I always enjoy reading Schopenhauer, but I think it's a bit naive to ignore the context in which Schopenhauer is writing (this btw, is not meant as a criticism of the post or it's author, this is a very enjoyable write up). Schopenhauer is in world filled with academics who he largely feels do not appreciate his own brilliant work. He's concerned with people reading all day instead of digesting what they've read, and his quite happy to dismiss most people who dismiss him as idiots. He's likely envisioning hordes of academics lapping up Hegel's most recent piece as he writes this.
I don't think there are very many people left in the world who read in the way that Schopenhauer is criticizing in this essay.
I can only imagine the horror Schopenhauer would have faced on seeing modern day "infotainment", and how little people read or think in our current information environment.
However, he most certainly would have had a hilarious Twitter account.
> I don't think there are very many people left in the world who read in the way that Schopenhauer is criticizing in this essay.
In what way? I think that it's much more prevalent nowadays for people to read many things and passively/non-critically accept them, which I feel you were describing (albeit among academics).
Reading The World as Will and Representation presented me with several insights on the under considered nature of this era's technological revolution. The philosophical issues presented by this era have likely been considered in full generally, but hardly enough specifically. “The animal feels and perceives; man, in addition, thinks and knows; both will. The animal communicates his feelings and moods by gesture and sound; man communicates thought to another, or conceals it from him, by language.” Coding strikes me as a language that is not readily interpretable. A language that is not readily interpretable is wholly inexpressive, or else it is expressive only by dint of extreme contrivance. This special case, and the outsized power it produces in those that are fluent in it, leads to no few deleterious ends. If one wants to discover another facet of code's esoteric purpose, Schopenhauer is a good read.
In a Schopenhauer-ian regime, I think that programming is no different than construction work. Whether or not you consider the output of the labor physical or conceptual, both are “representation” inside the minds of the people using the product.
But Schopenhauer also writes that "Thus we shall find that author profitable the occasional use of whose mind when we think affords us sensible relief, and by whom we feel borne whither we could not attain alone. Goethe once said to me that, when he read a page of Kant, he felt as if he were entering a bright room."
Schopenhauer is one of the most amusing philosophers of the 19th century. I have a soft spot for his Art of Controversy[1] which was an early guide to trolling and other disingenuous argumentation. For example, “Put His Thesis Into Some Odious Category” has popularity that endures to this day.
It's fun too to see how the translator decides to translate things. For example I wouldn't translate "Eristische Dialektik" as "Controversial Dialectic" instead I'd prefer "Eristic Dialectic." It might be on account of reading the Illuminatus! Trilogy in my formative years, but I prefer the more literal translation of that one.
Well he also said that a book is made better by good readers and that reading a good book was a triumph. He didn't like "common" books, so maybe you're right. I had in min his general criticisms of Schopenhauer, though I'm no expert on wither.
I don't think there are very many people left in the world who read in the way that Schopenhauer is criticizing in this essay.
I can only imagine the horror Schopenhauer would have faced on seeing modern day "infotainment", and how little people read or think in our current information environment.
However, he most certainly would have had a hilarious Twitter account.