What do you think?
Rate this book
Los dolores del mundo
Leídos hoy, estos aforismos de Arthur Schopenhauer son pura dinamita intelectual, un monumento a lo políticamente incorrecto. Las reflexiones del filósofo alemán sobre la vida, el amor o las mujeres destilan una lúcida amargura que cuadra perfectamente con el carácter pesimista de su pensamiento.
Heredero de Kant, Schopenhauer, el filósofo anti-hegeliano por excelencia, es uno de los pensadores más originales que ha dado la filosofía occidental.
Heredero de Kant, Schopenhauer, el filósofo anti-hegeliano por excelencia, es uno de los pensadores más originales que ha dado la filosofía occidental.
109 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1850
373 people are currently reading
8276 people want to read
About the author
Arthur Schopenhauer
2,029 books5,976 followersArthur Schopenhauer was born in the city of Danzig (then part of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth; present day Gdańsk, Poland) and was a German philosopher best known for his work The World as Will and Representation. Schopenhauer attempted to make his career as an academic by correcting and expanding Immanuel Kant's philosophy concerning the way in which we experience the world.
He was the son of author Johanna Schopenhauer and the older brother of Adele Schopenhauer.
He was the son of author Johanna Schopenhauer and the older brother of Adele Schopenhauer.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 317 reviews
February 8, 2017
Things Schopenhauer likes: music, suicide, tragic drama.
Things Schopenhauer hates: toads, common sense, grand opera, religious dogmatics, action novels, women, published writers, the limitations to our understanding of the indestructibility of our essential being by death imposed on us by our narrow conception of time, spiders.
Schopenhauer is to philosophy what "The Smiths" are to popular music - so unrelentingly miserable that you can't help but cheer up when they stop. I love it. How about this:
He was lucky he lived in the nineteenth century. The internet would have destroyed him if he'd lived today. Just imagine the twitter storm if he'd tweeted this:
Although Schopenhauer wouldn't have wasted much time surfing the net in any case:
And it's great to read a philosopher that actually has an opinion on something, just like this - "published writers are all whores":
Not just a hint of jealousy there my old pal? Great stuff.
Things Schopenhauer hates: toads, common sense, grand opera, religious dogmatics, action novels, women, published writers, the limitations to our understanding of the indestructibility of our essential being by death imposed on us by our narrow conception of time, spiders.
Schopenhauer is to philosophy what "The Smiths" are to popular music - so unrelentingly miserable that you can't help but cheer up when they stop. I love it. How about this:
"...nonetheless, everyone desires to achieve old age , that is to say a condition in which one can say: 'Today it is bad, and day by day it will get worse - until at last the worst of all arrives.'…"
He was lucky he lived in the nineteenth century. The internet would have destroyed him if he'd lived today. Just imagine the twitter storm if he'd tweeted this:
"...For just as the female ant loses its wings after mating, since they are then superfluous...so the women usually loses her beauty after one or two childbeds, and probably for the same reasons...".
Although Schopenhauer wouldn't have wasted much time surfing the net in any case:
"…The art of not reading is a very important one. It consists in not taking an interest in whatever may be engaging the attention of the general public at any particular time…".
And it's great to read a philosopher that actually has an opinion on something, just like this - "published writers are all whores":
"…A man who tries to live on the generosity of the Muses..seems to me somewhat to resemble a girl who lives on her charms. Both profane for base profit what ought to be a free gift of their inmost being. Both are liable to become exhausted and both usually come to a shameful end. So do not degrade your Muse to a whore…".
Not just a hint of jealousy there my old pal? Great stuff.
January 18, 2016
Me: Schopenhauer honey, I do think you are brilliant, but you need a hug and a little fun!
Schopenhauer:
Schopenhauer:
April 11, 2018
Some readers seem to enjoy essays such as "On the Suffering of the World" while denouncing "On Women" completely. Of course Schopenhauer is overtly sexist but his view on femininity is a crucial part of his philosophy, so let's not ignore it simply because it's sexist. Schopenhauer's basic idea on women is that the female sex is the unaesthetic sex; they suffer but their suffering is unaesthetic and thus of little value. Schopenhauer famously regards suffering as positive and happiness as negative but it is important to note that he distinguishes between different kinds of suffering: women suffer from pains of childbirth, the caring for the child and subjection to the man, but women (the incurable philistines) are not capable of great suffering, or aesthetic suffering. The idea of aesthetic suffering seems self-contradictory to me because Schopenhauer suggests "aesthetics rests on the abolition of the will and thus the abolition of all possibility of suffering", so I think Schopenhauer might be suggesting that aesthetic suffering itself abolishes suffering? Anyway, for him, women are only capable of suffering associated with basic desire or the propagation of the human race, and are not capable of this superior category of suffering associated with the abolition of the will and the attainment of pure knowledge. This distinction between male being the aesthetic and female being the sexually desirable is nothing new or unique (ex: just contradict "Death in Venice" with "Lolita" for example), but Schopenhauer's association of this distinction with suffering is quite unique. Schopenhauer's another critique of the female sex is that they feel too much unnecessary/irrational compassion for suffering. I can imagine Schopenhauer saying to Beatrice: you stupid sentimental woman, leave Dante alone, let him suffer! Or maybe he would even criticize Jesus by associating him with femininity? Anyway, this collection of essays can serve as an introduction to Schopenhauer's philosophy, but his thoughts are quite immature and somewhat incoherent here. A 3.5 star for me.
August 4, 2019
When the shoe fits, the foot is forgotten.
Health and happiness are negative concepts: they can be defined only by negation. Just like being healthy is absence of diseases, happiness, Schopenhauer argues, must be defined by the absence of suffering.
Health and happiness are negative concepts: they can be defined only by negation. Just like being healthy is absence of diseases, happiness, Schopenhauer argues, must be defined by the absence of suffering.
July 6, 2015
there is no doubt in my mind that Arthur Schopenhauer is a genius, whatever that term may entitle.
in this book alone he foreshadowed the theory of evolution, the discovery of the conscious and subconscious mind, and had extremely beautiful texts regarding 'The suffering of the world', 'The vanity of existence' and 'on suicide'
he however had two Huge flaws that prevented me personally from enjoying his book fully:
A) his extreme self righteous vanity B) his massive almost psychopathic misogyny.
as a lot of highly intelligent, suppressed, outcast, and generally unsocial people tend to be (and these are all my personal assumptions, non of them are facts) I believe Schopenhauer simply did not think that the majority of people could conceive intelligent thought.
"how very paltry and limited the normal human intellect is, and how little lucidity there is in the human consciousness, may be judged from the fact that, despite the ephemeral brevity of human life, the uncertainty of our existence and the countless enigmas which suppress upon us from every sides, everyone does not continually and ceaselessly philosophize, but that only the rarest of exceptions do so. the rest live their lives away in this dream not very different from the animals"
how does he even know that people do not continually philosophize, because they havent written a book? because they get out of bed and go to work? because they conform to social norms? non of these things come even close to a proof, he also assumes that animals do not at all contemplate their own existence, how on earth does he know THAT? is he a scientist? has made research? if he has he hasnt mentioned anything about it here.
and this is just one example of his continuously pompous statements.
as for the misogyny which is so very ugly, I believe whole heartedly that it was directly tied with his terrible relationship with his mother and sister, his father (his idol) had committed suicide when arthur was very young, which he later discovered in a letter might have been a direct result of his mother's behavior. after his father's death, his mother had moved to a new city, opened a famous literary salon, wrote a novel, had men coming in and out of the salon and he was disgusted by how fast she had forgotten about his father. the last time he had seen her was 24 years before she died.
in his essay 'on women' he blatantly makes irrational and clearly anger driven remarks like "one needs only to see the way she is built to realize that woman is not intended for great mental or for great physical labour"
how on earth can he tell that she is not intended for great mental labour just by looking at the way she is built?
"women are suited to being the nurses and teachers of our earliest childhood precisely because they themselves are childish" and he also goes on to say that the ideal solution for female prostitution is male polygamy.
"since every man needs many women, than there could be nothing more just than that he should be free, indeed obliged, to support many women. this would also mean the restoration of woman to her rightful and natural position, the subordinate one, and the abolition of the world of the Lady"
lastly I would still say he has some incredibly wonderful lines and statements in the better part of this book, statements that were both clever and well written, and at one point fairly heartbreaking, making this book very human and vulnerable, seemingly written by somebody very lonely and unhappy comforting themselves with the most intelligent and pessimistic and consequently beautiful thoughts.
"that human life must be some kind of mistake is sufficiently proved by the simple observation that man is a compound of needs hard to satisfy;that their satisfaction achieves nothing but a painless condition in which he is only given over to boredom; and that boredom is a direct proof that existence in it's self is valueless, for boredom is nothing other than the sensation of the emptiness of existence."
in this book alone he foreshadowed the theory of evolution, the discovery of the conscious and subconscious mind, and had extremely beautiful texts regarding 'The suffering of the world', 'The vanity of existence' and 'on suicide'
he however had two Huge flaws that prevented me personally from enjoying his book fully:
A) his extreme self righteous vanity B) his massive almost psychopathic misogyny.
as a lot of highly intelligent, suppressed, outcast, and generally unsocial people tend to be (and these are all my personal assumptions, non of them are facts) I believe Schopenhauer simply did not think that the majority of people could conceive intelligent thought.
"how very paltry and limited the normal human intellect is, and how little lucidity there is in the human consciousness, may be judged from the fact that, despite the ephemeral brevity of human life, the uncertainty of our existence and the countless enigmas which suppress upon us from every sides, everyone does not continually and ceaselessly philosophize, but that only the rarest of exceptions do so. the rest live their lives away in this dream not very different from the animals"
how does he even know that people do not continually philosophize, because they havent written a book? because they get out of bed and go to work? because they conform to social norms? non of these things come even close to a proof, he also assumes that animals do not at all contemplate their own existence, how on earth does he know THAT? is he a scientist? has made research? if he has he hasnt mentioned anything about it here.
and this is just one example of his continuously pompous statements.
as for the misogyny which is so very ugly, I believe whole heartedly that it was directly tied with his terrible relationship with his mother and sister, his father (his idol) had committed suicide when arthur was very young, which he later discovered in a letter might have been a direct result of his mother's behavior. after his father's death, his mother had moved to a new city, opened a famous literary salon, wrote a novel, had men coming in and out of the salon and he was disgusted by how fast she had forgotten about his father. the last time he had seen her was 24 years before she died.
in his essay 'on women' he blatantly makes irrational and clearly anger driven remarks like "one needs only to see the way she is built to realize that woman is not intended for great mental or for great physical labour"
how on earth can he tell that she is not intended for great mental labour just by looking at the way she is built?
"women are suited to being the nurses and teachers of our earliest childhood precisely because they themselves are childish" and he also goes on to say that the ideal solution for female prostitution is male polygamy.
"since every man needs many women, than there could be nothing more just than that he should be free, indeed obliged, to support many women. this would also mean the restoration of woman to her rightful and natural position, the subordinate one, and the abolition of the world of the Lady"
lastly I would still say he has some incredibly wonderful lines and statements in the better part of this book, statements that were both clever and well written, and at one point fairly heartbreaking, making this book very human and vulnerable, seemingly written by somebody very lonely and unhappy comforting themselves with the most intelligent and pessimistic and consequently beautiful thoughts.
"that human life must be some kind of mistake is sufficiently proved by the simple observation that man is a compound of needs hard to satisfy;that their satisfaction achieves nothing but a painless condition in which he is only given over to boredom; and that boredom is a direct proof that existence in it's self is valueless, for boredom is nothing other than the sensation of the emptiness of existence."
April 24, 2020
Ο Σοπενχάουερ είναι ένας πεσιμιστής φιλόσοφος που δεν χρειάζεται ιδιαίτερες συστάσεις. Δυσκολεύτηκα ιδιαιτέρως να βαθμολογήσω γιατί από τη μία πλευρά περιλαμβάνει διεισδυτικά δοκίμια όπως το ''Περί της ματαιότητας της ύπαρξης'' που μας διδάσκει πόσο αλαζονικό είναι το οικοδόμημα της ευτυχίας, από την άλλη όμως υπάρχει το δοκίμιο ''Περί γυναικών''. Δείχνει τέτοια εμπάθεια προς το γυναικείο φύλο χαρακτηρίζοντας μας ως το ΑΝΤΙΑΙΣΘΗΤΙΚΟ ΥΠΟΔΕΕΣΤΕΡΟ φύλο που είμαστε μόνο ικανές για την αναπαραγωγή του είδους.
Μας συγκρίνει μέχρι και με θηλυκά μυρμήγκια που χάνουν τα φτερά τους όταν εγκυμονούν!
Ω λογικό να εκνευρίζομαι γιατί και εγώ είμαι ένα καχεκτικό πλάσμα με στενούς ώμους και φαρδιά λεκάνη :P
Μας συγκρίνει μέχρι και με θηλυκά μυρμήγκια που χάνουν τα φτερά τους όταν εγκυμονούν!
Ω λογικό να εκνευρίζομαι γιατί και εγώ είμαι ένα καχεκτικό πλάσμα με στενούς ώμους και φαρδιά λεκάνη :P
July 8, 2020
Este libro quizás podría ser la mejor manera para acercarse a la filosofía de Schopenhauer, su pesimismo se refleja en estos aforismos con una claridad espectacular que podrás no coincidir con su forma de ver la vida pero te los hace llegar de una forma tan bien redactada que te dejaran pensando mucho tiempo. Un libro tan corto que no por eso deja de ser una obra de arte. Me fascino.
“si nuestra existencia no tiene por fin inmediato el dolor, puede afirmarse que no tiene ninguna razón de ser en el mundo. Porque es absurdo admitir que el dolor sin término que nace de la miseria inherente a la vida y que llena el mundo, no sea más que un puro accidente y no su misma finalidad. Cierto es que cada desdicha particular parece una excepción, pero la desdicha general es la regla”
“el consuelo más eficaz en toda desgracia, en todo sufrimiento, es volver los ojos hacia los que son más desventurados que nosotros”
“si un dios ha hecho este mundo, yo no quisiera ser ese dios, la miseria del mundo me desgarraría el corazón”
“querer es esencialmente sufrir, y como vivir es querer, toda la vida es por esencia dolor, la vida del hombre no es más que una lucha por la existencia, con la certidumbre de resultar vencido”
“si nuestra existencia no tiene por fin inmediato el dolor, puede afirmarse que no tiene ninguna razón de ser en el mundo. Porque es absurdo admitir que el dolor sin término que nace de la miseria inherente a la vida y que llena el mundo, no sea más que un puro accidente y no su misma finalidad. Cierto es que cada desdicha particular parece una excepción, pero la desdicha general es la regla”
“el consuelo más eficaz en toda desgracia, en todo sufrimiento, es volver los ojos hacia los que son más desventurados que nosotros”
“si un dios ha hecho este mundo, yo no quisiera ser ese dios, la miseria del mundo me desgarraría el corazón”
“querer es esencialmente sufrir, y como vivir es querer, toda la vida es por esencia dolor, la vida del hombre no es más que una lucha por la existencia, con la certidumbre de resultar vencido”
March 20, 2021
Video Review
Please make way for the world's finest party pooper.
I think that these days people give Nietzsche too much credit and Schopenhauer too little. By way of comparison, I see some of Nietzsche's writing as a more developed yet verbose and convoluted commentary on Schopenhauer's ideas.
This book is a brilliant introduction to philosophical pessimism, as Schopenhauer's arguments are simple, effective and have withstood the test of time—not always agreeable but always understandable. I'm slightly surprised and ashamed that his 18th century views on women, though bitter given the context, are fairly balanced and timeless. I'll double-down and propose that he may even have influenced current criticisms of third-wave feminism in the last chapter, such as those by Alain Sorel, yet these are unpopular and potentially misogynistic. I think Epicurus offers better consolation for death perhaps because I don't share Schopenhauer's envy for the 'painless consciouslessness' of plants and animals. I found the arguments become less solid and interesting later in the book (such as his views on authorship), but as they are concise it is not too much of a drag.
--------------
The above was my original review, in my 2020 video review I link it back to what I've learned since from reading more books from Germany.
"You could [...] base [...] a theory that the greatest wisdom consists in enjoying the present and making this enjoyment the goal of life, because the present is all that is real and everything else is merely imaginary. But you could just as well call this mode of life the greatest folly: for that which in a moment ceases to exist, which vanishes as completely as a dream, cannot be worth any serious effort" p.17
Please make way for the world's finest party pooper.
I think that these days people give Nietzsche too much credit and Schopenhauer too little. By way of comparison, I see some of Nietzsche's writing as a more developed yet verbose and convoluted commentary on Schopenhauer's ideas.
This book is a brilliant introduction to philosophical pessimism, as Schopenhauer's arguments are simple, effective and have withstood the test of time—not always agreeable but always understandable. I'm slightly surprised and ashamed that his 18th century views on women, though bitter given the context, are fairly balanced and timeless. I'll double-down and propose that he may even have influenced current criticisms of third-wave feminism in the last chapter, such as those by Alain Sorel, yet these are unpopular and potentially misogynistic. I think Epicurus offers better consolation for death perhaps because I don't share Schopenhauer's envy for the 'painless consciouslessness' of plants and animals. I found the arguments become less solid and interesting later in the book (such as his views on authorship), but as they are concise it is not too much of a drag.
--------------
The above was my original review, in my 2020 video review I link it back to what I've learned since from reading more books from Germany.
April 12, 2011
Nihilistic and pessimistic but in the meantime deeply realistic criticism on life as a whole. Loved it!
May 2, 2012
Can't help but feel the world would have suffered a little less if Schopenhauer hadn't been in it.
June 9, 2018
Where he's good, Schopenhauer is very good (On the Suffering of the World, On Thinking for Yourself, On Philosophy and the Intellect), but where he's bad he's execrable (On Women).
Dour and pessimistic, he's the Morrissey of philosophy. All is vanity, life is short and joy is fleeting. I have to wonder if today he would be diagnosed with clinical depression, rather than the romantic melancholia of genius. So, that said, I found much in common with him, in a mordantly humourous way, as I'm inclined to a glass-half-empty view of life (much as I seek to amend that). Where I think he goes wrong, particularly so in his views upon women, is in not challenging the assumptions and cultural perspectives of his time and place. He takes these views as given and does not seem to be conscious of the possibility that the qualities he berates in woman may arise due to the rôles forced upon them by society, nor does he seem to consider that his own perspective may be skewed by the privileged position he holds in that society as a man.
Worth reading (3.5 stars if that were possible on GR), though I'm sure he would not have said the same about this review, laden as it is with plebian affectations to style, parentheses and devoid of original thought, relying instead upon a dissection of the thoughts of another.
Dour and pessimistic, he's the Morrissey of philosophy. All is vanity, life is short and joy is fleeting. I have to wonder if today he would be diagnosed with clinical depression, rather than the romantic melancholia of genius. So, that said, I found much in common with him, in a mordantly humourous way, as I'm inclined to a glass-half-empty view of life (much as I seek to amend that). Where I think he goes wrong, particularly so in his views upon women, is in not challenging the assumptions and cultural perspectives of his time and place. He takes these views as given and does not seem to be conscious of the possibility that the qualities he berates in woman may arise due to the rôles forced upon them by society, nor does he seem to consider that his own perspective may be skewed by the privileged position he holds in that society as a man.
Worth reading (3.5 stars if that were possible on GR), though I'm sure he would not have said the same about this review, laden as it is with plebian affectations to style, parentheses and devoid of original thought, relying instead upon a dissection of the thoughts of another.
February 3, 2023
Ironically a fine antidote to depression.
Read
April 12, 2020Τα κεφάλαια "Για τη δυστυχία του κόσμου", "Περί της ματαιότητας της ύπαρξης", "Περί πρωτογενούς στοχασμού" είναι εξαιρετικά δείχνοντάς σου και έναν άλλο τρόπο σκέψης πάνω την αντίληψή μας για τον άνθρωπο ως οντότητα.
Όλα καλά και όλα ωραία μέχρι που φτάνεις στο κεφάλαιο "περί γυναικών"
εκεί καταλαβαίνεις ότι μάλλον δεν τον θήλασε η μαμά του όταν ήταν μικρός.
Όλα καλά και όλα ωραία μέχρι που φτάνεις στο κεφάλαιο "περί γυναικών"
εκεί καταλαβαίνεις ότι μάλλον δεν τον θήλασε η μαμά του όταν ήταν μικρός.
August 5, 2015
I came across this book during a particularly bad spell of the black dog. I googled ‘suffering in the world why book’ and came across this and quotes related. I immediately ordered it off Amazon and thought it would be a soothing Buddhist style comfort imploring me to accept the influx of pain and suffering in reality.
I was partially right. But also very wrong.
Schopenhauer is quite a snobbish misanthrope, and I say this only in the confidence that I believe he would agree. His essay ‘On the Indestructibility of our Essential Being by Death’ was absolutely timeless and enlightening and one of the best things I have ever read, for this section alone I was tempted to give this 5 stars. As were his thoughts ‘On Thinking for Yourself’. His section ‘On Women’ however, was predictably myopic.
Nevertheless, I came away from the experience with the thrill of being able to cite his name pretentiously and the feeling of being better well-read. This book is good if:
• You are fearful/anxious of death aka oblivion, feel somewhat divorced from reality and would like to know where you fit in to it all
• Are misanthropic and can’t bear to read anything by someone who ceaselessly announces the core goodness of human nature, when all you ever see is its ugliness
• Wonder what goes through the mind of a cutthroat well-read critic when he reads your work or listens to your philosophical conjectures (see section ‘On Books and Writing’)
I was able to satisfy my curiosity in many ways, though. Some of the metaphors were particularly powerful such as the image of vegetation as aesthetically pleasing and resonating within the human spirit due to its defiance of gravity. His thoughts on the innocence of children as the reason why they perceive the beauty of things in a primal manner, due to cutting through the idiosyncrasy of what they see and straight to the genus and then the (Platonic) Idea behind it, was also sweet.
The major USP of this little book is that it is saturated in cynicism and misanthropy, which paradoxically gives it a lot of power for someone who is tired of puerile and repetitive cliché. Or maybe just tired of reading one particular type of book on psychology repeatedly (me and self-help), and wonders what to read instead.
I was partially right. But also very wrong.
Schopenhauer is quite a snobbish misanthrope, and I say this only in the confidence that I believe he would agree. His essay ‘On the Indestructibility of our Essential Being by Death’ was absolutely timeless and enlightening and one of the best things I have ever read, for this section alone I was tempted to give this 5 stars. As were his thoughts ‘On Thinking for Yourself’. His section ‘On Women’ however, was predictably myopic.
Nevertheless, I came away from the experience with the thrill of being able to cite his name pretentiously and the feeling of being better well-read. This book is good if:
• You are fearful/anxious of death aka oblivion, feel somewhat divorced from reality and would like to know where you fit in to it all
• Are misanthropic and can’t bear to read anything by someone who ceaselessly announces the core goodness of human nature, when all you ever see is its ugliness
• Wonder what goes through the mind of a cutthroat well-read critic when he reads your work or listens to your philosophical conjectures (see section ‘On Books and Writing’)
I was able to satisfy my curiosity in many ways, though. Some of the metaphors were particularly powerful such as the image of vegetation as aesthetically pleasing and resonating within the human spirit due to its defiance of gravity. His thoughts on the innocence of children as the reason why they perceive the beauty of things in a primal manner, due to cutting through the idiosyncrasy of what they see and straight to the genus and then the (Platonic) Idea behind it, was also sweet.
The major USP of this little book is that it is saturated in cynicism and misanthropy, which paradoxically gives it a lot of power for someone who is tired of puerile and repetitive cliché. Or maybe just tired of reading one particular type of book on psychology repeatedly (me and self-help), and wonders what to read instead.
July 19, 2018
This is not a book for everyone. Especially for those who believe life has a meaning and happiness is an achievable state instead of an imaginary idea. I think it is a very good book that speaks the truth that people tend to avoid on their everyday lives. Many may find his opinions to be too pessimistic but I believe he is a great writer who happened to view life and existence in a completely unique but realistic way. His chapter on women is frustrating but I enjoyed it taking into account when the book was written and Schopenhauer's personality and experiences with women.
July 22, 2022
Nunca havia me deparado com uma obra de pensamentos absurdamente ultrapassados, machistas e misóginos, apesar de já ter lido um pouco de Schopenhauer. Para minha surpresa, a leitura foi extremamente desagradável na maioria do tempo, no entanto, no início da exposição, Schopenhauer traz à tona o seu ceticismo tão comumente reconhecido, onde busca observar as dores que acometem o mundo dentro de núcleos precisos, sendo estes O Amor; A Morte; A Arte e A Moral.
Quando aborda as questões ligadas à morte, o filósofo reafirma sua tese de que "o mundo é o inferno, e os homens dividem-se em almas atormentadas e em diabos atormentadores", onde reconhece que se o hoje é mau, o porvir será pior de todos, mais que isso, acentua o eterno conflito do homem não apenas contra males abstratos, e sim, contra os outros homens, já que, "em toda parte encontra-se um adversário: a vida é uma guerra sem tréguas, e morre-se com as armas na mão", ou seja, nada de novo, apenas Schopenhauer cético.
Contudo, é quando busca falar acerca do amor, da moral e da arte que o show de horror aparece em forma de pensamentos completamente abomináveis, pois é ali que difunde a ideia da inferioridade da mulher, assim como destinando a ela as maiores baixezas. Em resumo, um copilado das falas que mais me chamaram a atenção:
"o adultério da mulher, devido às consequências que acarreta, e porque é contra a natureza, é muito mais imperdoável que o do homem";
"o que torna as mulheres particularmente aptas a cuidar, a dirigir a nossa primeira infância é o fato de elas se conservarem pueris, frívolas e de inteligência acanhada";
"são inferiores aos homens no que diz respeito à equidade, à retidão e à probidade";
"a natureza recusando-lhes a força, deu-lhes a astúcia";
"a dissimulação é inata da na mulher, tanto na mais esperta como na mais tola"
"é quase impossível encontrar uma mulher absolutamente verdadeira e sincera, desse defeito fundamental e das suas consequências nascem a falsidade, a infidelidade, a traição, a ingratidão, etc";
"as mulheres não têm nem o sentimento nem a inteligência da música, mais do que o da poesia e das artes plásticas, fingem-no por pura imitação";
"é evidente que a mulher, por temperamento, é destinada a obedecer"
Logo, foi pouca proveitosa a leitura a mim, muito bom, nota 0.
Quando aborda as questões ligadas à morte, o filósofo reafirma sua tese de que "o mundo é o inferno, e os homens dividem-se em almas atormentadas e em diabos atormentadores", onde reconhece que se o hoje é mau, o porvir será pior de todos, mais que isso, acentua o eterno conflito do homem não apenas contra males abstratos, e sim, contra os outros homens, já que, "em toda parte encontra-se um adversário: a vida é uma guerra sem tréguas, e morre-se com as armas na mão", ou seja, nada de novo, apenas Schopenhauer cético.
Contudo, é quando busca falar acerca do amor, da moral e da arte que o show de horror aparece em forma de pensamentos completamente abomináveis, pois é ali que difunde a ideia da inferioridade da mulher, assim como destinando a ela as maiores baixezas. Em resumo, um copilado das falas que mais me chamaram a atenção:
"o adultério da mulher, devido às consequências que acarreta, e porque é contra a natureza, é muito mais imperdoável que o do homem";
"o que torna as mulheres particularmente aptas a cuidar, a dirigir a nossa primeira infância é o fato de elas se conservarem pueris, frívolas e de inteligência acanhada";
"são inferiores aos homens no que diz respeito à equidade, à retidão e à probidade";
"a natureza recusando-lhes a força, deu-lhes a astúcia";
"a dissimulação é inata da na mulher, tanto na mais esperta como na mais tola"
"é quase impossível encontrar uma mulher absolutamente verdadeira e sincera, desse defeito fundamental e das suas consequências nascem a falsidade, a infidelidade, a traição, a ingratidão, etc";
"as mulheres não têm nem o sentimento nem a inteligência da música, mais do que o da poesia e das artes plásticas, fingem-no por pura imitação";
"é evidente que a mulher, por temperamento, é destinada a obedecer"
Logo, foi pouca proveitosa a leitura a mim, muito bom, nota 0.
October 27, 2014
This is very dark, and the harsh contrasts it draws between 'man' and 'brute' appear, at first, as much an indulgence of the human ego as a reflection on the human condition. Yet, Schopenhauer's essay twists and turns beautifully, working its way through a body of rhetoric (including the existential ideology of multiple creeds and cultures) to rest in the bowels of human suffering itself- effectively discrediting the assumption that our 'mortal coil' needn't be a state of suffering at all. The philosopher briefly shares thoughts on longevity, breeding, indulgence, distraction and spectacle which are eerily preemptive of a modern society that appears fixated on self-gratification, celebrity and legacy as though it might somehow cheat suffering (and inevitable death) by simply never looking mortality (or The Grim Reaper) in the eye (except where the demise of others is concerned, of course).
In light of such thoughts and reflections, Schopenhauer's call for compassion appears perfectly 'soulful' or 'divine'- yet it does not simply surmise what it is that makes human connectivity (and existence) tolerable, nay desirable, rather the philosopher effectively weighs his thoughts against examples of individual and collective human and 'brute' (or beast) experiences to illustrate his stance. In fact, his philosophical stance in this essay seems almost entirely devoid from explorations of the noumenal realm in favour of the sentient experience and, as such, it is not so much a question of 'what is suffering' that Schopenhauer is presenting here as 'why is suffering'. I found Arthur Schopnhauer's conclusions to be very enlightening.
This was a brilliant introduction to 'Studies in Pessimism' and a keen choice to follow my recent re-reading of Patrick Süskind's 'Perfume' with, I think. Perhaps I shall read the other studies as well.
In light of such thoughts and reflections, Schopenhauer's call for compassion appears perfectly 'soulful' or 'divine'- yet it does not simply surmise what it is that makes human connectivity (and existence) tolerable, nay desirable, rather the philosopher effectively weighs his thoughts against examples of individual and collective human and 'brute' (or beast) experiences to illustrate his stance. In fact, his philosophical stance in this essay seems almost entirely devoid from explorations of the noumenal realm in favour of the sentient experience and, as such, it is not so much a question of 'what is suffering' that Schopenhauer is presenting here as 'why is suffering'. I found Arthur Schopnhauer's conclusions to be very enlightening.
This was a brilliant introduction to 'Studies in Pessimism' and a keen choice to follow my recent re-reading of Patrick Süskind's 'Perfume' with, I think. Perhaps I shall read the other studies as well.
February 23, 2021
This book is a collection of 8 essays, along with some aphorisms grouped topic wise. The book having this structure, it's expected that it's going to be a mixed-bag and it is. So I'm going to rate the essays one by one.
Essays
1. On the Suffering of the World: 5
2. On the Vanity of Existence: 5
3. On the Antithesis of Thing it Itself and Appearance: 5
4. On Affirmation and Denial of the Will to Live: 4
5. On the Indestructibility of Our Essential Being by Death: 3
6. On Suicide: 2
7. On Women: 1
8. On Thinking for Yourself: 2
Aphorisms
1. On Philosophy and the Intellect: 2
2. On Aesthetics: 3
3. On Books and Writing: 2
The first 5 essays in a way sum up Schopenhauer's philosophical thoughts; moreover, it's very readable. His language is clear and concise—which is understandable because he straight-up attacks Hegel for not writing the same way later on in some of the essays. He also goes out of his way to explain his Kantian and eastern influences briefly. And he has the literary style to make it all very quotable. So the first 5 essays, especially the first 3, are highly recommended. It only goes downhill from there. I liked his aphorisms on aesthetics, but the rest are mostly meh.
Essays
1. On the Suffering of the World: 5
2. On the Vanity of Existence: 5
3. On the Antithesis of Thing it Itself and Appearance: 5
4. On Affirmation and Denial of the Will to Live: 4
5. On the Indestructibility of Our Essential Being by Death: 3
6. On Suicide: 2
7. On Women: 1
8. On Thinking for Yourself: 2
Aphorisms
1. On Philosophy and the Intellect: 2
2. On Aesthetics: 3
3. On Books and Writing: 2
The first 5 essays in a way sum up Schopenhauer's philosophical thoughts; moreover, it's very readable. His language is clear and concise—which is understandable because he straight-up attacks Hegel for not writing the same way later on in some of the essays. He also goes out of his way to explain his Kantian and eastern influences briefly. And he has the literary style to make it all very quotable. So the first 5 essays, especially the first 3, are highly recommended. It only goes downhill from there. I liked his aphorisms on aesthetics, but the rest are mostly meh.
December 19, 2021
Grande génio !!
Neste livro Arthur Schopenhauer volta a mostrar a sua visão sobre o mundo em vários temas. O amor, a morte, a arte, a moral, a religião, a política, o homem e a sociedade são temas sobre os quais deixa suas impressões. Não concordo com tudo, especialmente na parte dos relacionamentos ( raramente uma mulher gosta de homem mais baixo ou os opostos resultam kk ), mas pode-se dizer que em 90 % das coisas está mais que certo.
No mundo hipócrita que vivemos, talvez hoje este livro não fosse publicado. Com tanta mentira que o mundo sustenta este grande pensador talvez fosse cancelado, mas a verdade é que teve a ousadia de dizer aquilo que muitos sabem e não são capazes de dizer só pra não ficarem mal na foto. " Um médico vê o homem em toda a sua fraqueza, um jurista em toda a sua maldade e o teólogo em sua imbecilidade " é uma tirada muito bem metida. Chamar-lhe misógino e sexista é fácil, difícil é provar que está errado. As mulheres estão muito longe de se ter provado " iguais " aos homens. É preciso mais do que decorar o que está nos livros e passar em provas. A verdade é que o homem se desenvolve por mais tempo e atinge maiores patamares, e só um negacionista o pode negar, doa a quem doer... É a realidade.
Neste livro Arthur Schopenhauer volta a mostrar a sua visão sobre o mundo em vários temas. O amor, a morte, a arte, a moral, a religião, a política, o homem e a sociedade são temas sobre os quais deixa suas impressões. Não concordo com tudo, especialmente na parte dos relacionamentos ( raramente uma mulher gosta de homem mais baixo ou os opostos resultam kk ), mas pode-se dizer que em 90 % das coisas está mais que certo.
No mundo hipócrita que vivemos, talvez hoje este livro não fosse publicado. Com tanta mentira que o mundo sustenta este grande pensador talvez fosse cancelado, mas a verdade é que teve a ousadia de dizer aquilo que muitos sabem e não são capazes de dizer só pra não ficarem mal na foto. " Um médico vê o homem em toda a sua fraqueza, um jurista em toda a sua maldade e o teólogo em sua imbecilidade " é uma tirada muito bem metida. Chamar-lhe misógino e sexista é fácil, difícil é provar que está errado. As mulheres estão muito longe de se ter provado " iguais " aos homens. É preciso mais do que decorar o que está nos livros e passar em provas. A verdade é que o homem se desenvolve por mais tempo e atinge maiores patamares, e só um negacionista o pode negar, doa a quem doer... É a realidade.
December 6, 2014
I knew nothing of Schopenhauer when I started reading this and was hoping for some interesting insights into his original thinking.
But I found this collection of essays rather dull.
Schopenhauer writes his expostulations in a series of numbered paragraphs. Presumably, he thought he was laying out a structured argument/justification/idea but often they just read as a collection a 'similar' thoughts. His persuasion also relies too much on analogies, which whilst good at providing guidance to his thoughts don't provide the proof of his ideas that he hopes for.
In many ways his writing seemed to be like that described in the last essay in this collection - someone writing for the sake of it to fill up space.
But to give him credit, I understand that his thinking was new and appealing when he wrote, his ideas and understandings now fitting well with contemporary thought... though perhaps not his thoughts on women.
So, I'll allow this as historically interesting, but I struggled to find it of much further interest and found nothing profound or insightful.
But I found this collection of essays rather dull.
Schopenhauer writes his expostulations in a series of numbered paragraphs. Presumably, he thought he was laying out a structured argument/justification/idea but often they just read as a collection a 'similar' thoughts. His persuasion also relies too much on analogies, which whilst good at providing guidance to his thoughts don't provide the proof of his ideas that he hopes for.
In many ways his writing seemed to be like that described in the last essay in this collection - someone writing for the sake of it to fill up space.
But to give him credit, I understand that his thinking was new and appealing when he wrote, his ideas and understandings now fitting well with contemporary thought... though perhaps not his thoughts on women.
So, I'll allow this as historically interesting, but I struggled to find it of much further interest and found nothing profound or insightful.
June 23, 2012
Well, the part about life and how miserable everyone was, slave to their wants and desires, made want to push Schopenhauer off a cliff and end his suffering (and mine). But, I must admit that it was challenging, although I didn't share some of his statements. Also, some of the comparisons he uses are almost poetic – I'm especially fond of the one comparing human's attitude towards life to a child trying to blow soap bubbles.
And then the part about love, marriage and women was just unbearable. I understand he was born on the XIXth century but, please, there's a limit to how sexist you can be on an essay. I was just astounded by the amount of disrespectful and contemptuous remarks about women. Call me biased but that's the way it is.
And then the part about love, marriage and women was just unbearable. I understand he was born on the XIXth century but, please, there's a limit to how sexist you can be on an essay. I was just astounded by the amount of disrespectful and contemptuous remarks about women. Call me biased but that's the way it is.
January 6, 2025
Started out with a bang, with the book's namesake essay. I've often thought that our world could be considered a kind of Hell! It was super cool how much my own philosophy aligned with his.
Then, it got more difficult to follow and dull for me. But it picked up at certain points. "On Suicide" was awesome, and "On Women" was downright hilarious! "On Books and Writing" was especially interesting. I didn't always love the writing or agree with his ideas. I can see how the book might actually make people angry. But I legitimately had fun reading this somewhat miserable book!
Then, it got more difficult to follow and dull for me. But it picked up at certain points. "On Suicide" was awesome, and "On Women" was downright hilarious! "On Books and Writing" was especially interesting. I didn't always love the writing or agree with his ideas. I can see how the book might actually make people angry. But I legitimately had fun reading this somewhat miserable book!
Want to read
July 30, 2007everybody loves a pessimist
October 30, 2024
Me impactó profundamente, ese estilo directo y sin concesiones resuena con la crudeza de la realidad. Aunque ya había leído de Arthur "El arte de ser feliz", esta obra me pareció mil veces más reveladora en su visión pesimista. Schopenhauer sostiene que el sufrimiento es inherente a la vida, una afirmación que plantea una pregunta perturbadora: ¿cómo puede un Dios haber creado un mundo tan lleno de desgracias? Prefiero no ser ese Dios, ya que es desgarrador contemplar las miserias que enfrentamos.
Schopenhauer manifiesta que desde el momento en que nacemos, estamos condenados a la muerte, y esa certeza oscurece cualquier destello de felicidad. La búsqueda de la felicidad a menudo se presenta como un objetivo claro y alcanzable en la vida. Sin embargo, desde su perspectiva pesimista, esta búsqueda puede considerarse un espejismo, que significa que, aunque la sociedad nos impulsa a perseguir momentos de alegría y satisfacción, estos momentos son solo transitorios y, en última instancia puede haber un trasfondo de dolor o sufrimiento.
Schopenhauer sugiere que todo lo que vivimos es una ilusión. La realidad con sus crueldades y sufrimientos es la verdadera miseria del ser humano.
Este no es un libro para todos, para quienes creen que la vida tiene un sentido, y que la felicidad se encuentra en vivir en armonía con la naturaleza.
Pienso que esta obra quizás se asemeja más a su filosofía que cualquier otra. Me gustó porque te lleva a una profunda introspección sobre la naturaleza de la existencia y el sufrimiento humano.
4.5
Schopenhauer manifiesta que desde el momento en que nacemos, estamos condenados a la muerte, y esa certeza oscurece cualquier destello de felicidad. La búsqueda de la felicidad a menudo se presenta como un objetivo claro y alcanzable en la vida. Sin embargo, desde su perspectiva pesimista, esta búsqueda puede considerarse un espejismo, que significa que, aunque la sociedad nos impulsa a perseguir momentos de alegría y satisfacción, estos momentos son solo transitorios y, en última instancia puede haber un trasfondo de dolor o sufrimiento.
Schopenhauer sugiere que todo lo que vivimos es una ilusión. La realidad con sus crueldades y sufrimientos es la verdadera miseria del ser humano.
Este no es un libro para todos, para quienes creen que la vida tiene un sentido, y que la felicidad se encuentra en vivir en armonía con la naturaleza.
Pienso que esta obra quizás se asemeja más a su filosofía que cualquier otra. Me gustó porque te lleva a una profunda introspección sobre la naturaleza de la existencia y el sufrimiento humano.
4.5
October 13, 2025
memorable, ★★★★½
citas y/o fragmentos subrayados en mi kindle:
• “[...] la vida del hombre es un perpetuo combate, no sólo contra males abstractos, la miseria o el hastío, sino contra los demás hombres. En todas partes se encuentra un adversario. La vida es una guerra sin tregua, y se muere con las armas en la mano.”
• “A veces paréceme que la manera conveniente de saludarse de hombre a hombre, en vez de decir señor, sir, etc., pudiera ser: «Compañero de sufrimientos o compañero de miserias». Por extraño que parezca esto, la expresión es justa y recuerda la necesidad de la tolerancia, de la paciencia, de la indulgencia, del amor al prójimo, sin el cual ninguno podría pasar, y del que, por consiguiente, cada uno es deudor de algo.”
• “Al paso que la primera mitad de la vida no es más que una infatigable aspiración hacia la felicidad, la segunda mitad, por el contrario, está dominada por un doloroso sentimiento de temor, porque entonces se acaba por darse cuenta más o menos clara de que toda felicidad no es más que una quimera, y sólo el sufrimiento es real. Por eso los espíritus sensatos más que a los vivos goces aspiran a una ausencia de penas, a un estado invulnerable en cierto modo.”
• “Nada hay fijo en esta vida fugaz: ¡ni dolor infinito; ni alegría eterna; ni impresión permanente; ni entusiasmo duradero; ni resolución elevada que pueda persistir la vida entera! Todo se disuelve en el torrente de los años.”
• “La felicidad está siempre en lo futuro o en lo pasado, y lo presente es cual una nubecilla obscura que el viento pasea sobre un llano alumbrado por el sol. Delante y detrás de ella todo es luminoso, sólo ella proyecta siempre una sombra.”
• “Si la miseria es el aguijón perpetuo para el pueblo, el hastío lo es para las personas acomodadas.”
• “El hastío no es un mal despreciable; ¡qué desesperación concluye por pintar en el rostro! Él es quien hace que los hombres, que se aman tan poco entre sí, se busquen sin embargo unos a otros tan locamente: es la fuente del instinto social.”
• “La vida del hombre oscila como un péndulo entre el dolor y el hastío.”
• “Sentimos el dolor, pero no la ausencia de dolor; sentimos el cuidado, pero no la falta de cuidados; el temor, pero no la seguridad. Sentimos el deseo y el anhelo, como sentimos el hambre y la sed: pero apenas se ven colmados, todo se acabó, como una vez que se traga el bocado cesa de existir para nuestra sensación. Todo el tiempo que poseemos estos tres grandes bienes de la vida, que son salud, juventud y libertad, no tenemos conciencia de ellos. No los apreciamos sino después de haberlos perdido, porque también son bienes negativos. No nos percatamos de los días felices de nuestra vida pasada hasta que los han sustituido días de dolor…”
• “Las horas transcurren tanto más veloces cuanto más agradables son; tanto más lentas cuanto más tristes, porque no es el goce lo positivo, sino el dolor, y por eso se deja sentir la presencia de éste. El aburrimiento nos da la noción del tiempo y la distracción nos la quita.”
• “Voltaire, el feliz Voltaire, a pesar de lo favorecido que fue por la Naturaleza, piensa como yo cuando dice: «La felicidad no es más que un sueño; sólo el dolor es real».”
• “Este mundo es campo de matanza donde seres ansiosos y atormentados no pueden subsistir más que devorándose los unos a los otros. Donde todo animal de rapiña es tumba viva de otros mil, y no sostiene su vida sino a expensas de una larga serie de martirios; donde la capacidad de sufrir crece en proporción de la inteligencia, y alcanza, por consiguiente, en el hombre su grado más alto.”
• “Querer es esencialmente sufrir, y como vivir es querer, toda vida es por esencia dolor. Cuanto más elevado es el ser, más sufre… La vida del hombre no es más que una lucha por la existencia, con la certidumbre de resultar vencido…”
• “Es una historia natural del dolor, que se resume así: querer sin motivo, sufrir siempre, luchar de continuo y después morir… Y así sucesivamente por los siglos de los siglos, hasta que nuestro planeta se haga trizas.”
citas y/o fragmentos subrayados en mi kindle:
• “[...] la vida del hombre es un perpetuo combate, no sólo contra males abstractos, la miseria o el hastío, sino contra los demás hombres. En todas partes se encuentra un adversario. La vida es una guerra sin tregua, y se muere con las armas en la mano.”
• “A veces paréceme que la manera conveniente de saludarse de hombre a hombre, en vez de decir señor, sir, etc., pudiera ser: «Compañero de sufrimientos o compañero de miserias». Por extraño que parezca esto, la expresión es justa y recuerda la necesidad de la tolerancia, de la paciencia, de la indulgencia, del amor al prójimo, sin el cual ninguno podría pasar, y del que, por consiguiente, cada uno es deudor de algo.”
• “Al paso que la primera mitad de la vida no es más que una infatigable aspiración hacia la felicidad, la segunda mitad, por el contrario, está dominada por un doloroso sentimiento de temor, porque entonces se acaba por darse cuenta más o menos clara de que toda felicidad no es más que una quimera, y sólo el sufrimiento es real. Por eso los espíritus sensatos más que a los vivos goces aspiran a una ausencia de penas, a un estado invulnerable en cierto modo.”
• “Nada hay fijo en esta vida fugaz: ¡ni dolor infinito; ni alegría eterna; ni impresión permanente; ni entusiasmo duradero; ni resolución elevada que pueda persistir la vida entera! Todo se disuelve en el torrente de los años.”
• “La felicidad está siempre en lo futuro o en lo pasado, y lo presente es cual una nubecilla obscura que el viento pasea sobre un llano alumbrado por el sol. Delante y detrás de ella todo es luminoso, sólo ella proyecta siempre una sombra.”
• “Si la miseria es el aguijón perpetuo para el pueblo, el hastío lo es para las personas acomodadas.”
• “El hastío no es un mal despreciable; ¡qué desesperación concluye por pintar en el rostro! Él es quien hace que los hombres, que se aman tan poco entre sí, se busquen sin embargo unos a otros tan locamente: es la fuente del instinto social.”
• “La vida del hombre oscila como un péndulo entre el dolor y el hastío.”
• “Sentimos el dolor, pero no la ausencia de dolor; sentimos el cuidado, pero no la falta de cuidados; el temor, pero no la seguridad. Sentimos el deseo y el anhelo, como sentimos el hambre y la sed: pero apenas se ven colmados, todo se acabó, como una vez que se traga el bocado cesa de existir para nuestra sensación. Todo el tiempo que poseemos estos tres grandes bienes de la vida, que son salud, juventud y libertad, no tenemos conciencia de ellos. No los apreciamos sino después de haberlos perdido, porque también son bienes negativos. No nos percatamos de los días felices de nuestra vida pasada hasta que los han sustituido días de dolor…”
• “Las horas transcurren tanto más veloces cuanto más agradables son; tanto más lentas cuanto más tristes, porque no es el goce lo positivo, sino el dolor, y por eso se deja sentir la presencia de éste. El aburrimiento nos da la noción del tiempo y la distracción nos la quita.”
• “Voltaire, el feliz Voltaire, a pesar de lo favorecido que fue por la Naturaleza, piensa como yo cuando dice: «La felicidad no es más que un sueño; sólo el dolor es real».”
• “Este mundo es campo de matanza donde seres ansiosos y atormentados no pueden subsistir más que devorándose los unos a los otros. Donde todo animal de rapiña es tumba viva de otros mil, y no sostiene su vida sino a expensas de una larga serie de martirios; donde la capacidad de sufrir crece en proporción de la inteligencia, y alcanza, por consiguiente, en el hombre su grado más alto.”
• “Querer es esencialmente sufrir, y como vivir es querer, toda vida es por esencia dolor. Cuanto más elevado es el ser, más sufre… La vida del hombre no es más que una lucha por la existencia, con la certidumbre de resultar vencido…”
• “Es una historia natural del dolor, que se resume así: querer sin motivo, sufrir siempre, luchar de continuo y después morir… Y así sucesivamente por los siglos de los siglos, hasta que nuestro planeta se haga trizas.”
July 28, 2014
Pensaba que sería complicadisímo leer a Schopenhauer y sinceramente no lo fue tanto, tal vez porque éste libro es una especie de compilado de sus escritos, no sé que tan condensado lo hayan hecho ya que no había leído antes nada de él.
El libro comenzó y sentía que lo amaba, para ser filosofía lo sentí sencillo, con palabras fáciles y eso se agradece, sin embargo, todo se derrumbó cuando llegué al apartado sobre La mujer,(Es la mujer un animal al que es necesario pegar, alimentar bien y encerrar. Deberían tan sólo ocupase de su casa. Debería alimentárselas bien, pero no habría que permitirles mezclarse en sociedad. Y si bien deberían ser instruidas en religión, deberían ignorar la poesía, la política, y no leer más libros que de oraciones y de cocina...), comprendo que el tiempo en el que se encontraba es totalmente diferente al actual, las condiciones de vida han cambiado y sin duda evolucionado pero aún así me cuesta mucho trabajo emitir un juicio objetivo.
En pocas palabras, lo odié, me sentí decepcionada y me molestaron muchísimo sus comentarios tan misóginos, me sentí tan frustrada que todo lo bueno que había encontrado no fue suficiente para contrarrestar esas emociones que me dejó.
El libro comenzó y sentía que lo amaba, para ser filosofía lo sentí sencillo, con palabras fáciles y eso se agradece, sin embargo, todo se derrumbó cuando llegué al apartado sobre La mujer,(Es la mujer un animal al que es necesario pegar, alimentar bien y encerrar. Deberían tan sólo ocupase de su casa. Debería alimentárselas bien, pero no habría que permitirles mezclarse en sociedad. Y si bien deberían ser instruidas en religión, deberían ignorar la poesía, la política, y no leer más libros que de oraciones y de cocina...), comprendo que el tiempo en el que se encontraba es totalmente diferente al actual, las condiciones de vida han cambiado y sin duda evolucionado pero aún así me cuesta mucho trabajo emitir un juicio objetivo.
En pocas palabras, lo odié, me sentí decepcionada y me molestaron muchísimo sus comentarios tan misóginos, me sentí tan frustrada que todo lo bueno que había encontrado no fue suficiente para contrarrestar esas emociones que me dejó.
August 3, 2016
I read this in the course of two or three subway trips. I felt in agreement with some things, especially in how much I agree that a better life is achieved by eschewing what hurts you; however the last two or three chapters are a textbook on male sexism of the early 19th century (which makes a lot of sense considering Schopenhauer's bio). I understant that zeitgeist must be taken under consideration when reading, but this was beyond what I could stand.
January 27, 2020
Ενα καταπληκτικό δοκίμιο
January 24, 2021
آقای شوپنهاور، چرا اینقدرغمگین بودی؟
July 22, 2022
To be read slowly and with patience. Quite an amusing read. Schopenhauer seems to have been a man filled with bitterness about existence and also an incredible self confidence. Probably a good insight into the thought of Schoperhauer - even though I know basically nothing about his philosophy except what I read in this book.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 317 reviews