Schopenhauer and the Two Orders of Purposiveness in the World

William Mattioli
{"title":"Schopenhauer and the Two Orders of Purposiveness in the World","authors":"William Mattioli","doi":"10.5902/2179378667452","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper, I intend to argue that the emergence of the material conditions for the suppression and denial of the will in the human organism (the extraordinary and to some extent “unnatural” development of the brain) is not something like an “accident on the way” of will's manifestation in the world. It is rather, as it were, an intentional result of the whole process of objectivation of the will, a result that emerges from a teleological order. This teleological order is primary and more fundamental than the teleological order of nature that produces each phenomenon and each organic structure according to its ability to promote the emergence, conservation and expansion of life. This means that we have to understand the problematic principle of nature's purposiveness in Schopenhauer's thought as containing two distinct and largely contradictory orders of purpose. We can call these two orders of purposiveness “order of nature” and “order of salvation” (in analogy to Schopenhauer’s “kingdom of nature” and “kingdom of grace”). These two orders of purpose correspond to what I understand to be two forms of teleology that coexist in constant tension in his system: a functional and an ethical-soteriological teleology.","PeriodicalId":111706,"journal":{"name":"Voluntas: Revista Internacional de Filosofia","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Voluntas: Revista Internacional de Filosofia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5902/2179378667452","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

In this paper, I intend to argue that the emergence of the material conditions for the suppression and denial of the will in the human organism (the extraordinary and to some extent “unnatural” development of the brain) is not something like an “accident on the way” of will's manifestation in the world. It is rather, as it were, an intentional result of the whole process of objectivation of the will, a result that emerges from a teleological order. This teleological order is primary and more fundamental than the teleological order of nature that produces each phenomenon and each organic structure according to its ability to promote the emergence, conservation and expansion of life. This means that we have to understand the problematic principle of nature's purposiveness in Schopenhauer's thought as containing two distinct and largely contradictory orders of purpose. We can call these two orders of purposiveness “order of nature” and “order of salvation” (in analogy to Schopenhauer’s “kingdom of nature” and “kingdom of grace”). These two orders of purpose correspond to what I understand to be two forms of teleology that coexist in constant tension in his system: a functional and an ethical-soteriological teleology.
叔本华与世界的两种目的性秩序
在本文中,我打算论证,在人类有机体中出现的压抑和否定意志的物质条件(大脑的非凡和某种程度上的“非自然”发展)并不像是意志在世界上表现的“途中的意外”。更确切地说,它是意志客观化整个过程的一个有意的结果,一个从目的论秩序中产生的结果。这种目的论秩序比自然界的目的论秩序更初级,更根本,因为自然界的目的论秩序根据其促进生命出现、保存和扩展的能力,产生了每一种现象和每一种有机结构。这意味着我们必须理解叔本华思想中存在问题的自然合意性原则,因为它包含了两种截然不同且在很大程度上相互矛盾的目的秩序。我们可以把这两种合意性秩序称为“自然秩序”和“救赎秩序”(类似于叔本华的“自然王国”和“恩典王国”)。这两种目的顺序与我所理解的两种形式的目的论相对应,这两种形式的目的论在他的体系中以持续的张力共存:一种是功能目的论,一种是伦理目的论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信