@firuinthehouse Every major philosopher that came after Schopenhauer was influenced by Schopenhauer: Nietzsche, Sartre, Heidegger, Camus, Wittgenstein, etc. etc. Even artists like Borges. Sounds like he accomplished more than you could ever hope to. Doesn't sound like a loser to me.
@joshplayin111 Yes and at the same time you are aware that he was a failure in life, at least in the emotional / social departments?
Or let me put it another way, all his great ideas aside, you wouldn't want to end alone and with pudels yourself when reaching old age. Or would you?
*To be fair I am talking as an ignorant to his particular ideas, I dig Epicurus and that's about it for now. But Schopenhauer to me, seems kinda dysfunctional in ways I wouldn't want to emulate.
And there are also couples that aren't in love, but they do enjoy each other's company and feel happy enough together. If their biological connection isn't that strong, why do they stay together?
I would ask, can't you fall in love (due to biological urge) with someone who is *also* right for you? And if that is possible, doesn't it mean that you might be relatively happy?
And if love is so important for the best offspring possible, how do we explain the centuries of "contract"-marriages that had nothing to do with falling or being in love, but basically with reproducing, stabilizing and strengthening the family? Were their offsprings not that good?
In contract-marriages the female usually doesn't have the liberty to secure a mate of her own free choosing, nevertheless the will to live still plays out, the woman then viewing her husband as the only option for bringing about the next generation of their seed. Their offsprings could be good or not good. love while important, for its the only thing that will get us headlong into the act of procreating, is secondary next to the fact of simply satiating that biological urge.
Why doesn't the nature of BOTH parties see that they're biologically unsuited for each other? Why is it only one party that unconsciously sees this while the other is left heartbroken?
"Biological shorcomings?" So if a couple both have small noses and the woman ends up leaving her boyfriend for a guy with a big nose to counterbalance HER nose, why might her X be left dumbfounded? Why wouldn't HE have been only attracted to a woman with a big nose, as well, to counterbalance HIS "shortcoming?"
Well, according to Sho's theory, it appears to be an issue of high, unconscious priority.
But let's say that a big-nosed woman WAS available to him, would he then, according to this theory, most likely leave his small-nosed girlfriend for her?
stopped reading the comments i did! what a difference
xxmdogxx1ify 7 months ago
love philosophy
527matt 8 months ago
@firuinthehouse: YOU are the real loser, you're lacking the intelligence to realise Schopenhauer was right about everything;
jeed888 8 months ago 2
Read the book it can be that this baronese here -.- a jota have forgett.
MrNiko7777777 1 year ago
Sounds to me like the guy was a loser.
Spent too much time thinking, failed at real life and ended up with pudels.
If that's not a loser, I don't know what is.
firuinthehouse 1 year ago
@firuinthehouse Every major philosopher that came after Schopenhauer was influenced by Schopenhauer: Nietzsche, Sartre, Heidegger, Camus, Wittgenstein, etc. etc. Even artists like Borges. Sounds like he accomplished more than you could ever hope to. Doesn't sound like a loser to me.
joshplayin111 1 year ago
@joshplayin111 Yes and at the same time you are aware that he was a failure in life, at least in the emotional / social departments?
Or let me put it another way, all his great ideas aside, you wouldn't want to end alone and with pudels yourself when reaching old age. Or would you?
*To be fair I am talking as an ignorant to his particular ideas, I dig Epicurus and that's about it for now. But Schopenhauer to me, seems kinda dysfunctional in ways I wouldn't want to emulate.
firuinthehouse 1 year ago
@firuinthehouse What an intelligent comment.
TheBestInterest 1 year ago
Does not Man's escape lies in putting an end to Reproduction?
Only this can end our prisonner's dilemma.
eacans 1 year ago
Mongeese is not the plural of mongoose. The plural is mongooses.
AubreyDebrett 2 years ago
Biology stronger than reason. Scary yet truthful!!
alukkkard 2 years ago
And there are also couples that aren't in love, but they do enjoy each other's company and feel happy enough together. If their biological connection isn't that strong, why do they stay together?
shipcomesin 2 years ago
other extenuating psychological reasons, perhaps?
MrPfund 2 years ago
i guess so :)
shipcomesin 2 years ago
I would ask, can't you fall in love (due to biological urge) with someone who is *also* right for you? And if that is possible, doesn't it mean that you might be relatively happy?
And if love is so important for the best offspring possible, how do we explain the centuries of "contract"-marriages that had nothing to do with falling or being in love, but basically with reproducing, stabilizing and strengthening the family? Were their offsprings not that good?
shipcomesin 2 years ago
In contract-marriages the female usually doesn't have the liberty to secure a mate of her own free choosing, nevertheless the will to live still plays out, the woman then viewing her husband as the only option for bringing about the next generation of their seed. Their offsprings could be good or not good. love while important, for its the only thing that will get us headlong into the act of procreating, is secondary next to the fact of simply satiating that biological urge.
MrPfund 2 years ago
that's right
shipcomesin 2 years ago
opposites attract
jona2jona 4 years ago
It's not that they're 'unsuited'.
One merely chances upon a *healthier counterweight* for THEIR biological shortcomings. Heartbreak helps sharpen one's discernment and resolve.
quangojones 4 years ago
Why doesn't the nature of BOTH parties see that they're biologically unsuited for each other? Why is it only one party that unconsciously sees this while the other is left heartbroken?
Antichrist4Life 4 years ago
It's not that they're 'unsuited'.
One merely chances upon a *healthier counterweight* for THEIR biological shortcomings. Heartbreak helps sharpen one's discernment and resolve.
quangojones 4 years ago
"Biological shorcomings?" So if a couple both have small noses and the woman ends up leaving her boyfriend for a guy with a big nose to counterbalance HER nose, why might her X be left dumbfounded? Why wouldn't HE have been only attracted to a woman with a big nose, as well, to counterbalance HIS "shortcoming?"
Antichrist4Life 4 years ago
It's only one of (likely) many issues, and of low priority.
Plus, such a mate might not be available to him.
quangojones 4 years ago
Well, according to Sho's theory, it appears to be an issue of high, unconscious priority.
But let's say that a big-nosed woman WAS available to him, would he then, according to this theory, most likely leave his small-nosed girlfriend for her?
Antichrist4Life 4 years ago
If he were *perfect* in ALL other regards.
quangojones 4 years ago
And she were too.
quangojones 4 years ago
so each one unconsciously decides for the best of themselves, so egoism is always stronger than love?
a Greek female poet said that love is the victim of body-trading egoism
shipcomesin 2 years ago