The World as Will and Idea (Vol. 2 of 3) — Schopenhauer — John Shaqi
The World as Will and Idea (Vol. 2 of 3)
Schopenhauer · en
beginning of his metaphysics: “Δια γαρ το θαυμαζειν οἱ ανθρωποι και νυν
και το πρωτον ηρξαντο φιλοσοφειν.” (_Propter admirationem enim et nunc et
primo inceperunt homines philosophari._) Moreover, the special
philosophical disposition consists primarily in this, that a man is
capable of wonder beyond the ordinary and everyday degree, and is thus
induced to make the _universal_ of the phenomenon his problem, while the
investigators in the natural sciences wonder only at exquisite or rare
phenomena, and their problem is merely to refer these to phenomena which
are better known. The lower a man stands in an intellectual regard the
less of a problem is existence itself for him; everything, how it is, and
that it is, appears to him rather a matter of course. This rests upon the
fact that his intellect still remains perfectly true to its original
destiny of being serviceable to the will as the medium of motives, and
therefore is closely bound up with the world and nature, as an integral
part of them. Consequently it is very far from comprehending the world in
a purely objective manner, freeing itself, so to speak, from the whole of
things, opposing itself to this whole, and so for a while becoming as if
self-existent. On the other hand, the philosophical wonder which springs
from this is conditioned in the individual by higher development of the
intellect, yet in general not by this alone; but without doubt it is the
knowledge of death, and along with this the consideration of the suffering
and misery of life, which gives the strongest impulse to philosophical
reflection and metaphysical explanation of the world. If our life were
endless and painless, it would perhaps occur to no one to ask why the
world exists, and is just the kind of world it is; but everything would
just be taken as a matter of course. In accordance with this we find that
the interest which philosophical and also religious systems inspire has
always its strongest hold in the dogma of some kind of existence after
death; and although the most recent systems seem to make the existence of
their gods the main point, and to defend this most zealously, yet in
reality this is only because they have connected their special dogma of
immortality with this, and regard the one as inseparable from the other:
only on this account is it of importance to them. For if one could
establish their doctrine of immortality for them in some other way, their
lively zeal for their gods would at once cool, and it would give place
almost to complete indifference if, conversely, the absolute impossibility
of immortality were proved to them; for the interest in the existence of
the gods would vanish with the hope of a closer acquaintance with them, to
the residuum which might connect itself with their possible influence on
the events of this present life. But if one could prove that continued
existence after death is incompatible with the existence of gods, because,