I listened to an audio book about him tonight, he was with many many women, but in his view never took the plunge, one could argue "wisely" He wasnt miserable either, His philosophy was in lessening suffering, so ironically he was probably happier than most! He didn't have to work either, so he spent the time doing the things he enjoyed, reading, long walks, social lunches
To me, it would be strange that such an intelligent man, a genius, would say such random silly things about woman. I suppose, because of this (his reputation as genius), some things he says might be true, but after reading works like Mill "subjection of women" and mary Wollstonecraft "vindication of the rights of woman" one cannot but disagree with him in his central point.
He did not defended it. He proved the irrationality and stupidity in the arguments against homosexuality and suicide. Whether they are left wing or whatever cartoonish representation you make of the complex arena of politics has nothing to do with his arguments. I respect him for his genius and blodness, as well as humanity. To lament is his hate for women, but not even genius is perfect.
I have met many types of women, that should be no surprise, since Schopenhauer is wrong to generalise a whole gender; since clearly through my experience, women are palpably different. Schopenhauer's fault is generality which leads him to a prejudice and a prejudice is a mal-judgement which I do not appreciate. I can assert that he is wrong based on many facts; like how it has been shown how homosexual women display similar brain activity to heterosexual men. I have many examples however.
A woman will do whatever it takes to win no matter what she loses. She derives her greatest pleasure in life from a man losing and forcing him to give up
There are of course some honourable mentions(Austen, Dickinson, George Eliot), but never comparable to Beethoven, shakespeare, Miguelangelo to name a few. Woman has made no contribution of great importance in philosophy as well. Honourable mentions(Hypatia, Agnesi, Wollstonecraft)... yes, but not a cultural shift or sublime masterpiece.
It is trivially true that women haven't produced any good philosophy over the greater course of history. You can't expect anything significant to come out of a class of people who were as oppressed, sheltered, and discouraged as them. It was far from being an equal playing field (and it might not be all that equal even today). But over the past 100 years or so, we've seen an enormous rise in good female philosophers.
One last bit of information: "Schopenhauer held a high opinion of one woman, Madame de Guyon, whose writings and biography he recommended." For the beginners of Schopenhauer, I reccomend to dispel all those ridiculous prejudices, like the one that he was a mysoginist. He was a misanthropist.
Yeah, I think Mill is especially timely in this regard, since his essay and Schop's weren't very far apart at all. I really like Mill's essay, too. I don't know Schop's bio all too well, but his attack on women always resonated with me as being rooted in a desire for revenge (revenge on the women that mattered to him or effected him and caused him to suffer throughout his life). I assume that his feelings towards women fluctuated regularly, since he was attracted to them.
It is interesting to see what his thoughts are, but he was also a man that lacked in love in his life. It is important to understand women for their struggles, to see these facts by the philosopher first hand because they do exist and he obviously can put into words his observations, but it is also important to note his affections for a certain young lady were dismissed and he constantly was at odds with himself as a lover, he lacked those attributes to get what he wanted, but did attract some.
I agree with a bunch of stuff in this essay and it's one of my favorite pieces, actually, especially for the prose and the author's unabashed strong feelings on the matter (to put it mildly!)
@Bydeathorlevel He never married, had a child by a 19 year old singer with whom he stayed for 10 years, then he took-up with a 17 years old, it was she who let his grapes 'drop gently' behind her into the sea. He seems to have gone for young uneducated girls who were well beneath his class.
It is also worth knowing that schopenhauer said this later on: After the elderly Schopenhauer sat for a sculpture portrait by Elisabet Ney, he told Richard Wagner's friend Malwida von Meysenbug, "I have not yet spoken my last word about women. I believe that if a woman succeeds in withdrawing from the mass, or rather raising herself above the mass, she grows ceaselessly and more than a man."
I'm a Schop "beginner," though not a total n00b, and I'm not quite sure why I should dispel of the idea that he was a misogynist given the complete misogyny of this essay. The fact that he respected a couple women, does not redeem him of from the charge of sexism. If you have any more information, please share.
This second part starts to sound like Shoepenhauer was going off here and there . . . as opposed to the first. Ah, well. It was the 19th Century. Not all of it is deluded though. Just a lot.
Yes, it is true that woman was heavily oppressed, but is also true that many of them were quite at ease with this submissive role and with superficiality, and even enjoyed it like the "ladies" that Schopenhauer speaks here about.
Definitely, not every woman feels comfortable with this, just as not every man feels comfortable with playing the dominant, masculine role. If you ask me, these boxes are too rigid for most of us. I think that every member of society is brought up with them (to some degree at least), though, because these are simply our Western social norms, not just our private, family values.
@loai050 Until relatively recently men did not allow women to hold patents, publish books, attend universities or vote even. Why was that ?????? Why the need to keep women back ?..........why do men feel so threatened by women ? That's the interesting question.
I don't disagree that egalitarianism has made some big strides via the women's movement in the past 100 years (let alone 30!), nor would I disagree that most educated people lean towards feminist positions today. But, I don't think either of these things have been sufficient for the squelching of sexism and the deeply ingrained cultural scripts and roles that Western society assigns to women and expects them to follow. Schop's essay was unconventional and very contemptuous, even for its time.
OK, my bad, his misanthropy. I don't remember anything quite as vitriolic as this essay ever being directed at "men as such." His relation with his mother quite obviously did effect his views of women. This essay was harsh even for its time period.
He did marry an 18 year old. I saw a portion of a documentary where she did not accept grapes from him and referred to him in negative terms, I wonder if that was the woman and I wonder if all of these observations of his relating to women are true or not. Is this fact or subjectivism? I see weakness in woman's and man's character, but it seems that woman's character is to be debated,whether it is man's fault for how they act or not, it is man that is also affected by man accordingly. Maturity.
As far as I know Schopenahauer's life was not miserable at all. (I cannot claim any biographical expertise here.) What I can say, for sure, I know many unhappy marriages. Marriage and happiness make uncomfortable bedfellows.
Schopenhauer too, peculiarly, claimed that the new born inherit, from the mother, intelligence and, from the father, character. So one could say that he disliked that woman, so capable, comformed herself on platitude. I do not agree with schopenhauer on this issue (although he says some truths, like that ridiculous envy between women). Still, even if he said only rubbish :D (on this essay), his prose is magnific and worthy of reading whether he spoke mistakenly, as he does here.
Schopenhauer believed women should be kept in their [natural] place, i.e., bound to men. That's a pretty normal historical view. His reasons make sense, if you disregard a 100+ years of advancements in biology, psychology, and social science (not to mention philosophy)! Don't get me wrong, I think Schopenhauer is brilliant, but his explanations for behaviors in this essay are extremely crude, even for him.
@CrazyChitTV It has been revealed in the past 5 years that females actually outscored men - but various government actually held back high scoring females and gave the placements to lesser scoring males - unbelievable, but true. Males find it hard to focus - testosterone. Generally, females are better with children, males have less tolerance to stress due to testosterone , hence they are more aggressive , children are stressors. Women must pay equally, pay isn't yet equal, but is near enough.
I wont negate that. But it is dubious the claim that women were intellectually inferior because of oppression, and because of it never flourished until now. That is half truth. Genius did flourish before, like Maria Agnesi, Hypatia or Mary Wollstonecraft (whom criticized woman for being comfortable on their submissive role and for idealizing herself, as a sentimental heroine of cheap novels).
Human existence must be some kind of error said Schopenhauer (along other things), the misanthropist, which negates right away partiality of feeling (misogyny). But do not be misguided by thinking of him as a poor soul full of hate. He was very sensible and noble (he defended suicide, animal rights, homosexuality and other things). I recommend you to read his primary works rather than to depend on second hand accounts like mine.
Schopenhauer essay while incorrect in certain aspects(this is because some of them must be understood in a socio-historical manner), still many of the arguments are hard to refute. Like the argument about the fine arts, the one only a pride blind fool woould not accept. Woman has never created a work of art of sublime qualities in literature, nor in painting, nor in music, etc.
Is fine :) I dont think all of them feel comfortable. Probably those that feel comfortable on the submissive role, were those brought up in such manner. I admit lack of knowledge on this and certain bias toward schopenhauer to defend him :) (a fav philosopher).
@CrazyChitTV There's a much bigger percentage of women in engineering and the sciences in Europe - but they find it hard to get a foothold in engineering - men don't want to hire them.
it is true existentialist philosophy is a generalisation, as you say; but when it comes to matters which do not by definition; have a surrounding, general idea, then to make an assertion (without evidence) is not very clever... However, Schopenhauer is not the type to use empirical evidence, but tried to construct conclusions from his own opinions. In some cases I believe he does succeed with this, like in 'On Suicide' but here I just don't think his arguments make the cut...
Such behavior towards women is quite irrational. I can't help but wonder the way he thought about his mother? Was she an irrational being also? Only goo for breeding?
Not his pessimism his misanthropy. A misanhtrope by definition "hates" men. Still, it is very possible that the relation with his mother gave him a bias, to negative opinion of women. Also, one has to read this essay on a socio-historico view i suppose. Of course, somebody born today see this essay as an abomination, as much as, quite probably, people of 20 years more, will see our behavior and opinion of non- human animals with horror and resentiment.
Schopenhauer did not have a balanced view, even his distaste for the female form is quite odd and unworthy of inclusion in a serious work. The man was very clever, but not normal alas. He was eccentric . But that said, men who have focused their negativity on women are comforted by his skewed,mean-spirited view of them.
@WizardKing78 Haha! its amazing to see men still taking this diatribe seriously. Of course people will use cunning when education has been denied them - Whatever is needed to survive. Fact is these assertions can and have been tested and here S. is simply absurd and blind to the position women had been put into in his time.
I'm sorry, I didn't mean to imply that you attributed their desire for the submissive role to their essence. I thought that you were saying that in order to justify the idea that women were oppressed because they like being in an oppressed position.
a shame such a great philosopher must shoot himself in the foot with this purely self-opinionated misogyny. Although even with such a bogus argument about women, he presents it very well and there seems to be something sound about it...I am glad Schopenhauer is wrong in this case, with his hate of women and I am glad such views are not accepted. I still however cannot help but assent to some of the things in his essay On Women, only because his argument highlights prejudices i admit i have.
Yeah - out with the bons bons. I'm sure there are few women interested in high level maths etc. It needs interest, not only ability. There is more to the be known/understood in this world than maths/physics etc -there are other aspects to intelligence- you take a very narrow elitist view , ( real degrees). No need to see women as the enemy, there is good and bad, strengths and weaknesses in both sexes.
@TheAsianEngineer Intelligence isn't all about the viseospatial component. But that's your area of strength and yes it is more a male than female trait. I don't think you guys are all mumbling idiots because you have a lesser ability to communicate, and it's ok that's you aren't so good at multi-tasking, and have poorer peripheral vision, and get emotionaly overwhelmed easily and must detach, can't cope...........you are still worthy people.As to inventions etc.
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
I love how people dismiss Schopenhauer entirely because of his views on women.
Talk about throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
+TrashHeapHedonist And the fact that his views on women are accurate and correct. People who dismiss him just get pissed off at the truth.
I listened to an audio book about him tonight, he was with many many women, but in his view never took the plunge, one could argue "wisely" He wasnt miserable either, His philosophy was in lessening suffering, so ironically he was probably happier than most! He didn't have to work either, so he spent the time doing the things he enjoyed, reading, long walks, social lunches
To me, it would be strange that such an intelligent man, a genius, would say such random silly things about woman. I suppose, because of this (his reputation as genius), some things he says might be true, but after reading works like Mill "subjection of women" and mary Wollstonecraft "vindication of the rights of woman" one cannot but disagree with him in his central point.
He did not defended it. He proved the irrationality and stupidity in the arguments against homosexuality and suicide.
Whether they are left wing or whatever cartoonish representation you make of the complex arena of politics has nothing to do with his arguments.
I respect him for his genius and blodness, as well as humanity. To lament is his hate for women, but not even genius is perfect.
Word for word, this is the absolute truth!
Wow, this is a very good analysis of the nature of women. I hope his knowledge is respectively passed on to 21st century thinkers.
I have met many types of women, that should be no surprise, since Schopenhauer is wrong to generalise a whole gender; since clearly through my experience, women are palpably different. Schopenhauer's fault is generality which leads him to a prejudice and a prejudice is a mal-judgement which I do not appreciate.
I can assert that he is wrong based on many facts; like how it has been shown how homosexual women display similar brain activity to heterosexual men. I have many examples however.
Those are exactly the works that I've read. Great stuff. Highly enjoyable and interesting philosophy.
A woman will do whatever it takes to win no matter what she loses. She derives her greatest pleasure in life from a man losing and forcing him to give up
if only women could just accept these truths, we'd all be far happier
This is one of the most awesome things I've ever heard! So true!
There are of course some honourable mentions(Austen, Dickinson, George Eliot), but never comparable to Beethoven, shakespeare, Miguelangelo to name a few.
Woman has made no contribution of great importance in philosophy as well.
Honourable mentions(Hypatia, Agnesi, Wollstonecraft)... yes, but not a cultural shift or sublime masterpiece.
It is trivially true that women haven't produced any good philosophy over the greater course of history. You can't expect anything significant to come out of a class of people who were as oppressed, sheltered, and discouraged as them. It was far from being an equal playing field (and it might not be all that equal even today). But over the past 100 years or so, we've seen an enormous rise in good female philosophers.
This is a true genius, no doubt.
One last bit of information:
"Schopenhauer held a high opinion of one woman, Madame de Guyon, whose writings and biography he recommended."
For the beginners of Schopenhauer, I reccomend to dispel all those ridiculous prejudices, like the one that he was a mysoginist.
He was a misanthropist.
Yeah, I think Mill is especially timely in this regard, since his essay and Schop's weren't very far apart at all. I really like Mill's essay, too.
I don't know Schop's bio all too well, but his attack on women always resonated with me as being rooted in a desire for revenge (revenge on the women that mattered to him or effected him and caused him to suffer throughout his life). I assume that his feelings towards women fluctuated regularly, since he was attracted to them.
It is interesting to see what his thoughts are, but he was also a man that lacked in love in his life. It is important to understand women for their struggles, to see these facts by the philosopher first hand because they do exist and he obviously can put into words his observations, but it is also important to note his affections for a certain young lady were dismissed and he constantly was at odds with himself as a lover, he lacked those attributes to get what he wanted, but did attract some.
I agree with a bunch of stuff in this essay and it's one of my favorite pieces, actually, especially for the prose and the author's unabashed strong feelings on the matter (to put it mildly!)
Life saving wisdom.
@Bydeathorlevel He never married, had a child by a 19 year old singer with whom he stayed for 10 years, then he took-up with a 17 years old, it was she who let his grapes 'drop gently' behind her into the sea. He seems to have gone for young uneducated girls who were well beneath his class.
It is also worth knowing that schopenhauer said this later on:
After the elderly Schopenhauer sat for a sculpture portrait by Elisabet Ney, he told Richard Wagner's friend Malwida von Meysenbug, "I have not yet spoken my last word about women. I believe that if a woman succeeds in withdrawing from the mass, or rather raising herself above the mass, she grows ceaselessly and more than a man."
Can you provide sources for that?
>Search this essay
>Come across feminist site
>See it labelled as misogynistic
>Facepalm
I'm a Schop "beginner," though not a total n00b, and I'm not quite sure why I should dispel of the idea that he was a misogynist given the complete misogyny of this essay. The fact that he respected a couple women, does not redeem him of from the charge of sexism. If you have any more information, please share.
This second part starts to sound like Shoepenhauer was going off here and there . . . as opposed to the first. Ah, well. It was the 19th Century. Not all of it is deluded though. Just a lot.
Yes, it is true that woman was heavily oppressed, but is also true that many of them were quite at ease with this submissive role and with superficiality, and even enjoyed it like the "ladies" that Schopenhauer speaks here about.
Definitely, not every woman feels comfortable with this, just as not every man feels comfortable with playing the dominant, masculine role. If you ask me, these boxes are too rigid for most of us. I think that every member of society is brought up with them (to some degree at least), though, because these are simply our Western social norms, not just our private, family values.
Poor man obviously was surrounded by plain, short-legged, wide- hipped women who weren't interested in art . Bummer.
@loai050 Until relatively recently men did not allow women to hold patents, publish books, attend universities or vote even. Why was that ?????? Why the need to keep women back ?..........why do men feel so threatened by women ? That's the interesting question.
I don't disagree that egalitarianism has made some big strides via the women's movement in the past 100 years (let alone 30!), nor would I disagree that most educated people lean towards feminist positions today. But, I don't think either of these things have been sufficient for the squelching of sexism and the deeply ingrained cultural scripts and roles that Western society assigns to women and expects them to follow.
Schop's essay was unconventional and very contemptuous, even for its time.
Mencken wrote a few things about women too and you'd be surprised how much these two share.
OK, my bad, his misanthropy. I don't remember anything quite as vitriolic as this essay ever being directed at "men as such."
His relation with his mother quite obviously did effect his views of women.
This essay was harsh even for its time period.
He did marry an 18 year old. I saw a portion of a documentary where she did not accept grapes from him and referred to him in negative terms, I wonder if that was the woman and I wonder if all of these observations of his relating to women are true or not. Is this fact or subjectivism? I see weakness in woman's and man's character, but it seems that woman's character is to be debated,whether it is man's fault for how they act or not, it is man that is also affected by man accordingly. Maturity.
As far as I know Schopenahauer's life was not miserable at all. (I cannot claim any biographical expertise here.)
What I can say, for sure, I know many unhappy marriages. Marriage and happiness make uncomfortable bedfellows.
Schopenhauer too, peculiarly, claimed that the new born inherit, from the mother, intelligence and, from the father, character.
So one could say that he disliked that woman, so capable, comformed herself on platitude.
I do not agree with schopenhauer on this issue (although he says some truths, like that ridiculous envy between women).
Still, even if he said only rubbish :D (on this essay), his prose is magnific and worthy of reading whether he spoke mistakenly, as he does here.
I adore woman, just am not dense enough to fall for their games! Control and conform= life is will to power
Schopenhauer believed women should be kept in their [natural] place, i.e., bound to men. That's a pretty normal historical view.
His reasons make sense, if you disregard a 100+ years of advancements in biology, psychology, and social science (not to mention philosophy)! Don't get me wrong, I think Schopenhauer is brilliant, but his explanations for behaviors in this essay are extremely crude, even for him.
@CrazyChitTV It has been revealed in the past 5 years that females actually outscored men - but various government actually held back high scoring females and gave the placements to lesser scoring males - unbelievable, but true. Males find it hard to focus - testosterone. Generally, females are better with children, males have less tolerance to stress due to testosterone , hence they are more aggressive , children are stressors. Women must pay equally, pay isn't yet equal, but is near enough.
意志と表象による世界
世界はわが表象である。
意志は盲目に生きんと欲す。
I wont negate that. But it is dubious the claim that women were intellectually inferior because of oppression, and because of it never flourished until now. That is half truth. Genius did flourish before, like Maria Agnesi, Hypatia or Mary Wollstonecraft (whom criticized woman for being comfortable on their submissive role and for idealizing herself, as a sentimental heroine of cheap novels).
Human existence must be some kind of error said Schopenhauer (along other things), the misanthropist, which negates right away partiality of feeling (misogyny). But do not be misguided by thinking of him as a poor soul full of hate. He was very sensible and noble (he defended suicide, animal rights, homosexuality and other things). I recommend you to read his primary works rather than to depend on second hand accounts like mine.
Schopenhauer essay while incorrect in certain aspects(this is because some of them must be understood in a socio-historical manner), still many of the arguments are hard to refute.
Like the argument about the fine arts, the one only a pride blind fool woould not accept.
Woman has never created a work of art of sublime qualities in literature, nor in painting, nor in music, etc.
Is fine :)
I dont think all of them feel comfortable. Probably those that feel comfortable on the submissive role, were those brought up in such manner.
I admit lack of knowledge on this and certain bias toward schopenhauer to defend him :) (a fav philosopher).
@CrazyChitTV There's a much bigger percentage of women in engineering and the sciences in Europe - but they find it hard to get a foothold in engineering - men don't want to hire them.
Ask an honest intelligent woman and she would agree.
it is true existentialist philosophy is a generalisation, as you say; but when it comes to matters which do not by definition; have a surrounding, general idea, then to make an assertion (without evidence) is not very clever...
However, Schopenhauer is not the type to use empirical evidence, but tried to construct conclusions from his own opinions. In some cases I believe he does succeed with this, like in 'On Suicide' but here I just don't think his arguments make the cut...
Such behavior towards women is quite irrational. I can't help but wonder the way he thought about his mother? Was she an irrational being also? Only goo for breeding?
@jmckinl1ongaku why? why WAS he miserable and single all his life? I want to see you back that up.
Oh, did not say it was their essence.
@MrDavies90 HAHAHAHAHAHA if that is so that explains it all! "Mother my food is cold!"
Well, he didn't think too much of any being, except his poodles of course.
I was wondering how long it would take for one your ilk to emerge from your burrow and bite,lol.
Not his pessimism his misanthropy. A misanhtrope by definition "hates" men.
Still, it is very possible that the relation with his mother gave him a bias, to negative opinion of women.
Also, one has to read this essay on a socio-historico view i suppose. Of course, somebody born today see this essay as an abomination, as much as, quite probably, people of 20 years more, will see our behavior and opinion of non- human animals with horror and resentiment.
Schopenhauer did not have a balanced view, even his distaste for the female form is quite odd and unworthy of inclusion in a serious work. The man was very clever, but not normal alas. He was eccentric . But that said, men who have focused their negativity on women are comforted by his skewed,mean-spirited view of them.
@WizardKing78 Haha! its amazing to see men still taking this diatribe seriously. Of course people will use cunning when education has been denied them - Whatever is needed to survive. Fact is these assertions can and have been tested and here S. is simply absurd and blind to the position women had been put into in his time.
i wonder if he'd say these things about his mother. or sister.
@AKAyoungwriter18 well said!
I'm sorry, I didn't mean to imply that you attributed their desire for the submissive role to their essence. I thought that you were saying that in order to justify the idea that women were oppressed because they like being in an oppressed position.
So you think depression stems from "the system".
awwww, poor Arty didn't get any...
@misusedmetaphor agreed! a total crock!
@machodoggman nope
Read his world as will and representation and his essays parerga and paralipomena.
a shame such a great philosopher must shoot himself in the foot with this purely self-opinionated misogyny. Although even with such a bogus argument about women, he presents it very well and there seems to be something sound about it...I am glad Schopenhauer is wrong in this case, with his hate of women and I am glad such views are not accepted. I still however cannot help but assent to some of the things in his essay On Women, only because his argument highlights prejudices i admit i have.
No love for any art
Yeah - out with the bons bons. I'm sure there are few women interested in high level maths etc. It needs interest, not only ability. There is more to the be known/understood in this world than maths/physics etc -there are other aspects to intelligence- you take a very narrow elitist view , ( real degrees). No need to see women as the enemy, there is good and bad, strengths and weaknesses in both sexes.
@TheAsianEngineer Intelligence isn't all about the viseospatial component. But that's your area of strength and yes it is more a male than female trait. I don't think you guys are all mumbling idiots because you have a lesser ability to communicate, and it's ok that's you aren't so good at multi-tasking, and have poorer peripheral vision, and get emotionaly overwhelmed easily and must detach, can't cope...........you are still worthy people.As to inventions etc.