Freud and Schopenhauer

Author(s): R. K. Gupta
Source: Journal of the History of Ideas, Vol. 36, No. 4 (Oct. - Dec., 1975), pp. 721-728
Published by: University of Pennsylvania Press
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/2708999
Accessed: 20-12-2018 14:53 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

University of Pennsylvania Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and

extend access to Journal of the History of Ideas

This content downloaded from 193.2.8.218 on Thu, 20 Dec 2018 14:53:13 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 FREUD AND SCHOPENHAUER

BY R. K. GUPTA

That Freud knew and admired many of Schopenhauer's ideas is fairly

known. What is not so well known is the full extent and range of intell
affinity between these two important thinkers. In Schopenhauer's wri
are to be found many of the piercing insights which were later developed a
elaborated by Freud. Since creative process is much too complex to adm
simple formulations, and since Freud had an extremely assimilative m
which absorbed and transmuted ideas from a staggering variety of sour
shall not go so far as to suggest that Freud derived some of his insights fro
the great philosopher and pessimist. I shall content myself with mer
pointing out what seems to me a remarkable similarity of thinking an
proach between the two on many questions of crucial importance.
I. There is a striking similarity between Schopenhauer's view of wil
Freud's concept of id. Both Schopenhauer and Freud reacted against the
vailing overvaluation of reason and intellect in man, and saw the real dr
force behind his action in the dark depths of the unconscious. While H
makes a new divinity of reason in history, identifying reason with ult
reality, Schopenhauer sees the ultimate reality as a blind and involun
force; the will. Schopenhauer accepts his teacher Fichte's doctrine that the w
is the basic substance of the world, the whole being one will differentiated
infinite forms of being. But whereas Fichte looks upon the will as a rat
principle, Schopenhauer regards it as blind, purposeless, and insatiabl
crying and raging in the darkness. Although Leibniz used the term "un
scious" before Schopenhauer, it is Schopenhauer who sees the unconscio
a primitive force of immense potency. In Schopenhauer, the unconscio
will is the source of all that happens. The intellect is just a tool, an instrum
an organ at the behest of the will, which is the seminal force of the univer
his belief that reason is merely an instrument devised to fulfill the clamor
needs of the will, Schopenhauer comes close to Freud's theory of ration
tion. In fact, as George Boas has pointed out, "it is at least plausible"
Freud's "belief in the subordination of reason to the will was suggested to h
by Schopenhauer."1
The will is the "inside" of the world, the noumenon; it objectifies itself
the phenomenon, the multiplicity of phenomena being "idea," the outsi
the world. Thus the will, the macrocosm, is objectified in each individua
microcosm. The will, then, constitutes the sum total of reality, an idea whi
Schopenhauer reiterates with considerable emphasis. "The will alone is a
in itself,"2 the "real inner nature" of man's "phenomenal being."3 "The
nature of everything is will,"4 and "every force in nature should be though

1Dominant Themes of Modern Philosophy (New York, 1957), 545.

2Schopenhauer, The World as Will and Idea; hereafter WWI (London, 1964
142.
3 WWI, I, 141. 4 WWI, II, 407.

721

This content downloaded from 193.2.8.218 on Thu, 20 Dec 2018 14:53:13 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
722 R. K. GUPTA

will." "The word will, . . . like a

everything in nature." Not only
every particular thing, and also
mands that only at rare interval
its threatening rumble and see
that "no possible satisfaction in
a goal to its infinite cravings, an
It is this interpretation that Fr
id, the primal source of psychic
paratus. The id is the seat of in
is oceanic because, like the sea, it
of the id as the true psychic rea
obscure id."8 Just as Schopenh
but a blind and involuntary fo
tional quality,"9 not accessible
cessible part of our personalit
ment."10 Like the will, the id
will, again, it is insatiable-an e
faction. "The power of the id
organism's life. This consists in
"has no organization and no un
faction for the instinctual needs
It is, therefore, "so to speak, a
their ends independently an
Schopenhauer's will is amoral,
pleasure-principle."14 The "plea
the processes in the id." The id,
no morality." "The laws of log
hold for processes in the id." "
in our view, is all that the id c
passions"15 and is the seat of ins
the imperious will in Schopenh
larity. In suggesting that "th
mediate satisfaction without reg
Schopenhauer, "who says of th
strong that a man could slay h
brother's fat."16 Freud himself
Schopenhauer's "unconscious 'W

5 WWI, I, 143-44. 6 WWI, III, 382.

7Freud, An Outline of Psychoanalysis; h
0OPA, 108.
9Freud, New Introductory Lectures on
1962), 100.
'0NILP, 98. 1OPA, 19. 12NILP, 98.
'3Freud, The Question of Lay Analys
'40PA, 109. 15NILP, 99-102.
'6"The Oedipus Complex," Fre
Works of C. G. Jung (New York,

This content downloaded from 193.2.8.218 on Thu, 20 Dec 2018 14:53:13 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 FREUD AND SCHOPENHAUER 723

as seen by psycho-analysis."17 In his essay "A

Psychoanalysis" (Imago, 1917), Freud says that p
heavy blow to the self-love of mankind by demo
man's capacity to control his thoughts and impu
believed it to be. When Abraham remarked of th
pearance of a personal document, Freud replied: "Y
the enumeration in my last paper may give the imp
beside Copernicus and Darwin. But I didn't want
train of thought on that account, and so at least put
ground."18
We should not, of course, press this similarity too
differences between the two. Whereas Freud's id, fo
individual personality, Schopenhauer's will is a w
everywhere in nature, so much so that the vital f
animals are to be explained by its activity. Moreo
to be protected by the ego, Schopenhauer's will br
survival force with it. And finally, whereas Schop
the will to live through renunciation and asceticis
liverance from an evil world, Freud advocates a r
tension of instinctual needs as a means of achievin
adjustment. But the basic affinity of their appr
seething force as the innermost and ultimate reality
II. There is also a remarkable similarity of view
subject of sex. Both Freud and Schopenhauer conside
portance in determining human behavior, and
influence of unconscious sex motives in human conduct and action. "The will
to live," says Schopenhauer, "expresses itself most strongly in the sexual im-
pulse,"19 that "most vehement of all impulses and desires."20 One half of man-
kind, he tells us, is busied with love the greater part of the time. "The sexual
impulse is to be regarded as the inner life of the tree (the species) upon which
the life of the individual grows, like a leaf that is nourished by the tree, and
assists in nourishing the tree; this is why that impulse is so strong, and springs
from the depths of our nature."21 The relation of the sexes is "really the in-
visible central point of all action and conduct, and peeps out everywhere in
spite of all veils thrown over it."22 It is "the true and hereditary lord of the
world," the "kernel of the will to live, and consequently the concentration of
all desire," the "most vehement of desires, the wish of wishes, the concen-
tration of all our volition."23 The "focus of the will, i.e., its concentration and
highest expression, is the sexual impulse and its satisfaction,"24 and thus the
act of generation is "the most distinct expression of the will,... the kernel, the
compendium, the quintessence of the world."25
In his analysis of the importance of sex in human life, Schopenhauer was an

17 "One of the Difficulties of Psycho-Analysis," Collected Papers ofSigmund Freud;

hereafter Collected Papers (New York, 1959), IV, 355.
'8Cited by Ernest Jones, The Life and Work of Sigmund Freud (New York, 1965),
II, 226.
19 WWI, I, 425. 20WWI, III, 376. 2 WWI, 111,310.
22WWI, III, 313. 23WWI, III, 314. 24WWI, III, 380. 25WWI, III, 379.

This content downloaded from 193.2.8.218 on Thu, 20 Dec 2018 14:53:13 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 724 R. K. GUPTA

intrepid pioneer who held ide

influenced by him, and two ou
admired him greatly and cited h
disciple von Hartmann, Schop
Europe before Freud began to
considered them of great value
had been proclaimed by the p
pressive passage,"26 Freud te
Freud's scheme is much too well
tration here. He regards sex as
believes that a neurosis can
"Among the causes of and occ
play an important, an overw
Moreover, the sexual impulse c
of human activity through th
life shows us," he says in Leon
pacity to direct a very tangible
fessional or business activities
yield such contributions becau
limation, i.e., it has the power t
value which are not sexual."
Both Schopenhauer and Freud present a black view of human sexuality and
regard it as an ignoble slavery to nature. Schopenhauer, it may be recalled,
looks upon sex as the lure whereby nature deludes the individual into
contributing to its nefarious goal of perpetuation of the species. It is the re-
productive hunger of the individual which keeps us chained to the wheel of life.
For the individual himself, Schopenhauer points out, the act of sex is nowhere
as romantically pleasurable as he might have anticipated, and is in fact often
followed by feelings of disillusionment and disgust. In fact, Schopenhauer
defines all pleasure as negative in nature, being nothing more than a cessation
of pain. "The satisfaction or the pleasing can never be more than the de-
liverance from a pain, from a want,"29 he tells us, and goes on to say that
"every satisfaction is only the removal of a pain, and brings no positive hap-
piness."30
Freud holds a similarly harsh view of human sexuality. In his three essays
on "The Psychology of Love," he presents a critique of romantic love, and his
writings on the theme of sex show a brooding concern with the idea that
sexuality is in essence vulnerability and that the sexual impulse is intractable to
civilized sensibility. Freud is also keenly sensitive to the transitoriness of sexual
gratification-"something in the nature of the sexual instinct itself," he says,
"is unfavourable to the achievement of absolute gratification,"31-and in his
"Three Essays on Sexuality," he too defines sexual pleasure as a negative
phenomenon, a mere release from painful tension and nothing more. Sexuality

26"The Resistances to Psycho-Analysis," Collected Papers, V, 169.

27 Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality (New York, 1962), 27.
28The Question of Lay Analysis, 53. 29 WWI, I, 411-12. 30 WWI, I, 485.
3"'The Most Prevalent Form of Degradation in Erotic Life," Collected Papers, IV,
214.

This content downloaded from 193.2.8.218 on Thu, 20 Dec 2018 14:53:13 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 FREUD AND SCHOPENHAUER 725

is, he tells us, basically a "detensioning" activity,

it is a form of tension, must be counted "as an unple
then, regards the quest for sexual pleasure as a sel
ment of tension, and is thus, like Schopenhauer, far
of sexual life. To both of them, sex remains a bargai
gent and pressing is this biological need that ma
thoughtless, into seeking its gratification.
Sharing this disenchanted view of human sex life,
Freud and Schopenhauer should also share a disp
women. Schopenhauer, it will be recalled, regards wo
of reproduction: "Women exist in the main solely
species." Women are "childish, frivolous and sho
fective in the powers of reasoning and deliberat
children their whole life long." They are "depend
upon craft; and hence their instinctive capacit
ineradicable tendency to say what is not true."33 For
a debt contracted in youth to be paid for in age.
Freud, too, presents a highly pejorative image
women intellectually deficient and more sensual t
women "the unaesthetic sex"). Women, says Freud
family and sexual life," while men represent "the
tributes to women "a greater amount of narcissis
loved is a stronger need than to love."35 Women h
little sense of justice"; "their social interests are w
and "their capacity for the sublimation of their inst
propensity to early "psychological rigidity and
more predisposed to neurosis. They are in fact lik
in Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego. As
a people to be ruled, so it is a woman's deepest desire
III. The striking affinity of thought and approa
and Freud also extends to other important facets
Schopenhauer and Freud consider excessive repres
personality. Schopenhauer had a deep interest in
while serving his philosophic apprenticeship at th
made frequent visits to the insane at the Charity
great deal on the subject, he came to the conclusio
instances the cause of insanity was repression. If a m
and idiosyncrasies too much, he believed, they tende
and conducted in the end to the madhouse. Now,
repression to be a useful means of securing pers
believed that too much reliance on it could create
Freud goes so far as to regard the theory of repress
of his understanding of the neuroses. Repression bei
at flight," and being also a process which demand

32Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality, 75.

33"On Women," The Essential Schopenhauer (London
34Freud, Civilization and Its Discontents (London, 193
35NILP, 170. 36NILP, 172-73.

This content downloaded from 193.2.8.218 on Thu, 20 Dec 2018 14:53:13 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
726 R. K. GUPTA

of effort," Freud says in The Pr

can have a harmful effect. The h
stinctual impulse becomes hen
cessible, but this means that it
Thus the psychic equilibrium
somehow to force its way into
Then "we are no longer norma
psychotic symptoms arise."38
Freud points out that he had
pendently, but that he later f
knew of no influence that direc
this idea to be original until 0.
'The World as Will and Idea,' wh
nation for insanity. What he sta
ceptance of a painful piece of re
my theory of repression, that o
well read, for the possibility of
Schopenhauer's view that chi
mature attitudes is also interes
subject. "The experiences and
Schopenhauer remarks, "bec
knowledge and experience.... T
formed even in the years of chi
it is later carried out and com
belief on the subject, elaborate
II), is that "the experience of th
influence" on one's life, an inf
experience may in later years "b
direct his actions, force him
choice of his love-object by a pr
fended." The "psychoanalyses o
"that their earliest impressions,
to talk, manifest themselves la
pressions themselves are not
course, interprets childhood m
does not make the painstaking a
Freud's major accomplishment
childhood factors anticipate
psychoanalytical school.
Finally, it is possible to discern
and Freud on the subject of relig
follows Schopenhauer's Dialo
tremely likely that Freud had
and Freud assume that religious

37 The Question of Lay Analysis, 4

38"My Contact with Josef Poppe
39The Basic Writings ofSigmund
40Cited by V. J. McGill, Schopen

This content downloaded from 193.2.8.218 on Thu, 20 Dec 2018 14:53:13 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 FREUD AND SCHOPENHAUER 727

Schopenhauer's essay seems to suggest that relig

for the sake of culture, Freud holds the view tha
impeding the progress and betterment of mank
views religion much more harshly than Schopenh
of Life," Freud says that "the truth of religion
garded .... Its doctrines carry with them the stamp o
originated, the ignorant childhood days of the h
deserve no trust.... If one attempts to assign to
evolution, it seems not so much to be a lasting ac
neurosis which the civilized individual must pass
childhood to maturity."41 Although Schopenhauer
tolerantly than Freud, even he suggests that if relig
the progress of mankind in the knowledge of the tr
most possible forbearance be set aside."42
IV. Perhaps it may not be too fanciful to suggest i
the similarity of views between Schopenhauer and
some central, others peripheral, to their intellectual
larity of general attitude towards life. This attitude
disillusionment and despair. Schopenhauer, the arc
as "a business which does not cover its expenses"
being whose existence is a punishment and an exp
swings like a pendulum between pain and ennui. Und
to live, man blindly and fruitlessly strives to still th
appetite. Freud also implicitly but unmistakably brin
human destiny. His dark vision of the embattled
human mind as a house divided against itself are e
the pervasive tone and tenor of Schopenhauer's
theoretically admitted the possibility of a satisfactor
long and painful experience had told him that in
tory adjustment was rarely achieved. He knew h
nighted creatures, preferred to ignore the voice o
their illusions. He knew and declaimed against the
of dependence, love, happiness, union; the super-e
ciety, progress, brotherhood, fatherhood, finally ev
of reason, energetic, independent, and purposeful
ingless universe."45 Thus, Freud presents a view of t
is entirely consistent with the general pattern an
philosophy. It is fitting that in an Address signe
others, on Freud's eightieth birthday, Freud was d
dent spirit, 'a man and knight, grim and stern of
Schopenhauer, a thinker and investigator who kn
then drew many to him and with him, he went his
which seemed dangerous because they revealed w
den, and illumined dark places."46
It would, of course, be a mistake to ignore the m

41NILP, 215. 42WWl, II, 370. 43WWI, III, 383. 44WWI, III, 391
45Philip Rieff, Freud: The Mind of the Moralist (New York, 1961), xxii.
46Cited by Ernest Jones, III, 205.

This content downloaded from 193.2.8.218 on Thu, 20 Dec 2018 14:53:13 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
728 R. K. GUPTA

these two thinkers on a whole

their approach and emphasis. W
comprehensive, sweeping image
schematic philosophical framewo
inscrutable workings of the h
method is largely intuitive, and
of passion, eloquence, and ri
essentially analytical, with t
monotone. These differences m
parative study of the two. Th
remarkable similarity of view
portance. While Schopenhauer
Freud may be credited with ha
the two established a solid comm
much so that Schopenhauer is of
Freud's major findings. No wo
himself remarks with referen
thinker have divined somethin
details subsequently confirms?"4

Indian Institute of Technology,

47NILP, 139.

GREEK
POETRY
AND
PI <y rf 1S , ~ ^~ rThe literary and intellectual history of the
I^_L O - I? I"~ I Greeks from Homer to Pindar and the first
I I iI Ii u English translation of a book that "has found
its way into the library of every place of learn-

SO PH Y ^| _ll ~ _ f V ultima Hesperia." -The Classical Journal l

A HELEN AND KURT WOLFF BOOK

HERMANN FRNKEL $25.00

Translated by
Moses Hadas and James Willis , ,E
l~ilailailil~lalalalalalalalalill HAR

This content downloaded from 193.2.8.218 on Thu, 20 Dec 2018 14:53:13 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms