects.
Differences between Schopenhauer’s and Coué’s meaning of life become even more apparent if you compare their books.
Coué wrote in 1922 “Self-mastery through conscious auto-suggestion,” where he states that one can improve one’s health and effectiveness through positive affirmations. Schopenhauer refused this possibility in his book “On the fourfold root of the principle of sufficient cause.”
Their views on the meaning of life grow wider apart in 1926 when Coué published “How to practice suggestion and auto-suggestion.” This book presents positive thinking as the pillar of self-improvement; in contrast, Schopenhauer rejected all-out subjectivism in his book “On the will in nature” (1832).
Coué’s “Self-healing through auto-suggestion” (1929) and “Effortless living” (1932) combine his positive-thinking theory with methods of relaxation and meditation. What a difference with Schopenhauer’s “Parerga and Paralipomena” (1851), that is providing only objective, hands-on recommendations.
Self-improvement and Schopenhauer’s meaning of life
Schopenhauer would have radically rewritten Coue’s advice to improve one’s life. Instead of asking people to repeat “Every day in every way, I’m getting better and better,” he would have told them to repeat “Every day, I am growing more self-aware and taking determined action to get better and better.”
The meaning of life, according to Schopenhauer, doesn’t lie in subjectivism. Imagination is fine, but doesn’t change reality. Coué was wrong in expecting thoughts alone to shape facts. Success ensues only when positive beliefs are accompanied by determined action
Schopenhauer didn’t view the subconscious as a garden, but as a construction site. It is not enough to conceive the idea of a beautiful building. You also need to dig the foundations, pour cement, erect the walls, and install the ceiling.
I agree that Schopenhauer’s view of the meaning of life isn’t as optimistic as Coué, who believed that every problem has a solution that can be found with the right attitude. Nonetheless, I find Coué’s expectations exaggerated.
Schopenhauer is more realistic and practical. He had rightly assessed that not every problem has a perfect solution, but one can go a long way by thinking clearly, making good decisions, and carrying them out consistently.
If you are interested in applying rational ideas every day to address problems, I recommend you my book “Asymmetry: The shortcut to success when success seems impossible.”
Related articles
Schopenhauer’s views on the relationship between art and morality
Schopenhauer’s views on wisdom
Schopenhauer and the meaning of life