Søren Kierkegaard, a towering figure of 19th-century Danish philosophy and often regarded as a precursor to existentialism, delved deeply into the intricate relationship between human suffering and the quest for meaning.
I personally think he's serious overrated, and even 'dishonest' (while being sincere and in good faith) compared to Schopenhauer, who basically had the guts to say, without mincing words: 'YES, life has NO meaning. It is actually a DISTURBANCE between never having been born and going back to a state of tranquil non-existence. This all relates to the Will, a dumb, blind force that cares only for continuing the species but nothing for the individual, thus eating its own tail.'.
I mean, think about it: when you were born, you were cast into an eternal, dreamless sleep (for what would be the difference)? You had nothing to lose. But you get cast into life, and now you have ALL to lose.
I just don't understand why even today the honesty of Schopenhauer is ignored or underappreciated. He himself would probably be quite spiteful of Kierkegaard, for the latter mentions 'the Absolute', an Hegelian term which Schopenhauer dismissed as worthless mumbo-jumbo, and for implying that theology is philosophy, which Schopenhauer said it's not: theology merely tries to pass itself as philosophy, but it's a travesty of it.
Schopenhauer was NOT advocating nihilism. He opposed suicide although he did not demonize it as many contemporaries did.
In his works such as Parerga, he was advising to 'not be fearful as soon as the clouds start to gather', and that the evils we fear may never come to pass, etc.
Really valuable advice, rather than the weird and rather ineffective ideas of Kierkegaard. This 'leap of faith' thing, what is it? Faith about what? Faith in god? That's so common, and unworthy of a real philosopher.
He even wrote that this 'leap' is problematic. No kidding. When a part of you tells you you WANT to believe something, but another says that it might just be a silly delusion, you WILL have problems believing it.
I haven't read anything by Kierkegaard, or rather, started to and gave up after a few pages. So maybe I am missing something worthwhile about him, but after trying several times to understand what this man was saying, I continue to be disappointed. Sure, an interesting thinker, even a beautiful mind. But his ideas seem to me to be weak and do not hold water.
Better reading Frankl. The poor man had no choice but to continue the fight, a true knight of life. If someone who, after making it alive out of a concentration camp, found out that only his sister was alive, says life is worth living, then I want to learn from him.
''...suffering is not merely an obstacle to happiness but a vital component of personal growth and authentic existence.''.
Yet the second argument doesn't defeats the first one. Even if it were true that suffering makes one grow and live 'more authentically', there's a limit to how much suffering one can take. If you had your entire family exterminated by the Nazi, say, there's very little there that 'makes you grow' or 'live more authentically'. The saying: 'what does NOT break you, makes you stronger, applies'. The strong tree in the wind cannot but break in a tornado.
“pain can serve as a catalyst for personal transformation”
I personally think he's serious overrated, and even 'dishonest' (while being sincere and in good faith) compared to Schopenhauer, who basically had the guts to say, without mincing words: 'YES, life has NO meaning. It is actually a DISTURBANCE between never having been born and going back to a state of tranquil non-existence. This all relates to the Will, a dumb, blind force that cares only for continuing the species but nothing for the individual, thus eating its own tail.'.
I mean, think about it: when you were born, you were cast into an eternal, dreamless sleep (for what would be the difference)? You had nothing to lose. But you get cast into life, and now you have ALL to lose.
I just don't understand why even today the honesty of Schopenhauer is ignored or underappreciated. He himself would probably be quite spiteful of Kierkegaard, for the latter mentions 'the Absolute', an Hegelian term which Schopenhauer dismissed as worthless mumbo-jumbo, and for implying that theology is philosophy, which Schopenhauer said it's not: theology merely tries to pass itself as philosophy, but it's a travesty of it.
Schopenhauer was NOT advocating nihilism. He opposed suicide although he did not demonize it as many contemporaries did.
In his works such as Parerga, he was advising to 'not be fearful as soon as the clouds start to gather', and that the evils we fear may never come to pass, etc.
Really valuable advice, rather than the weird and rather ineffective ideas of Kierkegaard. This 'leap of faith' thing, what is it? Faith about what? Faith in god? That's so common, and unworthy of a real philosopher.
He even wrote that this 'leap' is problematic. No kidding. When a part of you tells you you WANT to believe something, but another says that it might just be a silly delusion, you WILL have problems believing it.
I haven't read anything by Kierkegaard, or rather, started to and gave up after a few pages. So maybe I am missing something worthwhile about him, but after trying several times to understand what this man was saying, I continue to be disappointed. Sure, an interesting thinker, even a beautiful mind. But his ideas seem to me to be weak and do not hold water.
Better reading Frankl. The poor man had no choice but to continue the fight, a true knight of life. If someone who, after making it alive out of a concentration camp, found out that only his sister was alive, says life is worth living, then I want to learn from him.
Thank you for the article! Very well written!
''...suffering is not merely an obstacle to happiness but a vital component of personal growth and authentic existence.''.
Yet the second argument doesn't defeats the first one. Even if it were true that suffering makes one grow and live 'more authentically', there's a limit to how much suffering one can take. If you had your entire family exterminated by the Nazi, say, there's very little there that 'makes you grow' or 'live more authentically'. The saying: 'what does NOT break you, makes you stronger, applies'. The strong tree in the wind cannot but break in a tornado.