Decoding Schopenhauer's Metaphysics: The Key to Understanding How It Solves the Hard Problem of Consciousness and the Paradoxes of Quantum Mechanics

by Bernardo Kastrup

First proposed more than 200 years ago, Schopenhauer's extraordinarily prescient metaphysics if understood along the lines thoroughly elucidated and substantiated in this volume offers powerful answers not only to the paradoxes of quantum mechanics, but also to modern philosophical dilemmas such as the hard problem of consciousness which plagues mainstream physicalism, and the subject combination problem which plagues constitutive panpsychism. This invaluable treasure of the Western philosophical canon has eluded us so far because Schopenhauer's argument has been consistently misunderstood and misrepresented, even at the hands of presumed experts. Hoping to change this situation, Decoding Schopenhauer's Metaphysics, offers a conceptual framework, a decoding key for unlocking the sense of Schopenhauer's metaphysical contentions in a way that renders them mutually consistent. With this key in mind, even those who earlier dismissed Schopenhauer's metaphysics should be able to return to it with fresh eyes and at last grasp its meaning. And for those as yet unacquainted with Schopenhauerian thought, this volume offers a succinct and accessible entry path.

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction, Metaphysics, Psychology, Science, Spirituality, Quantum Mechanics

144 pages, Paperback

First published July 31, 2020

About the author

Bernardo Kastrup is the Executive Director of Essentia Foundation and Founder/CEO at AI systems company Euclyd BV. His work has set off the modern renaissance of metaphysical idealism. He has a Ph.D. in philosophy (ontology, philosophy of mind) and another in computer engineering (reconfigurable computing, artificial intelligence). As a scientist, Bernardo has worked for the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) and the Philips Research Laboratories (where the 'Casimir Effect' of Quantum Field Theory was discovered). He has also been creatively active in the high-tech industry for almost 30 years, having founded parallel processor company Silicon Hive (acquired by Intel in 2011) and worked as a technology strategist for the geopolitically significant company ASML. Most recently, he has founded AI hardware company Euclyd BV. Formulated in detail in many academic papers and books, Bernardo's ideas have been featured on 'Scientific American,' the magazine of 'The Institute of Art and Ideas,' the 'Blog of the American Philosophical Association' and 'Big Think,' among others. His most defining book is 'Analytic Idealism in a Nutshell: A straightforward summary of the 21st-century's only plausible metaphysics.' For more information, visit www.bernardokastrup.com.

Reviews

[Artūrs Kaņepājs · Rating 5 out of 5]

Having recently read Schopenhauer's magnum opus, I think Kastrup does an excellent job in summarizing, clarifying, and defending it. These tasks have been neglected, important and frankly, do not seem very difficult. This is b/c Schopenhauer's critics misinterpreted key aspects of his metaphysics, and therefore attacked a strawman.

My main doubts concern Schopenhauer's original ideas about the implications. I don't think there's a strong case for the teleological speculations ie that we are here b/c the will wants to know what it wills and why. Also, humans (especially contemplating philosophers) playing a very special role, among other animals and other potential agents, is too self-serving and arbitrary to be convincing. For some reason Kastrup does not acknowledge these ideas as speculative or address potential criticisms.

Schopenhauer was probably aware of the difficulties with interpreting him correctly; no wonder he orders to read the Will (a) only in the original language (b) at least twice. Sadly, seems like even professional critics have not made even one charitable attempt. But his ideas can revolutionize one's worldview, as they have mine. So kudos to Kastrup for elucidating the current & future cursory readers about what Schopenhauer actually meant, and encouraging to take him more seriously. An extremely needed and valuable contribution.

[Imaginarium · Rating 4 out of 5]

Now, this is a book that makes you want to read Schopenhauer!

This book is a reaction to Schopenhauer: A Very Short Introduction by Christian Janaway, which I have also read. Janaway's book is very weird. He is very critical of Schopenhauer to the point of calling his metaphysics a failure! Very dismissive and definitely not motivating the reader to study the works of the great philosopher. One can't imagine why would Janaway spend so much time writing articles, book chapters, and even collaborate in the newest translation of Schopenhauer's magnum opus, if he doesn't respect it.

Kastrup treats Schopenhauer with respect he deserves. He makes clear the points from The World as Will and Representation that are important and profound and original. When you read it, you feel that Bernardo sees great value in Schopenhauer, and you start to see it too. This is how an entry-level book about a philosophical work should look like. Bernardo delivered.

Words have many meanings. The sense of a word is made clear from its use and the context. This is how we speak and write in everyday life. And Kastrup — deliberately — makes perfect use of this fact. This is how he is able to interpret Schopenhauer's work and resolve apparent contradictions and inconsistencies — points, where some philosophers found baffling.

I still think it would be great for Kastrup to address points made by other people. For example, Bryan Magee believes that the best sense of Will would be something like a physical force that blindly drives everything. And Moira Nicholls in The Thing-in-itself And Will In The Thought of Schopenhauer (a PhD thesis) lists six plausible interpretations of Will. Kastrup focused only on his own (but consistent with some others, including Julian Young's) and on Janaway's.

What I would also like to hear about are some criticisms of Schopenhauer's system by Kastrup himself. I'm sure he has some points of disagreements. Especially considering the fact that he himself put forward a metaphysical system, very similar to that of Schopenhauer, yet with certain differences. Making clear the points of contention would be valuable to the reader.

There are some peculiarities in the book, which I will list only briefly. Kastrup claims that:
- Will has an instinctive (unknown to itself) purpose or goal, towards which it strives — this is very contentious and I feel like the point could use some more argumentation,
- Will is mental and experiential — again, a very contentious topic, but Bernardo makes it consistent throughout the whole work,
- Will dissociates itself into separate alters (various personalities embodies in animals, including humans) — this point comes directly from Kastrup's own metaphysics and seems to sit wobbilly in the present work.

Additionally,
- it wasn't clear to me how exactly the eternal Ideas (borrowed from "Platonic Idea") can give rise to particulars (for example, how the Idea of "catness" gives rise to particular cats), and how to square this with the appearance of new forms of life through evolution. The idea of Idea is very digital or category-like, rather than analog or smooth. We carve out cats from the world and abstract the concept of "cat" or "catness", even though there are instances where forms (of life or other things) change smoothly from one to another.
- Kastrup introduces his concept of alters to explain why we have different points of view, even though there is only a singular thing-in-itself (Will). Because of this, the very concept of Will complexifies, as there has to be something in Will that generates those alters, there have to be some processes that dissociate the mind at large into disparate, particular minds of animals. It feels like these processes are different than Will in some way.

Finally, a note about the narrator — Robert Fass. The narrator did a stellar job. This may be the best narration of a philosophical work I've experienced. When other narrators are flat and put you to sleep, Fass has a very natural intonation and he keeps you focused on the book. A very pleasant experience.

Both the book and the narration were so good, I read the book in one day. I highly recommend it for every fan of philosophy and of Schopenhauer.

[Jan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very interesting book about Schopenhauers metaphysics. Schopenhauer was a philosophical idealist, and it seems to me that Kastrup's interpretation of his philosophy is right. The book also shows the importance of clearly definining the words we use, especially when we discuss a phenomenon like consciousness. Schopenhauer's metaphysics has been misinterpreted in recent works because of terminology, and because it's hard to understand idealism if you can't let go of your materialist preconceptions. It's like one of those drawings that both depict, say, an old woman and a rabbit, and you have to 'flip your mind around' as it were, to see each. Many are unable to do it, because materialism has become the default popular belief of our time. Even though the mainstream of philosophy since the Greeks was always idealist.

Schopenhauer called what we usually call fundamental, or cosmic consciousness, the will, because he saw will as its basic tendency: the will to evolve freedom and understanding of itself. It evolves from a vague tendency, analogous to instinct, in inorganic matter, to an ever more conscious, intelligent and meta-conscious state, as in us, human beings. In our perception (the representation Schopenhauer calls that) this spiritual process is depicted as the evolution of matter into more and more complex organisms.

Kastrup's book is clear and concise, and can easily be read, as he says, in a weekend. It assumes a certain familiarity with idealism, or rather the different forms of it. Kastrup's brand of idealism (a modern, scientifically 'savvy' brand) is explained fully in his 'The Idea of the World'.

[putperest · Rating 5 out of 5]

so the culmination of thousands of years of western philosophic tradition arrived at the same point through analytical means, what was written in the eastern religious / mystic texts 3000 years ago.
god truly loves cosmic symmetry.

[Oskar Mortensen · Rating 5 out of 5]

Bernardo Kastrup har med Decoding Schopenhauer’s Metaphysics skrevet endnu en perle af en bog!

[Ryan Schmitt · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book helped me make sense of Schopenhauer's metaphysics, and to a lesser extent of German Idealism in general. Approaching Schopenhauer's philosophy through the lens of the hard problem of consciousness made things click for me, and clarified much of what that overall philosophical project was trying to accomplish. Several parts of this book, such as the discussions of quantum mechanics and the recovery of the distinction between consciousness and meta-consciousness, are very impressive and strike me as a significant contribution to both Schopenhauer scholarship and the philosophy of mind. Some of Kastrup's other explorations later in the book (such as Platonic Ideas, and his analysis of "denial of the will") are rather less successful, but on the whole I think this book brings tremendous clarity to a number of difficult subjects.

[Tobi ﾄﾋﾞ · Rating 3 out of 5]

will reread when i understand him more on a basic level

[Tobias Johnson · Rating 5 out of 5]

I don't even know what to think about reality anymore. I'm certain about things on a surface level but the deeper I go the more I'm just like ah welp i'll never understand that. The world is a true mystery. Mindblowing that any patterns and regularities emerge out of a ginormous unknown soup

[şahan · Rating 5 out of 5]

The chapter on the quantum mechanics was a good summary.

[M Spiering · Rating 4 out of 5]

I found this to be a quick but not necessarily easy read. Kastrup sets out to explore a broadly idealistic metaphysical framework as outlined in Arthur Schopenhauer's "The World as Will and Representation." I've not read this original work, so I don't know how closely Kastrup hews to it, but he's forthcoming in acknowledging that some of the more speculative bits in "Decoding..." are his.

Overall, I came away with the impression that trying to develop ontological models to get at the fact that reality just appears as though there is a subject-object duality, including a world made of material "stuff"--when in fact it's all one whole mental structure--inadvertently reinforces the "conventional" materialistic model.

As outlined in the book--and I'm loosely summarising--space and time are added to experience in the mind at some unconscious level. Concepts then emerge from conscious mental processes that allow an individual to navigate a world whose inner workings, the thing in itself (as previously defined by Kant) or the Will (as defined by Schopenhauer), remain obscured because the Will cannot grasp itself through representation (i.e., via [meta]cognitive processes in what Kastrup calls the Will's alters--the appearance of separate conscious individuals).

This is all well and good, and I really appreciated the clarity of this part. Where is becomes unwieldy is, for example, when Kastrup then tries to explain physical phenomena like non-local effects (or spooky actions at a distance) in quantum mechanics. The gist is, according to the author, that such effects occur because each individual observer (or alter) inhabits their own "physical" world, rendering non-locality moot. Something seems amiss, most notably the role, if any, of the reader who is trying to make sense of these descriptions of befuddling physical phenomena--what happens, presumably unintentionally by the author--is that the world seems more fragmented into distinct entities, not less.

Kastrup does go to some length to explain that these are all models couched out of necessity in symbolic language, which inherently has a subject-object structure (unless one is a skilled poet). But others, such as philosophers in the Yogacara school of Buddhism, plowing the same grounds, i.e., the nature of consciousness, are more successful in making these fundamentals clear without these linguistic pitfalls. For instance, they nudge one closer to the understanding that dualism arises from a cognitive distortion that's useful in so far as it allows to reach for something denoted "apple" and eat it, but holds us back when we want to find out at a deeper level why we're finding ourselves often at odds with the world and then suffer.

Kastrup does discuss suffering at some length, but mentions Buddhism only briefly, foregoing an opportunity to give this important facet of human experience a wider airing by drawing on parallel "idealistic" philosophies that have already developed some highly effective approaches and useful language. "When conventional reality submerges [in the mind], ultimate reality emerges [in the mind]" (attributable to Buddhist scholars like the Burmese monk Mahasi Sayadaw) provides a more intuitive account than Kastrup's attempts to explain the workings of the Mind/Will through analogies with vibrations and resonance, which often end up reinforcing physicalism.

So although I'm struck by the author's deep thoughts on the subject, I'm also left wondering whether he's somehow marooned himself by not meaningfully engaging with closely aligned philosophies, or, more importantly, more contrarian ones.

This gets me to my last point. Whenever I start a book on a weighty topic, I first read the acknowledgements to get a sense of the author's openness to criticism and whom they consider their peers and friends. I was a little dismayed that the book doesn't contain any acknowledgements--perhaps just an oversight or a means to keep printing costs down. But this, along with its other caveats, prevents me from recommending this work wholeheartedly even though I enjoyed and learnt much from reading it.

[António · Rating 5 out of 5]

In an era where the lines between Eastern and Western intellectual traditions are increasingly intertwined, Bernardo Kastrup’s Decoding Schopenhauer’s Metaphysics emerges as a brilliant and accessible exploration of one of philosophy’s most enigmatic figures. Arthur Schopenhauer, the 19th-century German thinker, was a trailblazer in European philosophy, notably for his incorporation of Eastern philosophy—specifically the non-dualistic teachings of Advaita Vedanta—into the Western canon. His concept of the "Will" as the fundamental essence of reality echoed the Advaita notion of Brahman, marking a profound synthesis that challenged the philosophical norms of his time. Kastrup’s paperback not only honors this legacy but revitalizes it, making Schopenhauer’s intricate metaphysics both comprehensible and strikingly relevant to today’s intellectual landscape.

Schopenhauer’s integration of Advaita Vedanta was nothing short of revolutionary. At a time when European philosophy was dominated by rationalism and idealism, he dared to look eastward, recognizing the unity beneath the apparent multiplicity of existence. His "Will"—a blind, impersonal force driving all phenomena—paralleled the Eastern view of an ultimate reality beyond individual distinctions. This bold fusion laid a foundation that Kastrup now builds upon with remarkable clarity and purpose.

In Decoding Schopenhauer’s Metaphysics, Kastrup performs a magnificent tour de force, distilling Schopenhauer’s dense and often daunting ideas into a framework that speaks directly to contemporary challenges. He deftly navigates the philosopher’s complex prose, offering lucid explanations enriched with vivid analogies.

What truly distinguishes this book is Kastrup’s application of Schopenhauer’s metaphysics to the hard questions plaguing physics and the philosophy of mind. In physics, mysteries like the observer effect in quantum mechanics—where consciousness seems to influence reality—find an ally in Schopenhauer’s assertion that the Will underpins all existence. Kastrup argues persuasively that this perspective positions consciousness as primary, not a byproduct of matter, offering a fresh lens on debates between materialism and panpsychism. Similarly, in the philosophy of mind, the "hard problem" of consciousness—how subjective experience emerges from physical processes—is reframed through Schopenhauer’s lens as a non-issue: if consciousness is fundamental, as the Will suggests, the question dissolves into a recognition of its primacy. These connections are not mere speculation; Kastrup grounds them in rigorous analysis, making Schopenhauer’s ideas a vital tool for today’s thinkers.

Kastrup’s writing is a delight—engaging, jargon-free, and brimming with passion. He sidesteps academic dryness, opting instead for relatable examples that invite readers into the conversation. This accessibility, paired with his insightful interpretations, transforms the book into both an intellectual journey and an inspiring call to rethink our place in the cosmos.

Decoding Schopenhauer’s Metaphysics is a must-read for anyone intrigued by the intersections of philosophy, science, and spirituality. Kastrup not only demystifies a towering figure but also proves that Schopenhauer’s vision—almost ignored and neglected in our time—remains a powerful framework for understanding the universe’s deepest mysteries.

[Dkettmann · Rating 5 out of 5]

(audio version)
Excellent work on a very dense topic! I'm a casual consumer of light academic Philosophy, and have been for some time -- a healthy mix of The Great Courses style lectures, podcasts and audiobooks. I started this book pretty much in the dark on Schopenhauer's metaphysics, but with a somewhat good idea of the branch called metaphysics and a vague sense of his work.

The author beautifully lays out what the book's aim is in the introduction. Me paraphrasing the author:

"Philosophers have been misunderstanding Schop's metaphysics the whole time and continue to do so. This is a great injustice to his legacy, because the way I have come to see it after much study/thought makes a lot more sense and still has merit and shouldn't be dismissed. Also with the newest discoveries of quantum states, it kind of makes even more sense."

Then a warning to the reader follows, paraphrasing again "I'm going to move fast. I'm going to keep this to the point and not go down too many tangents, nor spend time on hammering points home. You might get a bit lost and want/need to re-read some sections, but I want to keep this short"

and

"The only two books I will draw from are Schop's original publication and the most recent Very Short Introductions book on Schop. which I think well illustrates the parts that almost all get wrong"

I appreciated knowing that ahead of time, and it was a very accurate statement. The almost 4 hour audiobook really cooks but it is super interesting while doing so. Funny enough I have listened to quite a few of the VSI series of books and in another world I may have listened to that one first instead and this one and that would have been a fun moment. I digress.

What then ensued was a perfect-for-my-level summary of the outline of Schop's metaphysics. Then it got deeper and deeper. Still very interesting and expertly presented, there were some parts that felt more like a bullride and felt a bit over my head. Struggled once or twice with the very occasional, brief comparisons to other contemporaneous German philosophers' theories of the time but that isn't to ding it, just to kind of highlight that it can get quite academic in some parts.

This is a small thing, but where it really tried to toss me off was when half way through the author attempts to tie Schop's metaphysics to recent discoveries in Quantum Theory. Now, in general I can mostly grok the particle/wave dualism issue, and I mostly understand the slit lamp experiment in a general way. But this book, overall, really made some assumptions that the reader is both pretty smart at Philosophy and Quantum Mechanics with not much on-ramp to either. It being an academic Philosophy book, my deficiencies on that first topic are 100% on me. But I really felt a bit ambushed by the level of quantum theory discussed. When the book turned to this I did have a bit of a panic moment fearing the rest of the book would be building on this aspect that was lost on me, but was very very relieved when after 10-15 mins the subject moved back to Philosophy and stayed there.

Great book. Concise. Not light reading but rewarding and short.

[John · Rating 5 out of 5]

”We must learn to understand nature from ourselves, not ourselves from nature.” - Arthur Schopenhauer

Schopenhauer’s work both supports and edifies the world-inverting (and liberating) philosophy Kastrup has been espousing in his ten books over the past decade: reality is fundamentally mental, instinctively volitional, and phenomenally conscious; we are dissociated alters of the unitary Whole. While we delude ourselves into believing in the primary reality of an external physical world “out there,” all we have ever known—all we can ever know—lies right here within our own consciousness, and our perceptions of an external world are just our alter’s translations of our own fundamental Being: “the one eye of the world which looks out from all knowing creatures.”

Now that Kastrup has discovered an ally in Schopenhauer, an early 18th-century German philosopher, his metaphysical model seems to have evolved slightly. Here we find a broader spectrum of representation and re-representation that explains the experience of plants, animals, human perception, and human abstraction. More importantly, Kastrup’s “Mind-at-large” (cosmic consciousness) seems to have seamlessly assimilated the volition and telos of Schopenhauer’s “universal will.” Together, they decipher the dynamism of our universe, explain the existence of life, and embody our purpose, both collectively and individually.

”Through us, thus, the will attains a level of meta-cognitive self-control and a degree of freedom from the maelstrom of its own instinctive unfolding. Abstract representations overwhelm our endogenous feelings, define our actions in their stead, and ultimately make sense of the world. This, for Schopenhauer, is the purpose of life.”

Kastrup is a philosopher in a minority position, and he devotes many pages to explain his contentions with other philosophers. Although I found this informative, it does detract somewhat from the beauty of his ideas. Regardless, I continue to find that his clear, analytic thinking mollifies the tyranny of my intellect, allowing a cohesive, peaceful union between the blind man who carries me and the lame man who thinks for me, especially on the topic of Quantum Mechanics. I have read the works of several physicists, including Carlo Rovelli, and none of them can reconcile the findings of our most fundamental physical theory with any semblance of intuitive sense. Bernardo manages exactly this. It was riveting, and I found myself smiling with excitement throughout.

When I read Bernardo’s words, I feel a sense of peace come over me. No longer must I endure the oppression of a threatening, obstacle-ridden external world, because no such thing exists. Indeed, “I” do not exist. Instead, the “eye of the world” looks through a transient, unique perspective and beholds, as through a mirror, the resonating splendor of herself. My problems are illusions.

[Clement · Rating 5 out of 5]

Thank you Bernardo for connecting all the dots for me about the meaning of LIFE! Quotes from the book below:
"The primordial impetus of the will is towards self-understanding: it yearns instinctively—i.e. not meta-cognitively—to figure out explicitly what it wills and why. Without self-understanding, the will drowns in the maelstrom of its own unfolding. It is this irresistible impulse that, through self-excitation according to the will’s natural modes, led and still leads to the rise of living organisms: the images of local, dissociative configurations of the will—alters—that seemingly split off from the rest so to be able to contemplate it as object.With life, there arose the world as representation—i.e. the image of the will as it presents itself from across a dissociative boundary—which, in turn, enabled re-representation. And because re-representation is the sine qua non of self-understanding, with it the will finally developed the potential for self-understanding that it instinctively seeks. The epitome of this development is human beings, capable of many layers of re-representation. Through us, and our meta-conscious contemplation of ourselves and of nature at large, the will learns about what it yearns and why.The highest degree of the will’s self-understanding is achieved through human contemplation of the eternal Ideas, which reveals the will’s basic templates of striving or natural modes of excitation and, therefore, its essential properties. With focused attention and an initial re-representation that sets the world—as object—apart from the subject, human beings can apprehend these Ideas through perceptual feelings. This way, the world as representation comprises symbols of the eternal Ideas, pointers to something essential and immanent in all nature. Its purpose in the universal unfolding of the will is to be studied and deciphered for the attainment of the will’s self-understanding.Having apprehended the eternal Ideas, human beings can, thereafter, rationally process the corresponding insights. For this, we leverage the many layers of re-representation characteristic of our conceptual reasoning, so to replace the instinctive dispositions of the will with deliberate purposes. Through us, thus, the will attains a level of meta-cognitive self-control and a degree of freedom from the maelstrom of its own instinctive unfolding. Abstract representations overwhelm our endogenous feelings (see Figure 1), define our actions in their stead, and ultimately make sense of the world. This, for Schopenhauer, is the purpose of life."

[Jonathan Hockey · Rating 4 out of 5]

A clear, good, and convincing interpretation of Schopenhauer's metaphysics. I haven't considered Schopenhauer for many years, having been at one time fascinated by his perspective, though never getting quite on board with the Buddhist denial of the will aspect. But Kastrup puts a spin on this idea that does make some sense.

My main issue remains with the whole idea of representations, which I think is already a misstep, and puts us in some "dissociated" state by default, to fit it within the way Kastrup interprets this. When in reality, I think we are able to connect directly with real surroundings and do not need to consider ourselves trapped in a world of representations. Kastrup tries to avert the infinite hall of mirrors of representations with his dissociated identity idea, but I remain unconvinced of the comprehensiveness or adequacy of this idea to fill this hole.

Regarding Quantum theory he makes some good points for how Schopenhauer's views can be seen as presaging a better metaphysics for making sense of it, but of course, one could say the same of many idealist philosophies, including Kant in a more idealist reading, Leibniz and then lets not forget the process philosophy of Whitehead and Bergsons vitalism. Offshoots in this latter case perhaps of Schopenhauer himself.

But a problematic, to my mind, other offshoot of this approach is the Being for itself, in itself philosophy of Sartre. Problematic I would say because it becomes embroiled in levels of existential relativism that may be a danger to a good and proper scientific and metaphysical understanding of reality.

Nevertheless, certainly enough to renew some interest for me in the ideas of Schopenhauer and I may revisit his Opus, World as Will and Representation at some point accordingly. I will be interested also to compare and contrast this view with Bryan Magee's, who was also quite keen on Schopenhauer's metaphysics and felt it had gone underappreciated, and wrote a significant book on the topic.

[Tom · Rating 3 out of 5]

A punchy little book that clarifies some big-picture issues surrounding Schopenhauer's metaphysics. While ostensibly a response to wrong-headed criticism alleging contradiction or inconsistency, I read this rather as an introduction to Schopenhauer, in preparation for diving into The Will and Representation at some point next year (inshallah). I found it very useful in that regard.

After a strong first half focused on untangling Schopenhauer's writings, the second half discussed quantum physics and disassociative identity disorder (aka "multiple personalities"), and seemed to be be less about Schopenhauer's ideas and more about the author's own approach to these topics.

The greatest value offered by this book is its clear and concise statement in the early chapters of the most charitable and coherent reading of Schopenhauer's philosophical ideas about the nature of appearance and reality.

[Lawliettt · Rating 4 out of 5]

8.5/10

Le doy esta nota debido a que pienso que todo lo anterior a los últimos dos capítulos es perfecto, explica concisa y sencillamente su filosofía de una manera magistral y con esquemas y analogías que no se me habían ocurrido antes. Sin embargo, los dos últimos capítulos me parecen una malinterpretación relativamente grande de lo que a Schopenhauer se refiere cuando habla de la negación de la voluntad. En síntesis, Kastrup afirma lo siguiente:

"In summary, when Schopenhauer talks about the denial of the will he is referring merely to the subjugation of the endogenous feeling states of an alter by the alter’s overwhelming apprehension of eternal Ideas through sense impressions. But this apprehension itself also consists of (nonindividual) states of the will. As such, the ‘denial of the will’ isn’t actually a denial of the will as ground of being, but merely a suppression of particular experiential states from the field of self-reflection of an alter. This is Schopenhauer’s recipe for the temporary end—or at least alleviation—of human suffering, and for the achievement of life’s metaphysical meaning"
-Bernardo Kastrup, Decoding Schopenhauer’s Metaphysics, p. 112.


De modo que para Kastrup, como vemos, la negación de la voluntad, en primer lugar, se consigue a través de la contemplación de las ideas y es en este punto es donde tengo mi primera objeción, es cierto que con la contemplación de las ideas hay una suerte de negación de la voluntad, pero no es la negación de la voluntad propiamente dicha, simplemente hay que recordar los pasajes del primer volumen de El Mundo como Voluntad y Representación (tercer libro) donde Schopenhauer afirma que en la contemplación de las ideas desaparece el mundo como voluntad y sólo resta el mundo como representación, ahora bien, teniendo en cuenta esto, comparémoslo con la conclusión del cuarto libro de este volumen, donde habla de la negación de la voluntad propiamente dicha y explícitamente afirma lo siguiente:

"Así hemos conocido la esencia en sí del mundo como voluntad, y en todas sus manifestaciones solo hemos reconocido su objetivación, y hemos seguido a esta desde el oscuro apremio inconsciente de las oscuras fuerzas de la naturaleza hasta el obrar más plenamente consciente del hombre. Así, no rehuimos en modo alguno la consecuencia de que, con la libre negación, la supresión de la voluntad, también se suprimen todos esos fenómenos, ese continuo apremio e impulso sin meta ni descanso sobre todos los niveles de objetivación en que consiste el mundo, suprimiéndose la multiplicidad gradual de las formas subsiguientes, al suprimirse con la voluntad su fenómeno global, finalmente también las formas de este, tiempo y espacio, y también su última forma fundamental, sujeto y objeto. Ninguna voluntad: ninguna representación, ningún mundo."
-Arthur Schopenhauer, El Mundo como Voluntad y Representación I.


De modo que, como vemos, en la negación de la voluntad propiamente dicha no hay ni voluntad ni representación, y, por consiguiente, tampoco contemplación de ideas, ya que estas permanecen a la contemplación estética que es parte de la representación, como he mencionado arriba. El problema es que Kastrup parece confundir la suerte de negación de la voluntad que ocurre en la contemplación de las ideas con la negación de la voluntad en sí.

Por otro lado, en segundo lugar, Kastrup también afirma que para Schopenhauer la negación de la voluntad no significa literalmente eso, ya que aún permanece "the will at large" como él la llama y se refiere a eso cuando habla de "As such, the ‘denial of the will’ isn’t actually a denial of the will as ground of being". Cosa con la que estoy sumamente en desacuerdo, al fin y al cabo, de ser esto así, para Schopenhauer no habría distinción entre morir y negar la voluntad, de modo que alguien que viviese una vida guiada por pasiones sumamente intensas y muriese llegaría a la misma conclusión que alguien que ha negado la voluntad, a fin de cuentas ambos se han fusionado con esta "will at large". Por otro lado, Schopenhauer mismo afirma en el primer volumen lo siguiente: "El mundo es mi voluntad", que concuerda con el resto de tesis al respecto de este asunto que concierne a su negación, la verdadera clave es que para Schopenhauer, alguien que muere sin negar la voluntad regresará a esa especie de seno donde estamos todos sumergidos que es la voluntad pero este renacerá, ya que la voluntad le otorgará un nuevo intelecto, y así vivirá las vidas que sean necesarias hasta llegar a negarse a sí misma, y, de ese modo, logrará escapar de este ciclo de reencarnaciones (negando la "will at large"), concepto que, por cierto, es muy similar al Samsara.


En conclusión, es un muy buen libro en caso de que no tengas tiempo para leer la obra capital de Schopenhauer salvo por los dos últimos capítulos, yo especulo que Kastrup realmente sabía a lo que se refería Schopenhauer (al fin y al cabo lo entendió casi todo con perfecta claridad y leyó el libro varias veces), pero debido a lo sumamente contrarias que resultan las conclusiones del propio Schopenhauer al sentido común decidió maquillarlas un poco para que no sonase tan raro, al fin y al cabo uno de sus objetivos con este libro era darle valor a la metafísica de Schopenhauer en la actualidad, y aclaraciones como las que he hecho a lo largo de este post quizá incomodasen a algunos lectores, pero bueno, es una simple especulación lo que estoy haciendo ahora. De todos modos ha sido un muy buen libro, me ha encantado, definitivamente seguiré leyendo más cosas de Kastrup.

[Esioan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Another classic from Kastrup. He perfectly explicates the enlightening nature of Schopenhauer's metaphysics, with great use of reference to Quantum Mechanics and empirical neuroscience research. The brevity and succinct style here is what's most impressive though. I can't think of any other thinkers - bar Nietzsche when it comes to length- who can cover so many topics with such nuance, all in a page limit of 120. He really is a relic.

If you're interested in novel interpretations of quantum physics, German idealism and eastern spirituality from a methodological, lucid and most of all scientific perspective, you can't beat Bernardo.

[Maša Bratuša · Rating 5 out of 5]

what a pleasant surprise this book was! i picked it up for the thesis, looking for inspiration and sources related to the CEMI theory of consciousness and it delivered so much more. it basically connected and grounded all of the vague metaphysical notions that ive found some sense in up to now.

the takeaway is that schopenhauer must be read "context-dependent" and then his metaphysics can be rehabilititated. and kastrup really convinces us that they should be.

the book is really conscise, but not as conscise as the author promised in the preface hehe. all in all, very good, probably understands schopenhauer better than schopenhauer does. favourites.

[Kenneth Bachmann · Rating 3 out of 5]

As usual, Kastrup's remarkable intelligence and excellent writing skills are evident. My mediocre rating is much more due to my own inadequacies rather than to any fault of Kastrup. The book reads (as is appropriate) more like a doctoral dissertation than a book for laymen. He takes a deep dive into the metaphysics of Schopenhauer and the refutation of Schopenhauer's critic(s). His writing and thoroughness is appropriate for the task, however the book reads more like a dissertation intended for critical review by academic metaphysicists rather than a book for the lay public in my opinion. I did find the entanglement between Schopenhauer's metaphysics and analytic idealism to be satisfying.

[Luke · Rating 5 out of 5]

Thank you, someone who actually understands Schopenhauer before critiquing him! I love the consideration to how others read Schopenhauer's philosophy, and how they misinterpret hypocrisies in his logic using an overly reductionistic lens. The most important thing to recognize is Schopenhauer's use of certain words without a solid operational definition. Kastrup eloquently shows how it is important for those words to change meaning and have the freedom to open the mind of the reader. Regardless of how you read Schopenhauer, don't miss how he has brilliantly figured it all out. An important detail to notice!

[AttackGirl · Rating 5 out of 5]

The Will, The Creator, Being. Very well presented and I just loved the defense of Schopenhauer’s work

I said years ago that the Double Slit Experiment is the absolute proof of GOD ( Creator of the ALL).

Universal consciousness, Perhaps with a global platform and AI we will be able to know if all the dreams do fit together to find out ..

I love this type of discussion and will be reading his other books and following his work.

I have read some of Schopenhauers work but nothing of this discussion, I am impressed.

[Calvin · Rating 5 out of 5]

I rarely enjoy reading philosophy, but perhaps it's because I usually don't care much about the topic covered or take issue with the metaphysics beneath.

The topics Kastrup explores with his idealist metaphysics are fascinating, and his metaphysics itself is both illuminating and profound.

Exploring Schopenhauer through this lens, has sparked a new interest in philosophy in general. Looking forward to Kastrup's next book on Jung.

[Robert · Rating 5 out of 5]

I have never read Schopenhauer directly but only through other writers and I have to admit that this book shows Schopenhauer very differently.
Clearly Schopenhauer has been read with a non-context-dependent attitude from people in general and B. Kastrup attempt to truly understand Schopenhauer is sincere at the least. Agreements and disagreements with Schopenhauer's metaphysics in this book are after all individual but the amazing work of Kastrup in undeniable.

[Thomas · Rating 4 out of 5]

Recommended for those who have seen the cracks in the axioms of physicalism, should be enlightening for any philosophically oriented phycisist. Presupposes some basic knowledge on Kant's distinction of the thing-in-itself and the representation, although Kastrup does a decent job of summarizing this concept early on.

[William EightFingers · Rating 5 out of 5]

Best breakdown of Schopenhauer's work I've ever read. I understand "the Will" &"the representation," and the re-representation better than prior to this read. These are fascinating concepts, but according to Schopenhauer, I'm writing this to myself in my solipsism universe.

[John · Rating 5 out of 5]

Required reading list.

[Marco · Rating 2 out of 5]

Too convoluted (for me). Many headache-inducing sentences. The first book by Kastrup I didn't get into.

[Piet van Dongen · Rating 4 out of 5]

Have to reread it twice to understand, I think, but very interesting nonetheless.

[Domagoj Bodlaj · Rating 4 out of 5]

Because reading "The World as Will and Representation" is not an option