Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860) devoted his whole life to the pursuit of truth. He acknowledged that truth is sometimes unpleasant and harsh, but humans are better off when they face problems and take action to solve them.
In his major work “The World as Will and Representation,” (1818), Schopenhauer categorized the will (“life force”) as the main driver behind human actions. It exerts massive influence on perception, motivation, and on how people take decisions.
Schopenhauer criticized mainstream philosophers because of their failure to grasp how the will drives the universe. If you fail to study the theory of the will, you cannot understand the tangible experiences of life.
Truth can only be perceived, argued Schopenhauer, by those who acknowledge the influence of the will on the thoughts of individuals. Those thoughts combine the will (blind, irrational, external force) with individual perceptions and desires.
Schopenhauer’s books “On the fourfold root of the principle of sufficient cause” (1814) and “Parerga and Paralipomena” (1851) recommend confronting the harsh realities of existence, instead of engaging in wishful thinking; the truth will help you make the right decisions.
Schopenhauer’s rejection of idealism
Schopenhauer’s philosophy on the nature of truth possesses the following distinct characteristics, which set him apart from other thinkers in history.
First, a rejection of idealism, that is, a rejection of abstract constructions that aren’t based on reality. Schopenhauer had no appreciation for the theories of Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) on so-called “noumena” that cannot be perceived.
Schopenhauer regarded the search for happiness as essential in any philosophical system. Idealists such as Kant have built ethical systems that contain mostly prohibitions. Those pay no attention to personal well-being and happiness.
Schopenhauer’s acceptance of a harsh reality
Second, Schopenhauer acknowledged that happiness is hard to achieve. He considered it impossible for anyone to fulfil all his desires and goals.
As time passes, desires and goals multiply and can consume all your energies. Many of those goals are destined to remain unattainable. The sooner you acknowledge this fact, the better you should do in life because you can steer away from lost battles.
Third, it takes energy and foresight to take countermeasures to minimize the negative effects of the will. If you let the will take control of your life, you will make mistake after mistake. I regard this point as one of the key lessons from Schopenhauer.
Even if you study Schopenhauer’s theory of the will and get familiar with its effects, it is still insufficient to escape them. If you fail to adopt active measures, it is practically impossible to keep a clear head in times of trouble.
Schopenhauer’s realistic recommendations
Fourth, good philosophy starts with asking correct, relevant questions. Schopenhauer used to say that untalented people fail to hit the target and talented people hit it, but only a genius can see a target that nobody else can see; the same applies to ideas.
Schopenhauer did not only ask himself the questions that all other philosophers had asked. In terms of structure, philosophy had maintained the shape given by Plato (428-348 BC). Until Schopenhauer came up with the theory of the will, philosophy had been disconnected from human motivation and action.
Fifth, you can vastly improve your life by minimizing risks, practising self-discipline and keeping a margin of safety. Those strategies are present in Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, and ancient Stoicism.
Schopenhauer reinvigorated them by connecting them to his theory of the will. Christianity, Buddhism or Hinduism did ask people to be self-disciplined, but without explaining what for. I find it unsurprising that their ethics are applied inconsistently, considering that they mainly consist of commands.
The approach taken by Schopenhauer is totally different. He explained in great detail why countermeasures are necessary to escape the dire influence of the will. Without self-discipline, it is impossible to resist short-term desires demanding fulfilment at any price.
Schopenhauer compared with Soren Kierkegaard
We can better see Schopenhauer’s unique passion for truth if we compare him with Soren Kierkegaard (1813-1855), who is regarded as the father of existentialism and post-modernism.
While Schopenhauer acknowledged the difficulty of finding truth and making right decisions, Kierkegaard rejected the idea of objective truth altogether. He regarded truth as a personal, subjective conviction often linked to religious experience.
In books such as “Fear and Trembling” (1843) and “Works of Love” (1847), Kierkegaard uses the concept “leap of faith.” He defined it as a passionate commitment beyond rationality, and argued that it takes a leap of faith to perceive truth.
In fact, the opposite is true. To perceive the truth, you need to check the facts, assess them rationally, and draw conclusions that match the facts. The last thing you want is to take a leaf of faith rendering you oblivious to reality.
The theory of the will compared to Soren Kierkegaard
While Schopenhauer had rejected mysticism and idealism because they are unconnected to reality, Kierkegaard praised them incessantly. He called his readers to listen to their anxiety and fears to attain a deeper understanding of truth.
Schopenhauer viewed the will (“life force”) as the essential element driving the cosmos. The will is an external, pervasive, constant energy that prompts all living creatures to ensure their survival and reproduction. Its presence can be witnessed day in and day out.
In contrast, Kierkegaard paid no attention to any driving life force. He emphasized individual choices in shaping the truth, criticized social conformity, and called people to listen to their inner self. In other words, Kierkegaard was favouring extreme subjectivism.
There is a world of difference between adopting the views of Schopenhauer and those of Kierkegaard. Realism, accuracy, and good decisions require workable ideas, and there is plenty of wisdom to be drawn from Schopenhauer’s works. I’m afraid though that no wisdom can be drawn from Kierkegaard’s fears.
If you are looking for practical, rational ideas to apply here and now, I recommend you my book titled “Sequentiality: The amazing power of finding the right sequence of steps.”
Related articles
Schopenhauer and the unconscious
Impact of Schopenhauer’s views on the unconscious
Critique of Schopenhauer’s views on the unconscious