What is his philosophy, and why is he so unhappy?

>>8641714
His philosophy was the school of hard knocks, and he's unhappy because he got knocked hard

>>8641714

Schopenhauer wasn't unhappy. He played the fuckin' flute for christs sake

>>8641753
Did he play your flute, bbgril?

>>8641753
now, were it the tuba, that'd be a different story altogether

How is his notion of the Will any different from the Occasionalism of Malebranche?

File: 1474498333636.jpg (44KB, 574x382px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 574x382px

>>8641714
Life is sad because suffering is an integral part of life. . . .in fact the very act of living causes suffering. . . because muh will.

Schopenhauer in a nutshell.

>>8641763
Well, because Malebranche defines 'God' as the only true causal agent with humans simply being vectors of divine causality. Schopenhauer considers the 'will' to be the thing-in-itself, the pulsing lifeforce that drives all existence, nothing divine about it. The theories are similar in that they both view humankind as peripheral phenomena of the central driving force, but Malebranche considers it to be God and does not (could not) take transcendental idealism into account. Schopenhauers view is more comprehensive and consistent with modern philosophy

>>8641778
So, the difference is what character they wish to ascribe to the thing-in-itself? That's it?

>>8641767
maybe Schopenhauer in a nutshell to someone who hasn't read The World as Will and Representation and has merely relied on little textbytes from 4chan and wikipedia

>>8641782
no, the nature of the prime agent fundamentally alters each theory. Malebranche took no inspiration from Kant, and therefore did not distinguish the noumenal world from the phenomenal. Furthermore, he did not broach the idea of categories of human consciousness that Kant proposed, and therefore his understanding of causality is much more limited and vague than Schopenhauer's was. Malebranche considered God to be a sentient being operating under constraints of the human concepts of causality and will, whereas Schopenhauer's Will was much more monad-like, constitutive, and less dependent on a direct relationship to humanity

>>8641790
OK, I follow. Efectively you still have the same kind of causal determinism, or so it seems.

>>8641753
he was definitely unhappy if you follow his own definition. He didn't deny the will in the least. The only thing he did to combat desire was a lot of music.

he didn't even consciously opt out of romance, he said "I liked women well enough, it just happens that they didn't like me back"

This board is the most cancerous crap Ive seen in my life. /b/ at least is honest cancer. But here in /lit/ youre the most cringiest of retards, all day talking shit about people way more intelligent than yourselves and actually believing you understood a single fucking word of their work.
Cant even come here to cringe. Your level is just too much for me. I dont have such a lack of respect for people so brilliant that I can mock them all day or have fun watching how a bunch retards mock them.

Kys.

>>8641843
man you sure have proven how smart you are! Go to reddit if you want le ebik cringe compilations, i'm sure it's more your speed

>>8641843
This board is the most cancerous crap Ive seen in my life. /b/ at least is honest cancer. But here in /lit/ youre the most cringiest of retards, all day talking shit about people way more intelligent than yourselves and actually believing you understood a single fucking word of their work.
Cant even come here to cringe. Your level is just too much for me. I dont have such a lack of respect for people so brilliant that I can mock them all day or have fun watching how a bunch retards mock them.

Kys.

>>8641843
>>8641864

This board is the most cancerous crap Ive seen in my life. /b/ at least is honest cancer. But here in /lit/ youre the most cringiest of retards, all day talking shit about people way more intelligent than yourselves and actually believing you understood a single fucking word of their work.
Cant even come here to cringe. Your level is just too much for me. I dont have such a lack of respect for people so brilliant that I can mock them all day or have fun watching how a bunch retards mock them.

Kys.

>>8641843
>>8641864
>>8641867
haha lol I'm so quirky with my repost hahaa :P
>>>/reddit/

>>8641877
don't call yourself names anon it is rude to yourself

>>8641877
Youre trying too hard, anon. Pasting my post three times and then attributing that to me.. just to get a response. Dont you think youre beyond that? Does this really give you any gratification? Do you really have such low self-respect?
This is /lit/ after all, I guess... and I took the bait. You win. Now go read the greeks or shitpost about the Ubermensch. You sure know what it means.

>>8641877
This board is the most cancerous crap Ive seen in my life. /b/ at least is honest cancer. But here in /lit/ youre the most cringiest of retards, all day talking shit about people way more intelligent than yourselves and actually believing you understood a single fucking word of their work.
Cant even come here to cringe. Your level is just too much for me. I dont have such a lack of respect for people so brilliant that I can mock them all day or have fun watching how a bunch retards mock them.

Kys.

>>8641881
Youre trying too hard, anon. Pasting my post three times and then attributing that to me.. just to get a response. Dont you think youre beyond that? Does this really give you any gratification? Do you really have such low self-respect?
This is /lit/ after all, I guess... and I took the bait. You win. Now go read the greeks or shitpost about the Ubermensch. You sure know what it means.

>>8641923
Youre trying too hard, anon. Pasting my post three times and then attributing that to me.. just to get a response. Dont you think youre beyond that? Does this really give you any gratification? Do you really have such low self-respect?
This is /lit/ after all, I guess... and I took the bait. You win. Now go read the greeks or shitpost about the Ubermensch. You sure know what it means.