Arthur Schopenhauer
Religion
UUID: 53a94740-e9f0-11e5-9e40-0f7870795abd
This ebook was created with StreetLib Write (http://write.streetlib.com)by Simplicissimus Book Farm
Table of contents
Prefatory Note
Religion. a Dialogue.
A Few Words on Pantheism.
On Books and Reading.
Physiognomy.
Psychological Observations.
The Christian System.
Prefatory Note
Schopenhauer
is one of the few philosophers who can be generally understood
without a commentary. All his theories claim to be drawn direct from
the facts, to be suggested by observation, and to interpret the world
as it is; and whatever view he takes, he is constant in his appeal to
the experience of common life. This characteristic endows his style
with a freshness and vigor which would be difficult to match in the
philosophical writing of any country, and impossible in that of
Germany. If it were asked whether there were any circumstances apart
from heredity, to which he owed his mental habit, the answer might be
found in the abnormal character of his early education, his
acquaintance with the world rather than with books, the extensive
travels of his boyhood, his ardent pursuit of knowledge for its own
sake and without regard to the emoluments and endowments of learning.
He was trained in realities even more than in ideas; and hence he is
original, forcible, clear, an enemy of all philosophic indefiniteness
and obscurity; so that it may well be said of him, in the words of a
writer in the Revue
Contemporaine, ce n’est pas un philosophe comme les autres, c’est
un philosophe qui a vu le monde.It
is not my purpose, nor would it be possible within the limits of a
prefatory note, to attempt an account of Schopenhauer’s philosophy,
to indicate its sources, or to suggest or rebut the objections which
may be taken to it. M. Ribot, in his excellent little book,
[Footnote: La
Philosophie de Schopenhauer,
par Th. Ribot.] has done all that is necessary in this direction. But
the essays here presented need a word of explanation. It should be
observed, and Schopenhauer himself is at pains to point out, that his
system is like a citadel with a hundred gates: at whatever point you
take it up, wherever you make your entrance, you are on the road to
the center. In this respect his writings resemble a series of essays
composed in support of a single thesis; a circumstance which led him
to insist, more emphatically even than most philosophers, that for a
proper understanding of his system it was necessary to read every
line he had written. Perhaps it would be more correct to describe
Die Welt als Wille und Vorstellung
as his main thesis, and his other treatises as merely corollary to
it. The essays in this volume form part of the corollary; they are
taken from a collection published towards the close of Schopenhauer’s
life, and by him entitled
Parerga und Paralipomena,
as being in the nature of surplusage and illustrative of his main
position. They are by far the most popular of his works, and since
their first publication in 1851, they have done much to build up his
fame. Written so as to be intelligible enough in themselves, the
tendency of many of them is towards the fundamental idea on which his
system is based. It may therefore be convenient to summarize that
idea in a couple of sentences; more especially as Schopenhauer
sometimes writes as if his advice had been followed and his readers
were acquainted with the whole of his work.All
philosophy is in some sense the endeavor to find a unifying
principle, to discover the most general conception underlying the
whole field of nature and of knowledge. By one of those bold
generalizations which occasionally mark a real advance in Science,
Schopenhauer conceived this unifying principle, this underlying
unity, to consist in something analogous to that
will which
self-consciousness reveals to us.
Will is, according
to him, the fundamental reality of the world, the thing-in-itself;
and its objectivation is what is presented in phenomena. The struggle
of the will to realize itself evolves the organism, which in its turn
evolves intelligence as the servant of the will. And in practical
life the antagonism between the will and the intellect arises from
the fact that the former is the metaphysical substance, the latter
something accidental and secondary. And further, will is
desire, that is to
say, need of something; hence need and pain are what is positive in
the world, and the only possible happiness is a negation, a
renunciation of the
will to live.It
is instructive to note, as M. Ribot points out, that in finding the
origin of all things, not in intelligence, as some of his
predecessors in philosophy had done, but in will, or the force of
nature, from which all phenomena have developed, Schopenhauer was
anticipating something of the scientific spirit of the nineteenth
century. To this it may be added that in combating the method of
Fichte and Hegel, who spun a system out of abstract ideas, and in
discarding it for one based on observation and experience,
Schopenhauer can be said to have brought down philosophy from heaven
to earth.In
Schopenhauer’s view the various forms of Religion are no less a
product of human ingenuity than Art or Science. He holds, in effect,
that all religions take their rise in the desire to explain the
world; and that, in regard to truth and error, they differ, in the
main, not by preaching monotheism polytheism or pantheism, but in so
far as they recognize pessimism or optimism as the true description
of life. Hence any religion which looked upon the world as being
radically evil appealed to him as containing an indestructible
element of truth. I have endeavored to present his view of two of the
great religions of the world in the extract which concludes this
volume, and to which I have given the title of
The Christian System.
The tenor of it is to show that, however little he may have been in
sympathy with the supernatural element, he owed much to the moral
doctrines of Christianity and of Buddhism, between which he traced
great resemblance. In the following
Dialogue he applies
himself to a discussion of the practical efficacy of religious forms;
and though he was an enemy of clericalism, his choice of a method
which allows both the affirmation and the denial of that efficacy to
be presented with equal force may perhaps have been directed by the
consciousness that he could not side with either view to the
exclusion of the other. In any case his practical philosophy was
touched with the spirit of Christianity. It was more than artistic
enthusiasm which led him in profound admiration to the Madonna di San
Sisto:Sie
trägt zur Welt ihn, und er schaut entsetztIn
ihrer Gräu’l chaotische Verwirrung,In
ihres Tobens wilde Raserei,In
ihres Treibens nie geheilte Thorheit,In
ihrer Quaalen nie gestillten Schmerz;Entsetzt:
doch strahlet Rub’ and ZuversichtUnd
Siegesglanz sein Aug’, verkündigendSchon
der Erlösung ewige gewissheit.Pessimism
is commonly and erroneously supposed to be the distinguishing feature
of Schopenhauer’s system. It is right to remember that the same
fundamental view of the world is presented by Christianity, to say
nothing of Oriental religions.That
Schopenhauer conceives life as an evil is a deduction, and possibly a
mistaken deduction, from his metaphysical theory. Whether his scheme
of things is correct or not — and it shares the common fate of all
metaphysical systems in being unverifiable, and to that extent
unprofitable — he will in the last resort have made good his claim
to be read by his insight into the varied needs of human life. It may
be that a future age will consign his metaphysics to the
philosophical lumber-room; but he is a literary artist as well as a
philosopher, and he can make a bid for fame in either capacity. What
is remarked with much truth of many another writer, that he suggests
more than he achieves, is in the highest degree applicable to
Schopenhauer; and his
obiter dicta, his
sayings by the way, will always find an audience.
Religion. a Dialogue.
Demopheles.
Between ourselves, my dear fellow, I don’t care about the way you
sometimes have of exhibiting your talent for philosophy; you make
religion a subject for sarcastic remarks, and even for open
ridicule. Every one thinks his religion sacred, and therefore you
ought to respect it.Philalethes. That doesn’t follow! I
don’t see why, because other people are simpletons, I should have
any regard for a pack of lies. I respect truth everywhere, and so I
can’t respect what is opposed to it. My maxim isVigeat veritas et pereat mundus, like
the lawyers’Fiat justitia et pereat
mundus. Every profession ought to have an
analogous advice.Demopheles. Then I suppose doctors
should sayFiant pilulae et pereat
mundus— there wouldn’t be much difficulty about
that!Philalethes. Heaven forbid! You must
take everythingcum grano salis.Demopheles. Exactly; that’s why I want
you to take religioncum grano salis. I want you to see that one must meet the requirements of
the people according to the measure of their comprehension. Where
you have masses of people of crude susceptibilities and clumsy
intelligence, sordid in their pursuits and sunk in drudgery,
religion provides the only means of proclaiming and making them
feel the hight import of life. For the average man takes an
interest, primarily, in nothing but what will satisfy his physical
needs and hankerings, and beyond this, give him a little amusement
and pastime. Founders of religion and philosophers come into the
world to rouse him from his stupor and point to the lofty meaning
of existence; philosophers for the few, the emancipated, founders
of religion for the many, for humanity at large. For, as your
friend Plato has said, the multitude can’t be philosophers, and you
shouldn’t forget that. Religion is the metaphysics of the masses;
by all means let them keep it: let it therefore command external
respect, for to discredit it is to take it away. Just as they have
popular poetry, and the popular wisdom of proverbs, so they must
have popular metaphysics too: for mankind absolutely needsan interpretation of life; and this,
again, must be suited to popular comprehension. Consequently, this
interpretation is always an allegorical investiture of the truth:
and in practical life and in its effects on the feelings, that is
to say, as a rule of action and as a comfort and consolation in
suffering and death, it accomplishes perhaps just as much as the
truth itself could achieve if we possessed it. Don’t take offense
at its unkempt, grotesque and apparently absurd form; for with your
education and learning, you have no idea of the roundabout ways by
which people in their crude state have to receive their knowledge
of deep truths. The various religions are only various forms in
which the truth, which taken by itself is above their
comprehension, is grasped and realized by the masses; and truth
becomes inseparable from these forms. Therefore, my dear sir, don’t
take it amiss if I say that to make a mockery of these forms is
both shallow and unjust.Philalethes. But isn’t it every bit as
shallow and unjust to demand that there shall be no other system of
metaphysics but this one, cut out as it is to suit the requirements
and comprehension of the masses? that its doctrine shall be the
limit of human speculation, the standard of all thought, so that
the metaphysics of the few, the emancipated, as you call them, must
be devoted only to confirming, strengthening, and explaining the
metaphysics of the masses? that the highest powers of human
intelligence shall remain unused and undeveloped, even be nipped in
the bud, in order that their activity may not thwart the popular
metaphysics? And isn’t this just the very claim which religion sets
up? Isn’t it a little too much to have tolerance and delicate
forbearance preached by what is intolerance and cruelty itself?
Think of the heretical tribunals, inquisitions, religious wars,
crusades, Socrates’ cup of poison, Bruno’s and Vanini’s death in
the flames! Is all this to-day quite a thing of the past? How can
genuine philosophical effort, sincere search after truth, the
noblest calling of the noblest men, be let and hindered more
completely than by a conventional system of metaphysics enjoying a
State monopoly, the principles of which are impressed into every
head in earliest youth, so earnestly, so deeply, and so firmly,
that, unless the mind is miraculously elastic, they remain
indelible. In this way the groundwork of all healthy reason is once
for all deranged; that is to say, the capacity for original thought
and unbiased judgment, which is weak enough in itself, is, in
regard to those subjects to which it might be applied, for ever
paralyzed and ruined.Demopheles.Which means, I suppose,
that people have arrived at a conviction which they won’t give up
in order to embrace yours instead.Philalethes. Ah! if it were only a
conviction based on insight. Then one could bring arguments to
bear, and the battle would be fought with equal weapons. But
religions admittedly appeal, not to conviction as the result of
argument, but to belief as demanded by revelation. And as the
capacity for believing is strongest in childhood, special care is
taken to make sure of this tender age. This has much more to do
with the doctrines of belief taking root than threats and reports
of miracles. If, in early childhood, certain fundamental views and
doctrines are paraded with unusual solemnity, and an air of the
greatest earnestness never before visible in anything else; if, at
the same time, the possibility of a doubt about them be completely
passed over, or touched upon only to indicate that doubt is the
first step to eternal perdition, the resulting impression will be
so deep that, as a rule, that is, in almost every case, doubt about
them will be almost as impossible as doubt about one’s own
existence. Hardly one in ten thousand will have the strength of
mind to ask himself seriously and earnestly — is that true? To call
such as can do it strong minds,esprits
forts, is a description more apt than is
generally supposed. But for the ordinary mind there is nothing so
absurd or revolting but what, if inculcated in that way, the
strongest belief in it will strike root. If, for example, the
killing of a heretic or infidel were essential to the future
salvation of his soul, almost every one would make it the chief
event of his life, and in dying would draw consolation and strength
from the remembrance that he had succeeded. As a matter of fact,
almost every Spaniard in days gone by used to look upon anauto da feas the most pious of all
acts and one most agreeable to God. A parallel to this may be found
in the way in which the Thugs (a religious sect in India,
suppressed a short time ago by the English, who executed numbers of
them) express their sense of religion and their veneration for the
goddess Kali; they take every opportunity of murdering their
friends and traveling companions, with the object of getting
possession of their goods, and in the serious conviction that they
are thereby doing a praiseworthy action, conducive to their eternal
welfare. [Footnote: Cf. Illustrations of the history and practice
of the Thugs, London, 1837; also [...]