Talk:Arthur Schopenhauer's aesthetics

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Philosophy (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.


  • This is a great article, but maybe something on criticisms of Schopenhauer's aesthetics would be useful. I'm currently writing an essay on the subject, so when that's done and dusted I might return and extend this article a bit.
By all means do. - Smerdis of Tlön 12:58, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
  • There does not seem to be any bibliography for Schopenhauer's aesthics philosophy. Where did all this information come from? (And I mean the Primary Source, not Magee's book.) Doktor Waterhouse 13:23, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
The best place to look for information about Schopenhauer's thoughts about art is The World as Will and Representation, Volume I, Third Book, Dover 1969, ISBN 0-486-21761-2.Lestrade 19:26, 20 May 2007 (UTC)Lestrade

In a nutshell[edit]

Schopenhauer's aesthetics can be summarized in one sentence: "Turning your attention to the world as pure representation will relieve you from experiencing the world as will."Lestrade (talk) 12:24, 26 September 2008 (UTC)Lestrade


It may be a good idea to emphasize that Schopenhauer did not consider the main importance of art to be its cognitive value. Art is not important merely because it affords an opportunity to acquire knowledge of the represented object or of its Platonic Idea. For Schopenhauer, art is of major importance because of the pleasure that it affords. The pleasure is totally negative in that it consists of the absence of willing. Art takes the person, who is a mere spectator, temporarily out of his/her everyday life of wanting, desiring, and striving. For confirmation, just look at the faces of people who are engrossed in watching a fascinating film or reading a gripping novel.Lestrade (talk) 17:20, 22 September 2009 (UTC)Lestrade