In this essay I will be primarily looking into Schopenhauer’s views on pessimism, explaining the impossibility of fulfillment (i.e., a happy, satisfied life) according to him and examining the bases of nihilism from Nietzsche’s point of view, underlining the illegitimacy of our determined values as well as the inhospitality of our world. Furthermore, I will state both philosopher’s views on the actions of Johannes in Kierkegaard’s story Diary of the Seducer. Schopenhauer would justify Johannes’ exasperated state at the end of the story with his hypothesis that fulfillment of desires lead to boredom and hence a contented life is ultimately prevented. On the other hand, Nietzsche would argue the absurdity of Johannes’ efforts to inconspicuously seduce Cordelia since his value in this regard (i.e., love) is inconsequential from the beginning.
Kierkegaard’s Diary of the Seducer is written from the point of view of Johannes (the narrative being comprised of his diary) who is an older man infatuated at the first sight of Cordelia, a younger and lively woman. Johannes works ardently to make Cordelia marry him but he doesn’t literally or physically force her to give her hand in marriage (war of liberation). Rather, he wants Cordelia’s freedom of choice which is why he makes sure she gets a good education and is knowledgeable enough to liberally make choices that are most profitable for her. “True enjoyment [is] when one can so arrange it that a girl’s only desire is to give herself freely, when she feels that her whole happiness depends on this, when she almost begs to make this free submission” (Kierkegaard, EO p. 51). With this unscrupulous plan in mind, Johannes keeps shamelessly stalking Cordelia and crafting relations with people from her social circle including her aunt, Jette, and another lover of hers, Edward. In a way, Johannes does indiscreetly influence Cordelia by manipulating her few connections, diminishing their freedom instead of hers. The fact that Johannes’ method is hard and intricate keeps his mission interesting. Cordelia stays as his ultimate goal, the one thing in life he strives towards, which keeps his passion ripe. It is right to conclude that Johannes wants Cordelia to be free in choices because it prevents him from drifting to a state of ‘insignificance’ or rather, ‘boredom’. However, when Johannes finally marries Cordelia, he has fulfilled the only substantial mission he had, leaving him with no other interests, passions and a reason to keep loving Cordelia.“Now all resistance is impossible, and only as long as that is present is it beautiful to love; when it is ended, there is only weakness and habit. I do not wish to be reminded of my relation to her; she has lost the fragrance [...] from now on she can no longer engross my soul.” (Kierkegaard, EO, pp. 79-80)
To understand Schopenhauer’s views on the aforementioned bizarre man, we first need to dissect his understanding of the pessimistic world. According to Schopenhauer there are to types of happiness: (i) hedonistic and (ii) desire-satisfaction. Hedonism simply states that ‘the happy life’ is a pleasant life whilst the desire-satisfaction type of love says one needs to have everything one wishes to have for a happy life. Firstly, Schopenhauer undoubtedly agrees that a happy life must be pleasant but he also dictates that pleasure asks for the satisfaction of desires/wishes. The pleasant life can be explained as a pain-free life where there is no present sufferings that kindle agony. When we’re under pain we desire its cessation, hence our desires are not all fulfilled and our life is not pleasant. Experiencing the ongoing frustration/insuperability of our desires is suffering itself which contrasts with pleasure. Schopenhauer then goes on to explain the impossibility of a happy life (i.e., a pleasant life with all desires fulfilled), pessimism. He claims there are two types of desires to be fulfilled: (i) first order desires such as love, fame, fortune, etc. and (ii) the second order desire to have desires, be engaged and interested. Schopenhauer considers ‘desiring’ as a desire because of his hypothesis that a life without desires is boring. Boredom emerges when you’re no longer ‘willing and striving’ to do stuff, when there is a lack of desire. Boredom isn’t a pleasant state, on the contrary, it is when one longs to engage in desire, it is a form of suffering as Schopenhauer puts it. This concludes that the fulfillment/satisfaction of the first order desires leads to boredom (suffering) and ignites pain but the fulfillment of the second order desire suggests that one or more of your first order desires isn’t satisfied which again is a source of pain. Thus, ‘the happy life’ is a mere impossibility and this claim itself is pessimism. “Everything in life proclaims that earthly happiness is destined to be frustrated or recognized as an illusion. The grounds for this lie deep in the very nature of things.” (Schopenhauer, WWR II xlvi; p. 573)
If we look at Diary of the Seducer again, Johannes choosing the hard way to make Cordelia marry him, trying keep himself interested and retreating into an agonizing state of boredom when they’re together, suddenly falling out of love proves Schopenhauer’s theory. The man is in pain trying to accomplish his one true desire and is pain again when he does accomplish ‘her’. Schopenhauer would hence find Johannes’ arduous efforts in reaching Cordelia meaningless since the pessimistic world, will not give way for him to be happy anyways. “Hence its life swings like a pendulum to and fro between pain and boredom, and these two are in fact its ultimate constituents.” (Schopenhauer, WWR, I §57)
On the other hand, Nietzsche’s reaction to the same events would be based on his perception of existential nihilism. Most basically, Nietzsche’s nihilism states that life and everything happening within it are without ‘objective’ meaning, they are purposeless and absurd. Thus, life isn’t worth living. The criteria of life’s worthiness, according to Nietzsche depends on the tenacity of values (e.g., love). With legitimate (its worth can be assessed) and realizable values our life engenders a goal worth pursuing. However, the universe lacks legitimate values, no matter our aims we keep asking ‘why’ is it that we live and act in such a way, we keep searching agitatedly for a meaning in life and we reach no objective ends. If we examine the devoted Christians in the middle ages, they were dogmatically chained to their beliefs and had no need to question their God or the meaning of life. The promised after life (no matter how much you suffer on earth) gave their lives meaning. This is why Nietzsche has said “God is dead.”. For the nihilist, coming by the ascendancy of science, the value of God is questionable (no longer objective), God has become ‘unworthy of belief’, the most prominent goal there ever was (religious yielding) is no longer legitimate. Another way to put it would be: the highest values are devaluated. To declare our highest values, we need conditions that are comparable with ‘lower’ values but as Nietzsche exclaims, the highest value (e.g., God) is illegitimate and therefore, the conditions of all values are unworthy.
Following this belief of nihilism, Nietzsche would find Johannes’ everlasting efforts to marry Cordelia nonsensical. Love, like all other values, is meaningless and will not grant Johanness a purpose in life. The world has become inhospitable for our values in the sense that our existential inquires, the why reason for our world and even ourselves to exist, are unanswerable by the once cherished values. To overcome this meaningless state, one would need to discover one’s true self, question one’s individuality to explore more of it rather than give in to illegitimate values like Johannes’ love/infatuation for Cordelia. Nietzsche says, one can only truly identify oneself after suffering remarkably and discovering the things that are worth enduring-this would be to overcome existential nihilism.
Comments