Where do the ideas of Schopenhauer and Freud meet and divide?

The theories and ideologies of the psychoanalyst, Sigmund Frued has been constantly compared with those of the philosopher, Arthur Schopenhauer by critics of the last century. The similarities between the theories on the Will and the Id are too striking to ignore, as are other ideas on subjects such as intellect/consciousness, repression and views on mankind, to name but a few. This coupled with certain similarities in their characters, motivations and theyre cast iron determination, are worth further study. Despite this evidence, Freud famously wrote, I have carefully avoided any contact with philosophy proper. The large extent to which psycho-analysis coincides with the philosophy of Schopenhauer - not only did he assert the dominance of the emotions and the supreme importance of sexuality but he was even aware of the mechanism of repression is not to be traced to my acquaintance with his teaching. I read Schopenhauer very late in my life. !anaway, "##"$ %y aim during this essay is not only to e&plore where these ideas meet and depart, but perhaps more importantly, try and discover what propelled these great thinkers into their own, individual line of thought and the reasons why theyre characters differed so strongly, as these factors were influential in theyre thinking. 'lthough intellectual comparisons can be made between (chopenhauer and Freud, their views and approach to life couldnt be more different. (chopenhauers ideas on pessimism wasnt only contained in his theories, but roamed freely in his life. )hether this could be attributed to the suicide of his father, his poor relations with his mother or the period of war and misery in which he lived in, they were all contributors to his somber outlook on life. *is incapacity to love restricted any hope for emotional happiness + for he who does not love is rarely loved himself. !e was egotistical" childish" suspicious" morbidly timorous" passionate#he was not or magnanimous. $osmopolitan by temper and training" he was lac%ing in all patriotic and civil feeling. !e felt %eenly the misery of human%ind" but too% no interest in any effort to alleviate it. De)itt *. ,arker, -."/$ )ith this in mind, it is no surprise that (chopenhauer consorted with only his most intimate friends. *e considered marriage, but fear of losing his independence, he abandoned the idea, choosing to live as a bachelor for the rest of his years. Though professing to despise women, he wasnt immune to their charms, leaving a string of romances 0 some poetic, others sordid. 1ot until the later years of his life, did (chopenhauer receive the recognition he so craved. *e was received with a luke+warm response2 whereas more established thinkers such as *egal were famous among the 3erman academia. This spurred him on to continue his studies and refine his philosophy, at the same time permitting himself to spend much energy

aggressively attacking other established thinkers, among them, Hegal, Newton and notably Fichte, when he submitted the essay Source and Foundation of Moralit to the 4oyal 1orwegian (ociety of (ciences, at Drontheim in -/5#. 6ompared with (chopenhauer, Freuds character and outlook on life couldnt differ more. (igmund Freud was born on 7 may -/87 in Freiburg. The eighty years of his life were on the whole uneventful, brought up in a middle class !ewish family, enrolling as a medical student in -/9:, then eventually moving to the ,hysiological ;aboratory under <rucke, whom he studied under for 7 years. *e took his medical degree -//- and after a year, reluctantly left <rucke to begin work in the =ienna 3eneral *ospital. There is something very &nglish about the 'reud that lives and dies so equably" in &ngland" land of his inner affinity. (ll that antinomian imagination is hedged off neatly by an unimpeachable private life) all that passion countered by stoic calm) all that friendship muted by reserve) all that desire to lead tempered by encouragement to epigones stri%ing out on there own if not too far. *o doubt +ones interpretation is the true one. 'reud must have been a giant of common sense and a character in perfect equilibrium to have led" amicably and for so long" such erratic and scheming followers in a highly moral intelligence of western culture. ,n the other hand" he must have felt the need for disciples desperately. The 'reud that has emerged into popular consciousness" because of the +ones volumes" is in fact the ideal product of psychoanalytic therapy" the long-sought physician who" if he has not cured himself" arriving at peace of mind" has achieved a truce within himself. 4ieff,-.9.$ This paragraph taken from the preface in !hilip "ieff#s Freud$ %he Mind of the Moralist# elegantly and efficiently sums up the way Freud conducted himself and was perceived by those around him throughout his life. (chopenhauer and Freud shared many similarities in theyre theories and ideas on the mind, knowledge and the nature of the human species as a whole. <oth were influenced by the ideas of &ant, such as concepts on the a priori or transcendental wa '# This way of establishing objective validity of concepts can be e&plained thus> Thoughts -i.e. concepts. without content /i.e. intuitions. are empty. ( concept can apply to what we experience even if it cannot be defined in terms of what we experience) it may do so by being a necessary condition for the possibility of experiencing things and of using concepts to describe what we experience. ,olitis, -..:$ This concept freed both the minds of (chopenhauer and Freud from the chains of empirical thought. ?t is important to note that !lato#s concept on Forms# was also an influential factor in the cultivation of both their theories.

<ut where the two strike uncanny comparisons lies in theyre fundamental theories on human motivations + the will and the unconscious Id, and theyre corresponding partners, the intellect and the ego' (chopenhauers concept of the intellect is the %nowing part of our mind, its function designed for comprehending those ends on the attainment of which depends on the individual life and it s propagation. !anaway,"##"$ *is metaphor for the relationship between the intellect and the will is likened to that of a crippled old man being carried on the back of a strong, blind man. The method of considering the intellect which is opposed to this is the ob0ective" which starts from without" ta%es as it s ob0ect not our own consciousness" but the being s given in outward experience" conscious of themselves and of the world" and now investigates the relation of their intellect to their other qualities" how it has become possible" how it has become necessary" and what it accomplishes for them. The standpoint of this method of consideration is empirical. Freud -.5#$ described the ?d as the psychical apparatus as the oldest part of our minds. ?t contains everything that is inherited at birth, which can be attributed to the instincts, which originates from the somatic organi1ation unknown to us. The ego is the evolved cortical layer in our brains, whose function it is to receive and organi@e e&ternal stimuli, to bring expedient changes in the external world, and ultimately, for self+preservation. The relationship between the two areas are that the Ago e&erts control over the demands of the instincts by deciding when or when it will not be satisfied, depending on the circumstances of the e&ternal world, the ego strives after pleasure and see%s to avoid unpleasure. (chopenhauer attributed many psychological functions and manifestations to the will, these including> all desiring" striving" wishing" demanding" longing" hoping" loving" re0oicing" 0ubilation" and the li%e" no less than not willing or resisting" all abhorring" fleeing" fearing" being angry" hating" mourning" suffering" pains in short" all the emotions and passions. 'or these emotions and passions are wea%er or stronger" violent and stormy or else quiet impulsions of one s own will" which is either restricted or restrained or unleashed" satisfied or unsatisfied. In their many variations they relate to the successful or frustrated attainment of that which is willed" to the endurance or the overcoming of that which is abhorred. $onsequently" they are explicit affections of the same will which is active in decisions and actions. (chopenhauer, -./8$ This, inevitably, leads onto the significance of se&uality, which is driving force behind the theories on the )ill and the unconscious 'ccording to (chopenhauer, se& is the e&ternali@ation of the will to life function based on reproduction. This constantly makes itself relevant in lives the ?d. its our

It is the ultimate goal of almost all human effort) it has an unfavourable influence on the most important affairs" interrupts every hour the most serious occupations" and sometimes perplexes for a while even the greatest minds# the public secret which must never be distinctly mentioned anywhere" but is always and everywhere understood to be the main thing as a matter of course" and is therefor always present in the minds of all. (chopenhauer, -.8/$ The se&ual impulse, common in all human beings, is believed to be the very essence of our being, the driving force of the )ill/?d is to B to bring one s own genitals into contact with those of someone of the opposite sex" not only for the sake of reproduction. Freud -."#$ went on to say that the se&ual drives are pleasure orientated and therefore the basic motivator of life 0 (ros. *e also attributed the repression of se&ual drives as the reason for certain neuroses and psychoses. 'bnormalities in mental functioning can manifest themselves as physical symptoms, e.g. paralysis in conversion hysteria in the case of 'nna C. The comparisons, with regards to the cause of some forms of madness, are also worth mentioning. Taken from the chapter ,n 2adness contained in volume " of %he World as Will and "epresentation,# this paragraph rounds up (chopenhaurers ideas on the effects of the ?ntellect imposed on the )ill. &very new adverse event must be assimilated by the intellect#but this operation itself is often very painful" and in most cases ta%es place only slowly and with reluctance. 3ut soundness of mind can continue only in so far as this operation has been correctly carried out each time. ,n the other hand" if" in a particular case" the resistance and opposition of the will to the assimilation of some %nowledge reaches such a degree that#certain events or circumstances are wholly suppressed for the intellect" because the will cannot bear the sight of them) and then" if the resultant gaps are arbitrarily filled up for the sa%e of the necessary connection) we then have madness. (chopenhauer, -.8/$ This is similar to Freuds interpretation of psychosis, though Freud points the blame at the ?d/)ill, opposed to the Ago/?ntellect. Freud believed that psychosis is brought about by the Ago/?ntellect not being capable of handling certain knowledge, resulting in a cathe&es in the ?d/)ill, thus weakening the Agos/?ntellects control. ?t is worth mentioning the shared respect for art and literature. <oth men were very cultured individuals and were enthusiastic of the connection between 'rt/literature and the unconscious. They were both well read in all forms of literature and they both wrote essays on theyre particular interests, (chopenhauer on the importance of aesthetics and art essay )n vision and *olors+2 Freud on the significance of literature and mythology symbolism in dream interpretation$. 'n interesting point should be made here on the comparisons of the two men. 'ccording to Dewitt *. ,arker,

#his apartment on the Schone (ussicht" unpretentious yet comfortable" where he lived in the company of his dog" surrounded by the li%eness of his favorite philosophers" including a bron1e 3uddha# Freud, too, had ceramics and bron@es which are still laid out in his =ienna study. *e also had a <uddha, but on his desk was a bron@e ,ao-%.u,# the writer of the %ao te *hing'# 'nd as ? am sure, both were aware of theyre symbolic meaning. 'lthough it can be argued that there are various correlations to be made between (chopenhauers and Freuds theories, it is the similarities and differences in their characters and personal lives that are to be attributed to the defining force of their ideas, because it is due to these areas that ultimately shape them as individuals. This leads to what is most strikingly different about the two men. (chopenhauer and Freud were both prone to fears and an&ieties (chopenhauer suffering from huge bouts of depression$, as we all are. These neurosis were allowed to plague the best part (chopenhauers life, though he somehow remained defiant in his battle2 Freud, on the other, was aware that ultimately humans were social creatures and felt he was saved from the 4worst fate5 of loneliness by his beloved wife, %artha. There are hints of Freud being a very intimate and passionate man. ,hillip 4ieff talks of a man so intense that Arnest !ones celebrated biography fails to penetrate and is #almost 3y1antine in it s flatness. This compared to (chopenhauers lack of intimacy with those around him, is a direct contradiction in their approach. (chopenhauer pushed away those that got too close and revered in his independence + as he no doubt would have phrased this acute fear of intimacy. This coupled with his defiant and aggressive approach to those who opposed him and his theories cemented the loneliness he e&perienced throughout his life. 'n analogy with the Blone gunman comes to mind here. Freud too has comparisons to this form of Bindependence, being in youth and old age, a lonely man. #gratitude permits him to unbend with her 62artha 3ernays7) otherwise he is never deprived of his pride in being alone#not a half-gentile of the real +ewish world but a fantasy 2oses" lonely and estranged as he leads the the large remainder of himself" resisting" through the 4magic world of intellect and unhappiness"5 from one small oasis of rational insight to another" with no promises of a promised land this time around. Such a powerfully useful selfimage" once deeply buried" is not easily given up 4ieff, -.9.$ This self+image is similar to that of (chopenhauer, though perhaps distinctively more modest. ?nterestingly, he confidently expected to be hailed as a prophet" according to Dewitt *. ,arkers account of him, though this is likely to be due to his inflated ego and rightly so$. 1o doubt both men were e&tremely strong characters, they just drew their strength from different sources 0 interestingly, a Freudian interpretation of (ros and %hanatos might be attributed here' 's ? e&plored Freuds personal

life, it has become clear to me that despite his firm independence, Freud no doubt received earlier recognition, gaining disciples, resulting in the =ienna 6ircle and pushed further by the political influence Arnest !ones had in Angland. This along with his loyal and devoted wife %artha, allowed Freud an outlet for his BAros to be e&pressed. (chopenhauer believed he inherited his independence of mind and high spirits from his father i.e. his temperament and character, which follows his theory that our intellect follows that of our mothers and the will from our fathers. ?t can be said that (chopenhauer needed his ravishing BAros to be assuaged2 he created something he believed to be substantial, this needs to be received by others, if this is not acknowledged, if the e&pression of Aros is frustrated and isnt given an outlet, this turns into the destructive energy known as BThanatos i.e. aggression, paranoia and cynicism 0 an outward e&pression2 Depression and pessimism, an e&pression of BThanatos turned inwards" towards the self. 'nd to reinforce this supposition, when (chopenhauer eventually received the recognition he so craved, it had a cathartic effect on his character. 'll that built up Thanatic energy finally found an outlet. This supposition is confirmed by (chopenhauers last ten years in life #no longer as a mere eccentric" but as a great man. (nd no item of attention was lost) he dran% it all in with a na8ve" childish delight. In the best of health almost to the very end" the turbulence of passion gone" the dream of his young manhood attained" his personality vibrated a mellower" quieter tone. (fter a brief illness" he died peacefully and alone" September 9:" :;<=. De)itt *. ,arker, -."/$ This verse taken from !arerga and !aralipomena clearly sums up the defining characteristic of the enduring self+belief associated with both (chopenhauer and Freud. :;>< 'inale I now stand weary at the end of the road) The 0aded brow can hardly bear the laurel. (nd yet I gladly see what I have done" &ver undaunted by what others say.

"eferences (chopenhauer, 'rthur -.8/$ %he World as Will and "epresentation /ol' 0' Dover <ooks (chopenhauer, 'rthur. %he World as Will and Idea /ol'0' Degan ,aul, Trench, Trubner E 6o., ;td, ;ondon !anaway, 6hristopher "##"$ Schopenhauer$ A /er Short Introduction . C&ford Fniversity ,ress Freud, (igmund -./7$ Historical and (1positor Wor2s on !s choanal sis. ,enguin Freud ;ibrary De)itt *. ,arker -."/$ Schopenhauer Selections' 6harles (cribners (ons 4ieff, ,hilip -.9.$ Freud$ %he Mind of a Moralist' The Fniversity of 6hicago ,ress Dant, ?mmanuel Adited by =asilis ,olitis -..:$ *riti3ue of !ure "eason' Averyman