Head to squarespace.com/weltgeist to save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain using code WELTGEIST

"Your pathetic fear of my writings is the fear of the truth." - Arthur Schopenhauer

@ownificationify

4 ай бұрын

I cannot think of a more arrogant thing to say

@The666Miraculix

3 ай бұрын

@ownificationify If you don't know or understand the context of this quote (1820 to 1850), then you'd better keep quiet 😉

@ownificationify

3 ай бұрын

@@The666Miraculix point me in the right direction because google isn't helping and I cannot begin to comprehend a context in which this quote isn't the most pompous shit I've ever heard my god, I'll give it the benefit of the doubt for you though.😅

@ownificationify

3 ай бұрын

@@The666Miraculix I'll tell you outright I'm generally skeptical of Schopenhauer though.

Leo Tolstoy (1828-1910) wrote to his poet friend Afanassi Fet (1820-1892) in a letter dated September 30, 1869, when he was 42 years old: 'Do you know what the past summer was for me? An uninterrupted enthusiasm for Schopenhauer and a series of intellectual pleasures that I had never experienced before. I ordered and read and read all his works (I also read Kant), and probably no student has ever learned and realized so much in his course as I did this summer. I don't know if I will change my mind, but now I am convinced that Schopenhauer is the most brilliant man. The whole external world is formed by us, by our senses. We know nothing and can know nothing about it. [...] [The so-called scholars] are naively convinced that the external world is the real reality, just as the peasants are convinced that the sun and the stars revolve around the earth. Just as the peasants know nothing of what Galileo, Copernicus and Newton have done, or, if they have heard it, do not believe it, so the materialist scholars have heard nothing of it or do not believe it ... - Leo Tolstoy (1896)

@braahqwekutv3142

4 ай бұрын

Wow

@Opposite271

3 ай бұрын

In Fantasy, engages humanity with, they deny the world as it denied what they thought was their right. Putting themselves on the throne, but only ruling in their mind. Acting like kings, but being just ants in the grand scheme of things. Wanting to create space and time but nothing they say or write will change that they are just beasts made of matter full with fear and pride. Accept it, humanity will never be unified. The wiseman thinks of himself above the mop, I think he should be relocated below their dog. The universe with no center, neither sun nor earth but with motion, the stars revolve relative to this world.

Another point that Schopenhauer was prescient on is his insistence that matter has no static being and is through and through just action. This was reflected in the famous unification of mass and energy which undermined the static view of substance, along with it's technological consequences: nuclear energy and the atom bomb.

Physics and philosophy go hand in hand

@deanodog3667

4 ай бұрын

How ??

@KerriEverlasting

4 ай бұрын

If 2 things are exactly alike in all aspects are they not the same thing?

@deanodog3667

4 ай бұрын

@@KerriEverlasting like what ??

@yosuancolon

4 ай бұрын

@@deanodog3667 Did you watch the video?

@deanodog3667

4 ай бұрын

@@yosuancolon not all of it yet , I'm just curious as to how the laws of gravity etc go hand in hand with various philosophies!

"Until 1818, when my work appeared, only very few, highly imperfect and scanty reports on Buddhaism were to be found in Europe, which were almost entirely confined to a few essays in the earlier volumes of the 'Asiatic researches' and mainly concerned the Buddhaism of the Burmese." Arthur Schopenhauer probably contributed more than any other important Western philosopher to opening the gates of the West to the Upanishads: It is the most rewarding and sublime reading possible in the world: it has been the consolation of my life and will be that of my death. - Arthur Schopenhauer

Not only did he influence physicists, but also, to a much greater extent, early psychology, through Hartmann, Freud and ultimately Jung. The concept of the unconscious is the Will in its evolved form.

@Kukuro20

4 ай бұрын

I understand the sentiment in a sense that Schopenhauer influenced Nietzsche and ultimatley Nietsche influenced modern Psychology. It was Nietzsche who reinterpreted Schopenhauer in a psychological, existentialistic way that gave rise to modern psychology and the multitude of modern philosophical enterprises.

@salvador.garcia

4 ай бұрын

​​@@Kukuro20 Nietzsche and Darwin are the fathers of nowadays psychology and biology. (But biology's branch of nietzschean philosophy died with nazis).

Schopenhauer is also the key to depth psychology and arguably more central to Jungian thought than Nietzsche. Schopenhauer is really slept on as a figure in philosophy.

@aidanhall6679

4 ай бұрын

The World as Will and Representation was without doubt the most intellectually validating experience of my life. I think I speak on behalf of many when I say that his teachings affirmed many of my deepest metaphysical convictions, not for want of reason did I seek out his work but a desire to understand myself better. It is no understatement to say that his work resonates with a great many thinkers, especially those who identify with idealist thought. I would stick my neck out and say that Schopenhauer was right precisely because he didn’t listen to reason to the exclusion of his other faculties but had a special reverence for intuition, indeed that is after all where his deepest insight necessarily came from.

@kdub9812

4 ай бұрын

@@aidanhall6679100%

@Kukuro20

4 ай бұрын

I dont understand that, you may elaborate. Nietzsche was - as far as I was educated - way more important to modern philosophy than Schopenhauer. Schopenhauers work was profound, no arguing that. But it was ultimatley Nietzsche who reinterpreted Schopenhauers work in a existentialistic manner (i.e that not suffering is unberarble, but meaningless suffering) the search for meaning as a means for meaning, the depth of aethetics and the will to power were all a culmination of the intellect that the enlightment cultivated. You can proclaim any success to Schopenhauer, but without Nietzsche, he would be no way as heard of as he is today.

@dantechersi6056

4 ай бұрын

herman hesse is supreme his books are superior in the way of magic words deep inside compšose of natural beuty and his caracter alweys get like buda nirvana or back to unpased peace and 100% undastanding of natural final truth

It would be interesting to see you cover Carl Jung, seeing as how he was heavily influenced by Kant, Schopenhauer and Nietzsche, and can perhaps be seen as continuing their work.

What a great content, thank you for the video. Will check your channel regularly.

You always find a way to make a video that interests me! I started quantum physics this semester and this up coming one is where we will have a deeper dive. It is interesting to hear how the greats of physics also took interest in Schopenhauer

Your videos are always substantive, insightful and thought-provoking. I download them and listen on walks with my dog, Maggie says hello. Thanks! 👏

Extraordinary work, amazing channel

Synchronicity central - great content as always!

Loved this video ! Thanks .

it had been a while since you dropped a banger like this!

Great talk, you have a gift for this work. I would also like to see an episode on Schrodinger. Thanks as always.

Just found this channel...truly amazing and absolute genius..keep up the good work 👏

Finding you for me is like when I found Thomas Sowell last fall. Thank you for sharing. Look forward to all your posts.

Thank you for sharing the thought of Schopenhauer. This is a gift for humanity.

These videos are some of the best stuff on KZread. Keep it up man.

great vid! thanks!

I suspected this quotation from Schopenhauer was what impressed Einstein. It suggests both special and general relativity "the essential nature of matter consists in the complete union of space and time, a union that is possible only by means of the representation of causality, and consequently only for the understanding, that is nothing but the subjective correlate of causality"

Very nice and interesting linking of ideas. Very interested in the Schrödinger video!

An excellent video, Weltgeist, the metaphysics of Schopenhauer and his influences are a profound and intriguing topic.

Excellent.... thanks 🙏❤

I was out of the loop from this link between Schopenhauer and Quantum Physics. The concept of Unity is amazing. In my layman's terms, we are just a pale mirror of something literally unimaginable. Something I'd never expect for today.

See also Bernardo Kastrup's _Decoding Schopenhauer’s Metaphysics: The Key to Understanding How It Solves the Hard Problem of Consciousness and the Paradoxes of Quantum Mechanics_

Great video

we swim in a sea of speculative theories about reality - maybe we are looking and perceiving phenomena across a single moment of the now - time present - there is nothing else no before and after - the unity of which Schopenhauer speaks is simply this

Great video. Yes, please do one on Schroedinger"s book.

Excellent video!

@WeltgeistYT

4 ай бұрын

Glad you liked it!

Really important to understand that our understanding of Quantum Mechanics has advanced considerably since Schrodinger, Wigner, Oppenheimer, etc. Since the 70s the rigid mathematical models of entanglement and decoherence have been tested, proven, and applied in fields like quantum computing, and quantum communication. It is information, not consciousness that causes wave functions to APPEAR to collapse to a conscious observer. Participation of the conscious is an obsolete theory.

@honkhonk8009

3 ай бұрын

Lol im reading up on information theory and claude shannons stuff rn. Iv only done mechanics tho since its not my major. I had no idea information theory was sumn they used in physics lol.

@user-pt8sh1qz8e

2 ай бұрын

That is wrong, information isn’t a thing, it’s the knowledge within an observer. So at bottom it’s still consciousness.

@ownificationify

2 ай бұрын

@@user-pt8sh1qz8e lol, idealists

This might seem minor, but the music choice at the beginning adds to the aesthetic of the video. It makes it more engaging, so I thought it was a great addition.

@luciocastro1418

4 ай бұрын

Me too!

He who experiences the unity of life sees all beings in his own self and his own self in all beings in the universe.

Schoppenheuer is just so relatable without being pedantic.

Very good. More

Without our capacity to apprehend reality, the ' reality outside us' doesn't exist. Kant's conclusion that we put order to the chaos of cosmos is the same with the idea that theoretical physicists who cannot admit of their finitude should stay quiet. . As the very first sentence of his Anti-Hegelian Philosophy: " THE WORLD IS MY IDEA."

Yes, please do a video on Schroedinger

Would love to see video about Mind and Matter

I'm a second year physics student, it would be great to get your take on schrödinger's book. I read "what's life" from him and found it quite enlightening.

What a synchronicity! I'm just reading "Synchronicity, through the eyes of science, myth and the trickster" and the first chapter deals with quantum physics...

@sosaysthelegend

4 ай бұрын

That book makes use of Bohmian mechanics a number of times. Which definitely seems relevant here.

Re 19:47--It is interesting that Schopenhauer likened the spectrum of colors to the world or representation and the light entering the prism to be the underlying "reality" of the Will (or the Noumenon, for Kant). The seems to be the reverse of the view of science since Newton (up to possibly Quantum Mechanics), i.e., whiteness is just the casual appearance of light, whereas the prism reveals whiteness to be an ensemble of the spectral colors, which are the actual colors.

The Schrödinger video idea sounds quite good.

Please do cover Schrodinger's mind and matter when you get the chance! Fabulous video as usual:)

I would personally love a deep dive video on Schrödinger's Mind and Matter!

Good video. Could you make a video about Beethoven and philosophers? Please I'd like to see the relationship between him and Nietzsche, for example. Beethoven is loved for many intellectuals and I hope to see his influence kn philosophers or scientists. ❤

We can actully imagine something spaceless and timeless: thestate before Big Bang. And the singularity as Unity.

Yay! Jung! Finally. When a complete video about his Psychology? About synchronicity? :o

definitely do a video on mind and matter

welltgeist, since you spoke about quantum physics, what about making some videos on Mainlander. he certantly fits the style of topics of this chanel and he is directly related to schopenhauer. his idea of the will and the suicede of god kinda remind of entropy and the chaos theory and is also very interesting. it would be wonderful to see

Amazing.

I noticed that you kept showing a picture of Claude Shannon which I think I have an idea of why but can you make a video? ❤😁😎😉

Big Schopenhauer fan here. Always was, always will be.

A “Mind and Matter” video would be greatly appreciated.

A very illuminating exposition of Schopenhauer’s signal ideas. I have always felt that Schopenhauer is one of the astute thinkers, and deserves to be carefully studied at universities.

Excellent video, I'll recommend to others. Using the spectrum of light as a metaphor is a bit ironic, as Schopenhauer despised Newton's theory of light, preferring his and Goethe's. More on the quantum connections in Bernardo Kastrup's Decoding Schopenhauer's Metaphysics. (There's also more on Pauli in his Decoding Jung's Metaphysics).

Very right about this. As a practicing philosopher of physics, Schopenhauer is the thinker who has had the greatest influence on me.

@aidanhall6679

4 ай бұрын

How does one generally become a professional philosopher of science? I’ve heard many practicing philosopher start out in stem, most notably mathematics and physics. Is this true? How did you get to where you are today? Thanks

@relativemotion2077

4 ай бұрын

@@aidanhall6679 started out in natural sciences, focussing on physics, then founds a masters in philosophy of physics as I wasn't satisfied with going on to do a physics PhD. I'm now a PhD student in philosophy of physics.

@dallinfullmer3073

3 ай бұрын

How the hell do you reconcile entanglement, decoherence, and information with Schopenhauerian idealism? All concrete, proven, and applied mathematical models that don't rely on conscious participation to be true?

@Maitatron

3 ай бұрын

@@relativemotion2077 Have you heard about Helena Blavatsky? She is the founder of the Theosophical Society and author of The Secret Doctrine at the end of the 19th century. This magnum opus The Secret Doctrine is intended to be the Synthesis of Science, Religion and Philosophy.

@relativemotion2077

3 ай бұрын

@@Maitatron I've heard of Blavatsky but was not under the impression her work would be relevant to what I do. I may have a look out of curiosity some time.

Not just a letter exchange with Carl Jung, Pauli was his patient!

please do a video on Schroedinger's work

I would be highly interested to see some Schrödinger and Schopenhauer related contend!

I'm in for everything related to Schopenhauer's influence and legacy in modern science. In the Mind and Matter video, please have a slot about Schopenhauer's influence in Schrödinger's 'What is Life?' too and how it lead to the discovery of the DNA.

really an amazing video! After reading the 4th chapter of Will and Representatiom I thought it sounded very ”einstein”, later I found out that Einstein was a Schopenhauer fan 😂

Great video! But let’s talk about Kant for a second. Kant was primarily a metaphysician, and his entire project in The Critique of Pure Reason was to save metaphysics because of Hume’s attack on it as a legitimate discipline. Hume showed that we cannot conclude by associations we form from seeing things occur together habitually in experience that such co-occurrence is attributable to anything other than pure chance. That is, we cannot establish causation, simply by observing that event B always follows event A, or to use Hume’s lingo, constant conjunction does not imply a necessary connection. For Kant, this was unacceptable, but he realized that Hume was right. Therefore, there must be something wrong with empiricism altogether-we might not be able to intuit such a thing with sensory perception purely through experience, but perhaps we have some other faculty which accomplishes this. Rather than appeal to innate knowledge and rationalism, Kant asked a deeper question: What if our faculty for reasoning itself, the thing which enables us to say things like “If A then B, A, therefore B,” was emptied of all of its contents, and we analyzed it to see how it does what it does? Pure reason is the subtracting away from our faculties-in our faculty of perception in the case of the Transendental Aesthetic, and in our analytical capacity in the Transendental Deduction. By this distinction and its analysis, Kant re-establishes our ability to know certain things about the world and our ability to practice metaphysics despite the problems of empiricism, because empiricism is only part of the equation. Kant says that we have access to necessary truths, and The Critique is meant to be akin to a formal proof establishing that some necessary truths are not purely analytic, but rather rely on contents of experience, though nonetheless provable: synthetic a priori propositions. Kant does not say that we cannot have knowledge of the world. He only claims that we cannot have direct knowledge of the world through perceptual experience. Knowledge of the world must be arrived through the application of the categories to the analysis of the contents of perception, which is why he is so careful to piece apart experience into distinct phases of analysis: forms of apperception, synthetic unity of the maniforld of intuition, transcendental unity of appercetion. When the contents of experience are analyzed at each level of Kant’s analysis in the Transcendental Aesthetic and they are considered with respect to the categories of pure reason, we get concepts of understanding. So even without direct knowledge of the world though sensory experience, which is impossible, we nevertheless are able to apply knowledge of necessary truths to the contents of sensory experience as sythetic a priori propositions, giving us knowledge of the world. This is the very thing that The Critique is about.

That sounds like a great idea regarding Schrodinger.

Another video that proves your channel to be a goldmine

Can you make a video on Wittgenstein?

Dude started his magnum opus with the phrase "The world is my idea. "

few talk about this, its significant link.

Maybe your best video!

Do a video about Schrödinger's mind and matter. That would be very interesting.

I think you should make a video on panpsychism next...

Do you have a suggestion on the best book (bio or otherwise) on Schopenhauer and his philosophy?

@CrazyLinguiniLegs

4 ай бұрын

Schopenhauer’s own books are well written and quite enjoyable. Having said that, I have heard others recommend Bryan Magee’s book and Bernardo Kastrup’s book. If you do a google search for them, I believe you can find the pdf files of both of those for free.

I feel better after I read Shoepenhauer. He relieved me of my illusory hope!! ! 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

Observation in QM has nothing to do with consciousness or perception. When we "observe" the position of an electron before it reaches the two slits, the observation refers to the beam of photons forcing the electrons' wave function to collapse. It has nothing to do with a conscious human or animal looking at an electron.

Mind and Matter. I want a video on it.

I’m not sure he’s called Mikhaïl Faraday lmao. Good vid btw!

I'm not a Quantum Physicist, but this is also why I love Schopenhauer.

As a spiritual questor who found my satisfaction in Advaita Vedanta when I studied some quantum physics as part of my undergraduate science degree I was amazed to read that Neil's Bohr demonstrated that the perceiver and perceived arise together . That was about 35 years ago . This was pure Advaita . Since then I have followed developments in quantum physics which culminated in the 2022 Nobel prize for physics for the demonstration that there was no such thing as local Reality . Indian physicists with a background in Vedanta were thrilled by this ' Oh so science has caught up with our ancient philosophy at last ' .🙂. I sometimes watch the Atheist Experience on KZread and amazed how far behind the curve the Atheist community are . I think the case for Idealism has already been made and Bernardo Kastrup is particularly eloquent about this . Of course there are physicalists who can't handle recent developments in quantum physics - they even challenged the award of the 2022 Nobel Prize for Physics . E=🕉️

Didnt Pauli actually coautored a book on synchronicity with Jung?

This makes complete sense but im shocked these giants of physics indulged in the philosophy of schopenhauer because I do too. Im no genius of course but he is one of my favorite thinkers along with people like Thomas Sowell and Jordan Peterson. So now im convinced there is something intriguing about schopenhauer's work that attracts the same people that care for something like theoretical physics. Its likely a deep cruiosity for all things existential. A curiosity driven by negative emotions like fear and anger.

@ownificationify

3 ай бұрын

The "thing" you're talking about is fear about a world with no God.

Kants view of space and time as mere tools of perception reminds me of the Hindu idea of maya which is described to mean the physical world but also to mean illusion

What separates one thing from another is space and time, but these two are objective, not merely SUBJECTIVE as Schopenhauer claims.

Schrodinger is also worth exploring.

Hi Weltgeist. I am still trying to come to terms with Schopenhauer’s metaphysical system. The “Will” is clearly of the highest importance for Schopenhauer’s entire philosophy. From my understanding, Schopenhauer believed that this Will was eternal, transcendent, singular, non-spatial, non-temporal, impersonal and irrational. It would seem then that all the multiplicity that we find in the world - between different objects and events (and even potentially different selves) - are only part of the world of “appearance” (or representation). Given this, is it true then that “the physical universe,” and all of the physical objects in the world, are nothing but mere illusions (for Schopenhauer), and all that really exists is this transcendent Schopenhauerian Will? Does this mean that all physical truths and facts are really just phenomenal/mental truths and facts for Schopenhauer? Also, at a fundamental level, what exactly is this “Will?” If it produces the entire cosmos, then what is this singular entity ‘*in-of-itself*’ for Schopenhauer. Usually, the term “Will” in philosophy, is a feature of mind. Is it therefore the case that for Schopenhauer, this Will is fundamentally mental or possesses some experiential quality? Thanks

Do the deep dive!

I think Alain Badiou is one the most important contemporary philosophers in these subjects.

'The common man marvels at the uncommon, the wise man at the commonplace.' Ultimately, most of philosophy/metaphysics or ontology boils down to problem of the One and the Many. Schopenhauer= Plato + Kant ( and the Upanishads). Good vid and I try to encourage such content with a like and a comment (any) for the YT algo'. We need more young folk to embrace und promulgate our rich philosophical heritage.

The notion of unity or oneness necessarily implies that it must have some sort of boundaries, even if such boundaries are to be considered infinite, hence inconceivable. However, the notion of a boundary should in turn imply a separation between what a thing is and what it is not. In other words, it would be impossible to define a thing without implying an ontological distinction between what that thing is and what it is not. Moreover, if unity should refer to the notion of totality or everything, it would still imply that it cannot be nothing. Therefore, unity must imply non-unity, or multiplicity in other words, because for the notion of unity to be conceived in the first place, there must be at least an ontological distinction between that which conceives and that which is conceived. Consequently, there must exist an interdependence between mind and notion, resulting in a lack of inherent essence of any of the two: Both mind and notion (such as unity and multiplicity) rely on each other for their essences. Therefore, the closest definition of reality is that of a dream in which the very notions of "dreamer", "dreaming" and "dream" also belong to the same dream.

Doesn’t Plato’s Socrates argue this about divinity? In book 2 or 3 of The Republic?

Einstein liked Schopenhauer because the latter claimed that "I can do what I want but not want what I want", a concept denying human free will and thus one's capacity to think.

If time doesn't really exist in the phenomenal world out there for various reasons, in the manifest world we experience, then how can it be a representation of an external unity? Only space can then be fundamental in that unity, and is in such way not different from Parmenides

If you ask where the flowers come from - even the god of spring does not know.

i mean its coherent w our line of scientific reasoning even in so far as to the latest interpretations of black holes - where at the bridge between our World and Nothingness reality is but a tapestry of non-local causalities, stretched eternally and eternally interwoven by quantum entanglement at the largest of distances

@annaturquoise7114

4 ай бұрын

The Well spoke about this w the information loss paradox

@honkhonk8009

3 ай бұрын

bro loes using big words

Schrödinger? Yes! Pleas 😊

Schopenhauer was a profound influence on all arts and sciences during that time.

It’s a bit of a stretch but sure. I imagine relationalism is becoming more popular than newton’s independent view of space and time, at least in philosophy of physics circles. Quantum physics has made it obvious that we cannot study the world without affecting it, and moreso, entanglement suggests we reconsider the otherwise flat tapestry of spatial and temporal connections. Simultaneously, the compatibility of purely epistemological interpretations of quantum theory, such as QBism, is surprisingly attractive due to their minimal ontological assumptions.

Metaphysics is the byproduct of axiology. Physics is the byproduct of metaphysics. Our worldview tells as much about what we value as it tells about the nature of reality.

Einstein did NOT keep a portrait of Schopenhauer. The third portrait was of Newton. How did you acquire this information?

Excellent, brilliant thank you There is only one major problem with part of this, but it's easy to understand how we get it wrong. There is no drive to procreate. Most life cannot even conceive of what it is doing in the metacognitive and linguistic sense. ALL of evolution is driven by the aversion to noxious stimuli mediated by negative valences of consciousness. Sex urges are relieved - that drives procreation. It might seem like a semantic distinction that makes no difference, but it's extremely important to understand this if we want to solve the root problem of the sentient predicament. I'm convinced, for example, David Pearce and others are probably right in that the measurement problem in QM and the phenomenal binding problem in philosophy of mind and neuroscience are the same issue, or at least different versions of the same root problem, and that quantum darwinism is basically true. The "representation" Schopenhauer talks about is essentially fitness-enhancing configurations of a qualitative primitive. Loved it though, thank you