Man, is this Schopenhauer verbose! It is a trait shared by European philosophers, I think, except for the likes of Wittgenstein, of which there are few.
How tedious all this must be in the original language, or is it that much better?
How much longer (if at all), and more importantly why, should we "use" other philosophers' work? I, taking full advantage of the technological means at my disposal, hereby declare my philosophy a new breed. 6-hourism. :)
Quote Schopenhauer, On Thinking For Yourself 10[sic, I guess I meant the paragraph number - this was before I started dog-earing the poor book], as an example of his vanity, as well as being the reason to put the book down whenever I want, as my will.
Prize essay on moral freedom in 1841? Was he really this vain? Anyway, who'm I to judge?
Sch was before "This Is Not A Pipe" by Magritte and modern art - for On Aesthetics.
Four paras into On Books And Writing and already I'm in almost complete agreement with Sch. As I said earlier, he is vain. But I guess I as a 6-hourist run with that risk. :)
As I said, Sch is verbose. He is also repetitive, a little, maybe - commonness, early-age-trainability of ours etc. That's the trouble, I guess, with short bursts of writing - thoughts can branch out differently, uniquely, when thought again.
The presence of thorns on plants as defense mechanisms is an example of their will.
No comments:
Post a Comment