1

I believe that Schopenhauer is the closest to describing true reality - at least as far as I have currently developed my thoughts. But if reality-in-itself is pure Will (or what you might call an immaterial realm of thought), and it presents itself as the material world (Representation), why should it represent itself this way? To me, this does not solve or address the hard problem of consciousness.

Would Schopenhauer say that the way our brains function is merely correlated to our Will? In other words, I feel happy, and my brain corresponds by firing synapses and releasing chemicals that, from a material view, represent happiness? If that is what he is saying, why should it appear that way? How and why does this representation form?

I do not see how transcendental idealism solves or avoids the hard problem of consciousness.

Improve this question
1
  • Schopenhauer's Will is not a "realm of thought", it is a realm of drives, blind, thoughtless and irrational. Nor does it "present itself" as anything in particular, the drives fragment into individuations and those, not encompassing the entirety of the Will, represent what they lack access to as external. The particular form of representation is an artifact of drives that constitute them. Schopenhauer's metaphysics is dual aspect (will/representation), the aspects do not merely "correlate", they are perspectives of the same thing.
    – Conifold
    Apr 27 at 21:31

0

Reset to default

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .