- Hardcover: 226 pages
- Publisher: Hackett Publishing Co, Inc; 2nd Revised edition edition (Dec 1995)
- Language English
- ISBN-10: 1571810528
- ISBN-13: 978-1571810526
- Product Dimensions: 21.8 x 14.4 x 2.2 cm
- Amazon Bestsellers Rank: 2,757,122 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
| ||||||||||||||||||
Did you know you can trade in your old books for an Amazon.co.uk Gift Card to spend on the things you want? Visit the Amazon.co.uk Trade-In Store for more details. |
Product details |
More About the Author
Product Description
Product Description
Interest in Schopenhauer has increased noticeably in recent years. Published here is one of his key works, which has been out of print for a long time, in the form of Payne's definitive translation. This work is one of the most significant nineteenth century treatises on ethics. It is also Schopenhauer's most extended discussion of traditional themes in ethics and presents a descriptive ethics radically at odds with rationally based, prescriptive ethical theories. Schopenhauer begins this book with a wide-ranging critique of Kant's ethics, one that anticipates the work of contemporary critics of modern moral philosophy like that of G E M Anscombe, Philippa Foot, and Richard Taylor. Schopenhauer argues that compassion is the basis of morality, and in so doing presents a virtue ethics in which passion and desire are viewed as the keys for explaining different moral characters, behaviours, and world views. In the concluding part of his essay, Schopenhauer sketches his metaphysics of morals, using Kant's transcendental idealism as a ground for stressing both the interconnectiveness of being and the affinity of his ethics to Eastern thought.
About the Author
Arthur Schopenhauer
--This text refers to the
Paperback
edition.
Inside This Book
(Learn More)
Browse and search another edition of this book.
Browse and search another edition of this book.
First Sentence
A prize question, posed by the Royal Dutch Society at Harlem in 1810 and answered by J. C. F. Meister, was the following: "Why do philosophers differ so widely on the first principles of morals, but agree on the conclusions and duties which they derive from such principles?" Read the first page
Front Cover | Copyright | Table of Contents | Excerpt | Index | Back Cover
A prize question, posed by the Royal Dutch Society at Harlem in 1810 and answered by J. C. F. Meister, was the following: "Why do philosophers differ so widely on the first principles of morals, but agree on the conclusions and duties which they derive from such principles?" Read the first page
Explore More
Concordance
Browse Sample PagesConcordance
Front Cover | Copyright | Table of Contents | Excerpt | Index | Back Cover
Tag this product(What's this?)Think of a tag as a keyword or label you consider is strongly related to this product.
Tags will help all customers organise and find favourite items. |
Sell a Digital Version of This Book in the Kindle Store
If you are a publisher or author and hold the digital rights to a book, you can sell a digital version of it in our Kindle Store.
Learn more
What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?
Customer Reviews
There are no customer reviews yet on Amazon.co.uk.
5 star
4 star
3 star
2 star
1 star
Most Helpful Customer Reviews on Amazon.com (beta)
Amazon.com:
3 reviews
41 of 43 people found the following review helpful
An Absolutely Beautiful Book
26 Jan 2005
Format:Paperback
The nineteenth century produced many different systems of ethics. While Kant, Nietzsche, Mill, and Hegel all contributed greatly to ethical thought, the greatest contribution, in my opinion, came from Arthur Schopenhauer.
On the Basis of Morality is not only a beautifully written book; it's quite simply, in my estimation, the most convincing (and humane) exposition on ethics that I've ever read. Schopenhauer's rightly hailed literary style is especially lucid here, and On the Basis of Morality is much more of an immediately digestible read as compared to The World as Will and Representation.
Schopenhauer's elegant polemic against Kant's ethics of duty, i.e. the categorical imperative, is very effective. Schopenhauer deconstructs Kant's rational ethics with such prodding efficiency that it's amazing that Schopenhauer isn't mentioned more frequently as a corrective to Kant's ethical thought. Schopenhauer also makes it a point to mention that Kant's ethics rely heavily on theism, albeit in a clandestine way. Schopenhauer's ethical thought is atheistic to the core.
The main thesis that Schopenhauer argues is that the basis of morality is compassion. In other words, the vast majority of so-called "moral" acts that we commit are in fact nothing of the sort. They are merely self-interested acts that we perform to either do what we are supposed to do, or because we will receive some sort of compensation. Schopenhauer's definition is quite different: only completely altruistic acts are moral.
Another aspect of On the Basis of Morality that I find so appealing is that it mixes Kant's transcendental idealism with a Buddhist sense of compassion for all sentient beings. Schopenhauer appropriated Kant's idealism of the thing-in-itself, and he defines that as a blind will to live that permeates all things. Therefore, everything is interconnected via the Will. Schopenhauer reiterates that true morality is compassion for ALL living beings, not humans alone. Schopenhauer was very much ahead of his time in this respect.
This is currently out of print, which is truly a shame. It's a great book by a great philosopher, and it deserves to be read.
On the Basis of Morality is not only a beautifully written book; it's quite simply, in my estimation, the most convincing (and humane) exposition on ethics that I've ever read. Schopenhauer's rightly hailed literary style is especially lucid here, and On the Basis of Morality is much more of an immediately digestible read as compared to The World as Will and Representation.
Schopenhauer's elegant polemic against Kant's ethics of duty, i.e. the categorical imperative, is very effective. Schopenhauer deconstructs Kant's rational ethics with such prodding efficiency that it's amazing that Schopenhauer isn't mentioned more frequently as a corrective to Kant's ethical thought. Schopenhauer also makes it a point to mention that Kant's ethics rely heavily on theism, albeit in a clandestine way. Schopenhauer's ethical thought is atheistic to the core.
The main thesis that Schopenhauer argues is that the basis of morality is compassion. In other words, the vast majority of so-called "moral" acts that we commit are in fact nothing of the sort. They are merely self-interested acts that we perform to either do what we are supposed to do, or because we will receive some sort of compensation. Schopenhauer's definition is quite different: only completely altruistic acts are moral.
Another aspect of On the Basis of Morality that I find so appealing is that it mixes Kant's transcendental idealism with a Buddhist sense of compassion for all sentient beings. Schopenhauer appropriated Kant's idealism of the thing-in-itself, and he defines that as a blind will to live that permeates all things. Therefore, everything is interconnected via the Will. Schopenhauer reiterates that true morality is compassion for ALL living beings, not humans alone. Schopenhauer was very much ahead of his time in this respect.
This is currently out of print, which is truly a shame. It's a great book by a great philosopher, and it deserves to be read.
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful
BOBWIRE
18 Oct 2009
Format:Paperback|Amazon Verified Purchase
Excellent read, but deep. I recommend that this treatise be read slowly. Reader should have a basic understanding of Kantian Ethics prior to reading this refutation.
6 of 8 people found the following review helpful
Schopenhauer's Basis for Morality
31 May 2008
Format:Paperback
I would just like to agree with the above reviewer in saying that Schopenhauer's philosophy outshines just about any other from the 19th century. Many praise Schopenhauer's writing style or his wonderful prose, but I cannot honestly say that I think every word of Schopenhauer is valuable. His ideas are worth more than diamonds, but I find that a lot of his writing can be a bit flowery. In the Basis of Morality, Schopenhauer does quite a bit of wandering and I find it hard to stay interested when he starts critisising Kant. However, that being said, I managed to find his statement of compassion in about 1-2 sentences somewhere in the middle, and it is the best explanation of compassoin that I have found yet. To sum up in a sentence, as pointed out correctly by the above reviewer, since we are simply instances of will in living organisms, which are basically material imbued with the 'spark' or 'will' of life, compassion is simply the recognition that there is No Difference between us and any other life form, becuase we are all of the same living will.
Were these reviews helpful?
Let us know
Customer Discussions
|
This product's forum
Active discussions in related forums
Search Customer Discussions
|
Related forums
|
Listmania!
Look for similar items by category
Look for similar items by subject
Feedback
- Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
- I am the Author, and I want to comment on my book.
- I am the Publisher, and I want to comment on this book.
