In The Horrors and Absurdities of Religion, Arthur Schopenhauer examines the nature of religion and dogma in society. He writes in the introductory dialogue, “The capacity for faith is at its strongest in childhood: which is why religions apply themselves before all else to getting these tender years into their possession” (pg. 4). Schopenhauer continues, “The power of religious dogmas imprinted in early years is such that they are capable of stifling conscience and finally all pity and humanity” (pg. 5). Further, “In every religion, faith, temple ceremonies and rites of all kinds soon come to be pronounced of more immediate interest to the divine will than moral actions; indeed, the former, especially when they are bound up with the emoluments of the priests, gradually come to be regarded as a substitute for the latter: animal sacrifices, or the saying of masses… soon come to be the most meritorious works, so that they atone for even the gravest crimes, as do penances, subjection to priestly authority, confessions, pilgrimages, donations to the temples and their priests… and the like, whereby the priests finally appear as virtually no more than go-betweens in a trade with bribable gods” (pg. 24). Schopenhauer then examines the nature of ethics, philosophy, religion, and “various subjects” (pg. 89). Discoursing on religion, Schopenhauer writes, “…He is still in his childhood who can think that superhuman beings have ever given our race information about the aim of its existence or that of the world” (pg. 66). He concludes, “Mankind is growing out of religion as out of its childhood clothes. Faith and knowledge do not get on well together in the same head” (pgs. 87-88). Despite his insights, Schopenhauer’s writing reveals his Euro-centric bias and general approval of imperialism as a force of social change. Thus, the reader must practice a certain amount of selective attention, focusing on the stronger points of his argument while understanding that he – like most authors – reflects the values of his time. That caveat in place, Schopenhauer’s The Horrors and Absurdities of Religion is a good entry in Penguin’s Great Ideas series for those interested in philosophy.… (altro)

Segnalato

DarthDeverell | 1 altra recensione | Jan 5, 2022 |

Nietzsche: Man & Philosophy 2ed di Hollingdale

Accessible and sound. A nice little introduction to the man and his work, providing context and explanation of his main ideas. Recommended for students and beginners.

Gareth Southwell is a philosopher, writer and illustrator.

Segnalato

Gareth.Southwell | 1 altra recensione | May 23, 2020 |

Great Ideas the Horrors and Absurdities of Religion di Schopenhauer Arthur

I have second-hand knowledge of Schopenhauer's "the will to live is consecrated in the act of procreation" thesis, and while it makes a brief appearance, much of this collection is focused on religion. The "On Various Subjects" section reads a little like La Rochefoucauld's Maxims, and makes some interesting assertions about genius (it is OK to make mistakes, just your masterpiece ought to be inimitable); on the farcical nature of higher education (perception must precede concept, not the other way around); an early statement concerning animal rights (p. 77); and that great works have to wait until enough idiots agree that it is great - such insight is possessed by the majority in the same way that a "castrate possesses of the power to beget children". Now to religion. Some of my favourites:

All religion is antagonistic towards culture; The absurdities of dogma... arise from the need to link together two heterogeneous doctrines as those of the Old and the New Testaments; Hatred and contempt are decidedly antagonistic to one another and mutually exclusive (p. 52); The more prudent rulers enter into an alliance with [priests]; and Faith and knowledge are totally different.

The latter explains the dialogue On Religion, which, although I understand Schopenhauer was atheistic, appeared on the surface to be bombastic, but might otherwise resonate with court judges who have been confronted with decisions concerning the existence of God, and have deferred on the grounds that, in effect, "faith and knowledge" are different. Nevertheless, there is in this work the attitude (of The Enlightenment) that rational individuals cannot possibly believe in God. I have heard this sentiment expressed by senior academics, in addition to the buffoons who drool over the Facebook echo-chamber "I F***ing Love Science" which confirms empirically that God does not exist because it has 25 million "likes" (see quote above about "castrates"). That said, there is little to surprise the modern reader, but Schopenhauer was one of the few Western students of India and Buddhism, and his insights demonstrate that the glory days Conservatives dream about did not really exist in the nineteenth century, the counterfactuals were simply hidden from majority view. But to disclose the real gem in this work, I found another piece to the riddle of Benjamin Franklin. One of his "virtues" is "moderation". This is not a riddle in itself, but when "temperance" is also one of the virtues, what is so special about moderation that it should stand alone? Schopenhauer explains in the essay On Ethics by setting out some of the differences between Eastern and Western virtues and vices. For Schopenhauer, "virtues are qualities of will", which means that cowardice cannot be a vice if we have the "will to live"! The Platonic virtues closely align with Franklin's,one of which Cicero translated as temperantia, which is"in English moderation". Schopenhauer states:

[Moderation] is a very vague and ambiguous expression under which many different things can be subsumed, such as prudence, sobriety, keeping one's head.

Prudence. Cautious. To Franklin, "avoiding extremes". "Sobriety", therefore, belongs with "temperance". But "prudence" and "keeping one's head", then, belong to moderation. Whether "keeping one's head" is the same thing as to "forbear resenting injuries so much as one is able" remains to be seen, but I daresay Schopenhauer and Franklin were conversant in the literature on virtues, and eventually I will solve the riddle. But what of Schopenhauer? Religion is something we believe because we are indoctrinated as children, but as humanity "grows up", religion must inevitably die because it doesn't make sense (irrational). Yet the final paragraph tells the story of adolescents throwing out the baby with the bathwater - Aesop's fables are too childish because everybody knows foxes, wolves, and ravens can't talk! Thus, Schopenhauer ends with a real noodle-baker (about the boy who was too grown up to read Aesop):

Who cannot see in this hopeful lad the future enlightened Rationalist?

… (altro)

Segnalato

madepercy | 1 altra recensione | Feb 28, 2018 |

Nietzsche: The Man and His Philosophy (Biography) di R. J. Hollingdale

When I last checked this comparatively short paperback was offered on Amazon.com for $35, and on Amazon.co,uk for £57, which begars belief: Amazon prithee: how can it be that you price such a short paperback book by a deceased author so expensively? Can demand be really that slim, given the worldwide fascination with the the book's subject, that the only way you can make a turn is at such a price?

That said, if, dear reader, you have any interest in the life and work of Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche and it is the best you can do, $35.00 is still a price worth paying for this superb volume (though, bargain hunters note: a second-hand copy from Amazon.com might be a better bet).

Reg Hollingdale was, with Walter Kaufman, largely responsible for resurrecting of Nietzsche's literary reputation in the latter half of last century, the philosopher's mendacious sister having fair ruined it soon after his death in 1900. Hollingdale - no tenured academic; in fact, a university dropout who put himself through German classes and worked on and off as a journalist) has translated all of Nietzsche's major works, the majority of which translation are still available in Penguin classics, together with his (altogether more reasonably priced!) A Nietzsche Reader, so his insight into the life and work of this philosopher was inevitably going to be a valuable one.

Even if you struggle with catching Nietzsche's drift (and be assured, you wouldn't be alone) you can still rejoice and marvel at Hollingdale's rendering in English of this most stylish of German writers - Hollingdale's articulation of the famous "Madman" passage from The Gay Science (which, by comparison, I have seen elsewhere translated more clumsily as "Joyful Wisdom") is a good example:

"... The madman sprang into their midst and pierced them with his glances. 'Where has God gone?' he cried. 'I shall tell you. We have killed him - you and I. We are his murderers. But how have we done this? How were we able to drink up the sea? Who gave us the sponge to wipe away the entire horizon? What did we do when we unchained the earth from its sun? Whither is it moving now? Whither are we moving now? Away from all suns? Are we not perpetually falling? Backward, sideward, forward, in all directions? Is there any up or down left? Are we not straying as through an infinite nothing?"

In Nietzsche's celebrated difficulty lies the real beauty of Hollingdale's biography. This is a body of work which, 130 years later, is desperately in need of context. Hollingdale provides it. Each of Nietzsche's major works is addressed against the stage in his life at which it was written and is painstakingly extracted, analysed and interpreted to form a coherent picture of whole body of work. You get much of the content of the Nietzsche Reader within the pages of this work (a bargain at five times the price!)

Personally, I found this book a key which has unlocked the whole cabinet: Despite trying over many years, I'd never previously been able to assimilate the source material to my own satisfaction (with the possible exception of The Anti-Christ) and have only ever managed an impressionistic sense of Nietzsche's philosophy. His aphoristic style, while exhilarating, is not for the faint of heart: an expert guide such as Hollingdale's (or proper academic tuition) is pretty much obligatory. I feel fortified, now, to have another go.

Hollingdale's position, notwithstanding the many views to the contrary, is that while Nietzsche's philosophy evolved, matured and solidified as he grew older, it did not contradict itself or lack coherence, and any shifts in emphasis and content between his early works (such as Beyond Good and Evil ) and his later ones (up to, but probably excluding, Ecce Homo: How One Becomes What One is) are a function of his growing out of an infatuation with Richard Wagner, and overcoming the philosophical limitations of Schopenhauer, by which he had formerly been impressed. Hollingdale paints a coherent and convincing account of a philosophy based on three main tenets: the intrinsic struggle and conflict which is central to all life, out of which flows his insistence on the primacy of the Will to Power and his rejection of Christianity as an instinctive denial of this conflicted but vital life force; the eternal recurrence, being (I think) a logical extension of the rejection of a prime mover, and also a pragmatic substitute for a God-given morality (Nietzsche's outlook is almost entirely the inverse of Janis Joplin's: live your life as if you would have to repeat it, identically, infinitely) and out of all of that the superman - he who can overcome himself and sublimate the Will to Power.

That this was, with his sister's complicity, wilfully misconstrued by some of the least appealing individuals to have ever walked the planet is unfortunate (far from being a putative supporter of the Third Reich, Nietzsche is repeatedly on record as intensely disliking the Germans in general and anti-semites in particular!) but thanks in large part to the work of the late Reg Hollingdale, that damage has largely been undone.

In the mean time, if you have any real interest in one of the most fascinating philosophers of all, $35 is arguably cheap at the price for your ticket.… (altro)