John Vespasian

In the philosophy of Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860), we find a unique combination of realism and empathy. His books show that Schopenhauer was fully conscious of the advantages of industrial societies. They offer individuals far more chances than agrarian, immobile, medieval structures.
At the same time, Schopenhauer was aware that perfection cannot be expected from any justice system. Judges and juries make mistakes, and corruption and incompetence play a role in some cases.
Even with hard work and the best intentions, you may prove extraordinarily unlucky, suffer a random accident, and lose your savings and your health. Indeed, justice isn’t guaranteed but we should remain grateful for the opportunities offered by modern society.
https://johnvespasian.com/schopenhauer-and-the-idea-of-justice/

According to most philosophy books, Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860) was profoundly pessimistic. However, when you look into the details of his life and his works, you will see that the truth goes in the opposite direction.
Historians tell us that Schopenhauer was confronted with a series of personal tragedies that rendered him pessimistic, but is this really true?
Indeed, his father passed away when Arthur Schopenhauer was just seventeen. That’s an early death by any standards, but not an unheard tragedy.
Let us not forget that Schopenhauer received from his father an inheritance that enabled him to live without ever working. I do not know many people that are placed in such a favourable financial situation when they are just seventeen.
I am sure that Arthur Schopenhauer would have preferred that his father lived for another three decades, but that’s life. It gives you good cards and bad cards, and demands you to play the game right away. There is not much point in complaining.
One thing is sure when speaking about Schopenhauer. He is not someone that had to face terrible financial struggles. I don’t know why some biographers would invent such nonsense. The truth is that Schopenhauer inherited a sizeable share package in his father’s company. The shares threw an annual dividend that is equivalent to forty thousand USD in today’s terms.
https://johnvespasian.com/schopenhauers-pessimism-what-it-is-and-what-its-not/

The philosophy of Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860) places history on a secondary plane. Schopenhauer didn’t give history a central role because he did not consider that humanity should achieve any goal beyond the happiness of the individual.
Schopenhauer believed that an eternal life force (“the will”) drives all creatures towards self-preservation and reproduction, but the influence of the will doesn’t mean that society must go in a particular direction.
According to Schopenhauer, the events in the world are a perpetual manifestation of the will, but the results are not easy to foresee. The will can lead to pleasure and happiness, but also to conflict, suffering, and pointless pursuit of power.
For this reason, Schopenhauer rejected the notion of linear progress in history. History can meander from good to worse, and then back to excellent. It is not leading to a particular goal, destination or achievement. It’s the result of the actions of large numbers of people, each pursuing his own happiness.
https://johnvespasian.com/schopenhauer-and-the-philosophy-of-history/

The reflections of Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860) are to be found in his work “The world as will and representation.” I consider equally interesting the observations contained in his “Aphorisms on the art of living,” published in 1851.
In contrast to Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831), Schopenhauer is not a philosopher of history. He didn’t develop an all-inclusive vision of history nor theorised about the end of times.
He did not regard the course of history as one unequivocal path pointing into a single direction. There is no single destiny where humanity is headed. History is made by people’s choices every single day.
The will (which I translate as “life force”) influences how a man or woman makes decisions; however, the will is not pushing people right or left. It is not exercising overwhelming power to the extent that each person can say “I could not help it.”
Schopenhauer declines presenting history as an imposition of destiny. Conversely, he underlines the importance of how a human being behaves over time. Life is essentially temporary. Every success and possession is naturally limited.
https://johnvespasian.com/schopenhauer-and-the-philosophy-of-time/

Happy people do not waste their time telling the world how happy they are, and Taoists are not an exception. Neither Lao-Tzu, Yang-Tzu or Chuang-Tzu made any effort to gain adepts to their philosophy. They simply wrote down or dictated their insights, making them available.
If you want to adopt their ideas, or some of them, great; and if you don’t, it is also great. Taoists don’t fundamentally care if the rest of humanity goes another way. They acknowledge each person’s freedom to choose his own path, and they respect it.
Why is the Taoist approach to happiness so intriguing? Why are people curious about the Tao Te Ching, considering that it was written in the 6th century BC?
Because of the serenity that Taoists exude. Because they are able to stay calm in situations where everybody else is falling prey to panic. Because people want to learn to stay effective in the face of setbacks and social pressure.
Taoist happiness is based on effective energy utilisation. For other cultures, this concept is difficult to understand because of their emphasis on doing something at all costs. When they pick up a goal, they assume that continued action is the best method for achieving it. In contrast, Taoists consider doing and not doing equally important.
https://johnvespasian.com/the-taoist-approach-to-happiness/

It was not long ago that universal history used to be part of the curriculum in secondary schools. A solid understanding of the key historical periods, their ideas and leading figures was a precondition for graduation.
Students were required to grasp the historical sequence that began with Ancient Mesopotamia and Egypt, Ancient Greece and Rome, the Middle Ages, the Renaissance, and so forth.
On the one hand, the study of history helps us place things in perspective, and on the other hand, it enables us to prevent repeating the mistakes made in the past. I regard it as naive to want to grasp the lessons from history without having gained a solid overview of the timeline.
Without historical perspective, nobody can understand the events taking place today, and without understanding, it is not possible to choose the correct course of action; no wonder that, in view of the diminishing knowledge of history, people keep repeating the same mistakes.
Each historical period is dominated by a particular doctrine or philosophy. It also encompasses a concept of happiness that drives people to act in a certain way. That explains why people in Ancient Greece undertook bold commercial expeditions, and people in the Middle Ages rarely ventured out of their village.
https://johnvespasian.com/the-taoist-path-to-happiness/

The desire to get something for nothing is a constant in all cultures and historical periods. To a large extent, mythology is derived from this desire. People make themselves believe that, if they perform a magical ritual, some divinity will assist them in getting something for nothing. When approaching Taoism for the first time, beginners are in danger of falling prey to the delusion of getting something for nothing. Why? Because, although Lao-Tzu emphasised not doing as a key element of his philosophy, Taoists seem to lead remarkably effective lifestyles. To prevent misunderstandings, this paradox requires strong warnings from my side. I do not want readers to regard Taoism as a form of magic that can deliver magnificent results without any thinking, learning or action. Chapter 48 of the Tao Te Ching stands at the root of all false hopes created by Taoism. It calls for reducing the scope of our action, day by day, until very little or nothing is left. Similarly, it praises non-action as the supreme form of action and ends by saying that we can achieve our goals by doing nothing. No wonder that, if beginners take those words literally, they feel entitled to expect wonders without effort. Did Lao-Tzu not promise that we can get whatever we want without having to study, make plans, and implement every step carefully? In fact, that’s not what the Tao Te Ching means. Lao-Tzu’s words need to be interpreted by placing them in context. They should not be taken literally, as thought they were prophesies. I cannot warn people enough against taking Taoist quotes out of context. https://johnvespasian.com/warnings-about-the-taoist-idea-of-happiness/

In contrast to other philosophies or religions, Taoists do not regard happiness as a goal. Why? Because they view happiness as a side effect of leading a virtuous life, not as a goal in itself.
Neither Lao-Tzu, Yang-Tzu or Chuang-Tzu employed the term “the pursuit of happiness” in their writings. They would have found such formulation incomprehensible.
The fact that Taoists do not pursue happiness does not mean that they do not consider it important. On the contrary, every piece of advice given by Taoist masters aims, indirectly, to the achievement of happiness.
However, I must underline the word “indirect.” All ancient Chinese Taoist texts refrain from promising happiness. Their avowed objective is the alignment of one’s actions with the Tao under the assumption that such an alignment will automatically lead to happiness.
In his works “Nicomachean Ethics” and “Eudemian Ethics,” Aristotle (384-322 BC) ended up designing a path to happiness based on the same intellectual equation.
If we do what’s needed, ethically and strategically, we’ll get to a point where happiness is automatically achieved, Aristotle argued. Lao-Tzu would have agreed with Aristotle’s formula, but not with its implementation. Why not? Because the concept of virtue in Aristotle does not match the Tao Te Ching.
https://johnvespasian.com/why-taoists-do-not-pursue-happiness-directly/

Today’s mainstream philosophy constitutes the opposite of the Taoist idea of happiness. Why? Because today’s dominant beliefs are hardly reconcilable with the Tao, as depicted in the Tao Te Ching.
What do I mean when I say “today’s dominant beliefs”? On the one hand, the idea that everything is relative, that there are no universal moral prescriptions, and that nobody can reliably forecast the long-term effects of one’s decisions.
On the other hand, the belief that we should set objectives for ourselves and pursue them relentlessly, day after day. This belief goes hand in hand with making detailed plans, so that we can carry them out and constantly measure our progress.
Not everybody subscribes to the beliefs that I have outlined, but many people do, and few will find them questionable, false or ethically wrong. I am not aware of statistical measurements proving the prevalence of these beliefs, but I see them at work in my daily experience.
Why do Taoists oppose those ideas? Is it because Lao-Tzu, Yang-Tzu and Chuang-Tzu lived in Ancient China, and proved unable to come up with better ideas? Is it because the Tao Te Ching is unsuitable for living in an industrial civilisation?
No, the responses to those questions relate to human nature, which hasn’t changed since the times of Lao-Tzu. Today’s idea of happiness is incompatible with Taoism because it assumes a fundamental change in human nature due to industrialisation.
https://johnvespasian.com/why-taoists-do-not-pursue-happiness-directly/

Despite his sound reasoning and accurate writing, Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860) didn’t succeed in making his ideas on freedom popular. In particular, his theory of the will wasn’t taken seriously by other philosophers and fell into oblivion at the beginning of the twentieth century.
According to Schopenhauer, civilised society should grant legal protection to life, liberty and property. However, laws do not have the power to remove biological limits on freedom. I’m referring to the limits imposed by the will (“life force”) and by the human lifespan.
In his work “The world as will and representation”(1818), Schopenhauer exposed at length the deep influence of the will on human freedom. The will prompts people towards pleasure, reproduction, wealth accumulation and success, generating one desire upon another.
The will drives people to seek more and more, without ever achieving fulfilment. Schopenhauer observed the pattern repeat itself a million times. Thus, he acknowledged the influence of the will as a fact of life to be taken into account.
Schopenhauer outlined his philosophy of freedom not only in his major works, but also in the brief essays contained in his “Parerga and Paralipomena” (1851). Those essays give precise strategies to minimise the negative influence of the will. They can help readers keep trouble at bay and maximise happiness.
https://johnvespasian.com/critique-of-schopenhauers-ideas-on-freedom/