I would like to know who of mycontemporaries should be more competent inKantian philosophy than me.(Schopenhauer in a letter to Rosenkranz and Schubert, 18371)In this paper the attempt is made to show how Schopenhauer's critique of Kant leads from initial disagreements to a fundamental modification, even a new formation, of the Kantian concepts of understanding, reason, imagination, perception, idea and thing-in-itself. The starting point and the core of his critique is the demand for the appreciation of intuitive knowledge which is (...) apart from and independent of reason. The intuitive knowledge goes back to images and its highest form is aesthetic contemplation. Without a participation of concepts it is sufficient to explain objective reality. Particularly on the basis of Schopenhauer's critical examination of Kant's schematism it can be shown that his alternative conception of an image-based objectivity of experience is to be taken seriously, even if the way he presents it sometimes gives the impression of a mere misunderstanding of Kant's theory of cognition. (shrink)

En este artículo sondearemos los modos de conciencia de un sujeto que intenta desencadenarse de la voluptuosidad y del dolor, dado que la conciencia que posibilita el descubrimiento de la voluntad en cuanto cosa en sí es fruto del éxtasis de su negación. Testimonios personales del filósofo aunados con referentes platónicos y kantianos entre la conciencia empírica y la mejor, ayudarán a esclarecer el desencadenamiento de la metafísica de la voluntad. In this article we shall delve into the conscience moods (...) in a subject who intends to unchain from voluptuosness and pain, inasmuch as the conscience that makes it possible the discovery of will as the thing in itself is the fruit of its negation ecstasy. Personal testimonies of the philosopher together with Platonic and Kantian referents between the empirical conscience and the better conscience will help to elucidate the unleashing of will metaphysics. (shrink)

ABSTRACT As has long been recognized, Arthur Schopenhauer’s intellectual encounter with the Orient represents a departure from previous Western philosophers’ approaches to it. What has been less appreciated, however, is that this encounter also marks a pivotal moment in the modern critique of systematic philosophies of history. Since Schopenhauer doubted that there was any logic in history, either in the form of a providential plan or a rationally intelligible structure, he impugned both history’s scientific status and its significance for an (...) understanding of the human condition. Rejecting both Christian eschatology and the modern theory of progress, he opted instead for a transhistorical perspective. This denigration of history, which had far-reaching repercussions in the latter half of the nineteenth century, must be understood in light of Schopenhauer’s engagement with non-Western philosophy. Schopenhauer’s devaluation of the significance of historical difference, in stark opposition to the philosophers of history who preceded him, contributed to his receptivity to non-Western thought; and his belief in the affinity between his own transhistorical perspective and the teachings of Hinduism and Buddhism informed his antagonism to contemporary historical narratives and theories. (shrink)

After a brief introduction to Krause’s life and work this article investigates the impression, based of the available sources, that Krause had an important influence on Schopenhauer’s philosophy. It then provides a concise systematic analysis of central elements of Krause’s and Schopenhauer’s thinking and thereby substantiates the claim that Krause did indeed have a significant influence on the development of the philosophy of Arthur Schopenhauer.

Este trabajo pretende examinar la recepción de la filosofía de Arthur Schopenhauer en el período comprendido entre 1818 y 1848, y con ello contribuir a una desmitificación sobre la fortuna del pensamiento de este filósofo en estas tres décadas anteriores al comienzo de su fama. Para ello, tras ofrecer una imagen general del mito personal que ha marcado una buena parte de la tradición historiográfica y según el cual su filosofía habría sido silenciada o ignorada, presentaremos, mediante el análisis de (...) las noticias que de ella dieron sus contemporáneos en reseñas, historias de la filosofía o enciclopedias, las cuatro líneas fundamentales de su recepción: una lectura que hizo hincapié en los rasgos orientales de su filosofía, una interpretación en clave idealista que acusaba una falta de originalidad en ella, una comunidad académica que la situaba en contra “del espíritu de la época” por el papel subalterno de la razón frente a la voluntad y, por último, la aparición de sus primeros seguidores. (shrink)