I've loved Schopenhauer for many years, have read all of his works, including The World as Will and Idea twice, and have always appreciated his very realistic views on women, which align entirely with my own experiences of them, and have helped me to see that the problem isn't me, but them. But I've been reading picrel and came across the below quote, and I don't know how to feel about him now. This seems like the height of simping, and I've lost so much respect for him. The quote is supposedly from a letter he wrote to some woman called Malwida von Meysenbug. Was this just a fake quite added in to try to get at his sigma fans?
"I believe that if a woman succeeds in withdrawing from the mass, or rather raising herself from above the mass, she grows ceaselessly and more than a man.”
I feel like I don't even live on the same planet as guys like you
Schopenhauer banged loads of chicks. He wasn't some disgusting, kissless monster like you anon.
He is right. The vast and overwhelming majority of women conform to the descriptions in his famous essay, but when you encounter one exceptional woman, it's almost unbelievable.
>the quiet girl in the back of the class
if not them, the girls interested in the classics who never leave the house and are chained to their parents forever
My dream woman.
>The World as Will and Idea
excellent bait post
Elaborate
It's a bait post. Nobody like the translation of vorstellung as idea. He supposedly like Schopenhauer and has read The World as Will and Representation twice, but nobody who reads a 3 volume metaphysical treatise twice does so because they appreciate the philosopher's views on women. The quote that he posted gets posted on IQfy constantly to make fun of Schopenhauer. OP made up an elaborate story to bait people and no better topic than women since half of IQfy are incels and the other half are normies and both think the other are moronic. Who says "The quote is supposedly a letter he wrote to some woman called Malwida von Meysenbug"? He's pretending not to know where the quote is from with that phrasing, but if he read it in the book then there would be no "supposedly." He already knew about the quote from IQfy. "Helped me to see that the problem isn't me, but them." This is clearly making fun of incels. "I don't know what to feel about him now" again making fun of incels who like schopenhauer because he is an incel. Nobody who reads the world as will and representation twice would change their views after reading a quote they've probably already seen. "was the just a fake quote added in to try and get at his sigma fans?" after that you have to be moronic not to see how this is bait.
>3 volume
Excellent bait post.
>Bwahhh bwahhh my favorite writer complimented women in encouragement to a friend D: D: D: what a SIMP right guys I feel so disappointed
Listen to yourself
He's right. Seethe.
YWNBAW
YWNFAW
That's a good thing fren
He's not wrong but the very idea of a "woman withdrawing herself from the mass" to me seems literally as impossible as a square circle. I'll PayPal you a thousand dollars right now if you tell me with a straight face you've ever met a woman who isn't obsessed with social media, likes, online attention. They literally aren't able to go A DAY without it, they start getting cravings and feeling uneasy like a fricking crack addict. And the older women are all 24/7 glued to TV as we all know it. Women literally cannot disconnect themselves from the herd, the herd is what shapes them, gives them form.
You have a shallow and simplistic understanding, OP. What Schopie is saying here is not incorrect, it's just that he's presenting an idea that's completely utopic.
I know lots of women like this. Maybe the problem is that you don't know very many women.
Alright. So how "withdrawn from the mass" are these women you claim to be talking about? Are they like, able to attain the astonishing feat of going three days without social media?
Yes. I know women who don't use social media at all.
Also, Schopenhauer wrote this about women after finding a woman exactly like this. She carved a bust of him and he was extremely impressed by her.
Alright. I have two questions: first is how old are they, and the second is: they may not use social media, but are they actually withdrawn from the mass? As in, do they not hang out with people who use social media and take 100% of their influence by them? Do they have original thought, opinions that aren't of the type you'd expect to find in your average twitter addicted woman?
No, they don't take 100% of their views from people who use social media. Yes they have original thoughts and opinions. The women I know like this are aged between 28 and 40. My own partner, like me, spends most of her time reading.
Having said all this, I am not American, and I also just have never bothered to associate much with the kinds of people you talk about.
>partner
ooooooooooof
Look at this incel asking questions as if he ever even felt the touch of a woman. Yes most women are trash, most men too, btw.
>noooo don't you dare imply anything bad about women, how dare you
You are way too sensitive and easily shattered.
Are these women interested in finding Truth or Salvation? How do they spend their time? Are they chasing any artistic/philosophical ambitions? Are they still dependent on their families and other men?
Let's focus on the woman who inspired Schopenhauer to make the claim quoted in the OP, given that no matter what I say about the women I know, you can always just deny their existence, and more importantly given the fact this a thread about Schopenhauer.
Her name was Elisabeth Ney. If you're interested in discovering whether Schopenhauer had any grounds for the view he espouses in the quote, then you can research her and make your own mind up.
So those """outcasts"" are just your average women, okay.
This woman who I used to know doesn't have any social media. She was objectively the best woman I've met.
I know a lesbian.
>I'll PayPal you a thousand dollars right now if you tell me with a straight face you've ever met a woman who isn't obsessed with social media, likes, online attention.
I know one that sometimes posts stories daily for a week or two, then goes 6-10 months without ever posting anything (or maybe just a painting, or a sunset pic)
Does that count or not?
>caring about women
If that’s your main takeaway from reading all of Shopies work, that’s sad, anon.
he also had a a machiavellian realism about people, hence hisnadvice to do syuff like say things to get people angry so they reveal things about themselves.
He probably said that to get in her pants, or being. charitable he entertained a dissenting thought, doesn't dismiss the body of his actual fricking published work.
It sounds like you're describing behaviour that can only be ascribed to a lack of integrity.
>It sounds like you're describing behaviour that can only be ascribed to a lack of integrity.
No i'm describing behaciout that can be adcribed to mental flexibility which, given your autism over a single quite you seem to be lacking in.
"Mental flexibility" hahahaha, nice euphemism. Otherwise known as hypocrisy.
it's not hypocritical if it has an internally consistent logic you dimb Black person.
Let me guess, you read Schopenhauer but you haven't read more general texts that explain the identity of western aristocracy in terms of a gentleman warrior. You're the typical IQfy reader who reads the greats without educating themselves to the wider historical, political and social contexts those texts were written in.
Your a dumb Black person, go and google courtiership
Saying one thing while believing another is the definition of hypocrisy.
>hence hisnadvice to do syuff like say things to get people angry so they reveal things about themselves
Holy frick that's actually pretty great. In which one of his works does he give advice like this? I've only read Studies in Pessimism
This quote a dealbreaker for you? What kind of a weak little homosexual are you? Seriously, you are a laughing stock and I can guarantee you, that you are indeed the problem.
He's just your average IQfy user.
And you're an average twitter troon
Rent free.
>rent free
You know saying this only exposes you as being precisely what you're being accused of and makes you a very bright target for every sort of mockery and ridicule, right?
>You know saying this only exposes you as being precisely what you're being accused of and makes you a very bright target for every sort of mockery and ridicule
You sound like a right posh c**t.
>right posh c**t
I literally do not know what that means.
Not my problem you conceited prick.
>conceited
How am i conceited? I just stated a fact. I don't try to elevate myself anywhere. If it is the use of long sentences and large words that makes you feel gratuitously offended, i should just remind you that this is the literature board. People write like they read. Work on your inferiority complex.
>How am i conceited? I just stated a fact. I don't try to elevate myself anywhere. If it is the use of long sentences and large words that makes you feel gratuitously offended, i should just remind you that this is the literature board. People write like they read. Work on your inferiority complex.
You're a homosexual and it seems to be terminal.
>first post in the thread is saying "rent free" after being called a troony
>thinks he can call anyone a homosexual
Dilate.
>thinks he can call anyone a homosexual
I just did homosexual. Nice attempt at a change of tack from speaking like a gay thought.
You literally started posting in the thread by admitting to be a troony.
You are not in position to insult anyone.
Rent free
Yes, we already know you are a troony. There is no need to repeat yourself.
Whatever helps you to cope, even if it's dreaming of trannies. At least you've stopped writing like a gay.
You don't think i write "like a gay". You think i write better than you. And that makes you emotionally distressed because i am doing so while making a point against you (you wouldn't be complaining if i made some beautiful woke statement in grand prose about trans rights) , and since you're too stupid to refute that point you just cope by saying "f-f-f-gay talk". Literally talking like the moron cashier from Idiocracy. You lack the intellect to actually refute my point or even to write like a non-room temperature IQ person, so what should you do? Make it into some sort of "evil": "writing better than me isn't a win for the other side. He's just evil--a gay! That's right, i didn't lose... haha...". It's nothing but cope because you feel inferiorized, stupid and inferior--and there is a very well-known name in philosophy for that.
TL;DR: You're a troony, you're mad and your defense is literal slave morality.
Sorry I don't have time right now to read this essay about why you're seething uncontrollably.
Could you please email it over to me at [email protected]?
Literal 12 year old girl response. Congratulations troon, you finally became one.
Keep on seething.
Seething about what? You are a troony. No position to insult anyone.
Your words have no weight.
>Seething about what?
I don't know, why don't you write another homosexual essay to explain?
Because you'd be too busy dilating to actually read it.
I could be stuck in an empty void for an eternity with only one of your seething essays to keep me company, and even then I'd never read it.
Of course you wouldn't. Reading it would make you seethe because i am right--and you know it.
troony.
>because i am right--and you know it.
Hmm, but I don't remember you admitting to being a gay anywhere, and yet that's the only thing I know about you, so I guess you must have done.
>I don't remember you admitting to being a gay anywhere
And look how funny! I, on the other hand, do remember you admitting to being a gay.
No, worse than a gay, a troony. The lowest of the very low.
Lmao.
>Lmao
Yes that is the last reply I sent you. Why are you showing it to me on your phone, and why are you wearing makeup?
Pretty sure you're just looking at a mirror, dude.
>Even bothering with a response this shit
Anything smarter would be too much for your obviously underdeveloped brain.
I know you're just trying to have the last word, but trust me, no last word will change the fact that you have made a fool of yourself.
You were the one who admitted to be a troony, not me.
You are the only fool among us.
>Still seething this much about a troony living rent free in your head
Point proven.
As i said before: you couldn't possibly make anyone seethe. You are a troony.
Your words have no weight.
And yet you're seething so much that you effort post about why I make you seeth, desperately try to convince me that you aren't rattled, and are determined to have the last word. Keep coping anon.
>two lines
>effort post
Mother of god, just how fricking fat are you?
Oh my God anon, I do hope you're right. If this is true then I can forgive him.
Sorry was replying to
Maybe it just means that women can potentially grow ceaselessly and more than a man in relation to the ideal because on average men are closer to the ideal than women.
The will of God, it is the will. The only one that's eternal.
>The will of God,
Schopenhauer would cal you homosexual
The will to life is a spook.
What? A Stirnergay is a christcuck?
>The quote is supposedly from a letter he wrote to some woman called Malwida von Meysenbug
Yeah, and my algebra professor swears that a certain theorem was proved and the proof was handed out on a hand-written note at a lecture by the Yugoslav Mathematical Society, but alas, the hand-written note was lost during the war in Kosovo.
>and have helped me to see that the problem isn't me, but them
Κεκ
>Rudiger Safranski
finally someone with decent taste. Safranski, however, does have a habit of making authors seem a bit more sentimental and less ruthless. He roughs them up around the edges, so to speak.
His work on NEETzsche is quite similiar in tone and feel.