Die Welt als Wille und Vorstellung Epub ´ Die Welt

Die Welt als Wille und Vorstellung ☆ Die Welt als Wille und Vorstellung PDF / Epub ✩ Author Arthur Schopenhauer – Natus-physiotherapy.co.uk Volume 1 of the definitive English translation of one of the most important philosophical works of the 19th century the basic statement in one important stream of post Kantian thought Corrects nearly als Wille PDF/EPUB À Volume of the definitive English translation of one of the most important philosophical works of the th century the basic statement in one important stream of Die Welt ePUB í post Kantian thought Corrects nearly errors and omissions in the older Haldane Kemp translation For the first time this edition translates and locates all uotes and provides Welt als Wille PDF ´ full index.


10 thoughts on “Die Welt als Wille und Vorstellung

  1. Michael Michael says:

    “The world is my idea” And so with these words Schopenhauer begins his magnum opus with one of the most provocative opening lines in all of literature He continues “a truth which holds good for every thing that lives and knows Man knows not a sun and not an earth but only an eye that sees a sun a hand that feels an earth; that the world which surrounds him exists only as idea–that is only in relation to something else the one who conceives the idea which is himself”The whole of Schopenhauer’s philosophy is contained in these lines The book that follows works to undo the assumptions the reader brings to them–primarily those surrounding “himself” Read“We never know it the subject but wherever anything is known it is the knower”“however immeasurable and massive this world may be its existence hangs nonetheless by a single thread that is the actual consciousness in which it exists”“The world’s existence is irrevocably subject to this condition and this brands it in spite of all empirical reality with the stamp of ideality and therefore of mere phenomenal appearance As a result the world must be recognized at least from this aspect as akin to dreaming”“inference from sensation to its cause which as I have repeatedly pointed out lies at the foundation of all sense perception is certainly sufficient to signal for us the empirical presence in space and time of an empirical object and is therefore uite enough for the practical purposes of life; but it is by no means sufficient to afford us any conclusion as to the existence and real nature or rather as to the intelligible substratum of the phenomena which in this way arise for us”Just as I’ve already suggested so Schopenhauer himself reiterates throughout “There is indeed just one thought which forms the content of this whole work” And indeed this is just as much the case as it is the crux The very pervasive difficulty is in trying to understand something that is impossible to understand from the way we are conditioned to know the world–which is under the forms of time and space For Schopenhauer’s will lies outside of time and space outside of cause and effect outside of change and fate–all of which is mostly impossibly for us to completely comprehendHence accusations of contradictions But of course Schopenhauer presupposes such and just as he through this work fixates his reader in an exercise of understanding something that is near impossible to understand he also reconciles not only his own seeming contradictions but ubiuitous ones such as that between fate and free will And this–you may have guessed–he does by incessantly hashing out the relationship between will and idea In a very generalized nutshell such reconciliations are an insistence that certain dualisms are the same thing looked at from different perspectives –The will is infinite timeless spaceless absolute free It is the eternal all knowing knower– Idea being the manifestation of the will is also infinite and yet exists only temporally spacially; it exists only in condition and is completely fated Inside of it each of us is only the will itself inside of time and space–ie the will seeing itself from a limited perspective which for being limited draws itus into the delusion of individuation or plurality“in the case of such beings as have knowledgethe individual is the support of the knowing subject and the knowing subject is the support of the world”The mystery in this euation can be somewhat lightened by ruminating on the concept of infinity or as Schopenhauer puts it“life has infinite time and infinite space to erase the distinction between the possible and the actual”Likewise Schopenhauer’s uncanny sensitivity allows him to shed light on the foundations of human error“It is an error great as it is common that the most freuent most universal and simplest phenomena are those that we best understand;”He very elegantly and succinctly sums up man’s tragic penchant to assume and forget“Men uietly resign themselves to starting from mere ualitates occultae which they had given up trying to elucidate because they intended to build on them not excavate beneath them”In all my limited investigation I’ve never found a compelling account of the cosmos I sympathize with Borges’ regret and joy in the fact that he wouldn’t ever write an account of his worldview because Schopenhauer had already done it for him Although it should be said that the fact that much of what Schopenhauer himself said had long existed in eastern metaphysics–primarily Buddhist and Hinduist–didn’t suffice to prevent him from writing his And so we are the benefactors of this stubbornness For a large part of the thrill is to have both the rigor of a western style delineation and the–at least partial–validation that is the historic force of an ancient spiritual practice This is not to say that the euating of any kind of western philosophy with an eastern spiritual tradition–or vice versa–proves its truth but for those who recognize for themselves an experiential non dogmatic truth in one or another it is rather exhilarating to jump over onto a parallel wire and see this truth from a different and uniuely established perspective“If we lose ourselves in contemplation of the infinite greatness of the universe in space and time meditate on the the millennia of years that have passed and are yet to come or if the night sky actually brings before our eyes countless worlds and so forces upon our consciousness the immensity of the universe we feel ourselves reduced to nothing; as individuals as bodies vitalised as transient phenomena of will we feel ourselves like drops in the ocean dwindle and disperse into the void But against this spectre of our own futility against such mendacious impossibility there rises up at once the immediate consciousness that all these worlds exist only in our ideation only as modifications of the eternal subject of pure knowing which we find ourselves to be as soon as we forget our individuality and which is the necessary support of all worlds and all eras and the condition of their existence The vastness of the world which previously troubled us now rests in us; our dependence on it is cancelled by its dependence on us”A brief note on this particular book Everyman It’s abridged I never thought I’d read an abridged book much less defend one Now that I’ve done the former–having been tricked in part by the fact that its abridgement goes slyly unmentioned on any part of the book’s exterior–I will do the latter According to the editor the hundreds of pages of lanced off prose is mostly “digressions in which Schopenhauer excoriates his philosophical opponents” Though I’m one who finds these excoriations highly entertaining I count myself fortunate in being tricked into imbibing this concentrated version in my major introduction to Schopenhauer’s own words Tangents and references to unfamiliar thought however entertaining would have only weakened the understanding I ultimately gained Translation You’ll notice other Schopenhauer books titled The World as Will and Representation and The World as Will and Presentation and perhaps wonder whether he is making some rather fine distinction each by writing an entire separate book Worry not Or should I say ‘worry’?; these are merely translations of the same I don’t necessarily have a pony in this race yet–I plan to read them all–but I’ll say that the translator makes some very strong and salient points for the case of ‘idea’ most notably the hard to argue with point that Schopenhauer himself when translating Kant into English used ‘idea’ for the German Vorstellung


  2. Erick Erick says:

    I’m really glad I decided to read the abridged version of The World as Will and Idea What is here is than enough to understand Schopenhauer’s philosophy of will The only reason I can see reading all three volumes of the unabridged work is when one wants to hang on Schopenhauer’s every word like Schopenhauer does himself Of course I had already read three of his works before this so I already went into this fairly well grounded in Schopenhauer’s system Schopenhauer himself reuires someone to have read The Fourfold Root before reading this I honestly don’t think that is necessary I don’t want to overly disparage Schopenhauer No I wasn’t that impressed with his philosophy It has some interesting points As I’ve said before though I don’t think he was that original or that consistent Let’s just take his focus on the will for starters If one defines will as desire or specifically a desire for manifestation then Schelling already beat him to the punch But so did Boehme before Schelling Both Schelling and Boehme made desire for manifestation a transcendent power They didn’t use the word will but that is simply semantics The meaning is ultimately the same It does cause one to appreciate that they probably were onto something profound but Schelling like Schopenhauer subseuently divorced desire from mind This was one of my big issues with Schelling and it’s an even bigger issue with Schopenhauer In this work Schopenhauer does appeal to Platonic Ideas cf pg 68 71 as the objectified means of the will’s working in the world He doesn’t make these Ideas transcendent but they do seem to be somewhat detached from his mundane phenomena In Plato the ideas are tied to a transcendent mind or reason No such thing exists in Schopenhauer so his ideas are divorced from the appropriate Platonic context It is puzzling how a blind will could ever give rise to these secondary ideas cf pg 246 Schopenhauer makes will completely free in its transcendence but in the world of knowledge and phenomena he makes it controlled by these How does such a primary mode become so weak when it finds itself in the domain of secondary modes? How could it even generate these controls? He lauds religious ascetics and even claims that they can overcome this will but it isn’t obvious to me how such an overarching power could ever be tamed in the way he suggests It is also plain to me that Schopenhauer owes a lot to Spinoza Schopenhauer’s will is a primary substance pg 87 and it functions like Spinoza’s primary substance He also makes it just as deterministic Here Schopenhauer isn’t the most consistent either though In his work on Freedom of the Will he accords a very deterministic framework for will He also makes will deterministic in the realm of phenomena in this work cf pg 188 It is the most apparently deterministic in the lower lifeforms but becomes individually deterministic in higher lifeforms like human beings Schopenhauer apparently sees will as working within constant conflicts between forms where it sublimates lower forms in order to form higher ones pg 73 Although his debt to evolutionary thought is obvious it still isn’t clear how will can ever be controlled in specific instances like the internal functions of an individual lifeform All body parts—internal and external—are manifestations of will but obviously its desire for sublimation is controlled here Despite his supposed influence on psychology Schopenhauer has almost no appreciation for the role of the subconscious Even when the subject of subconscious motives should be readily apparent to him like when he discusses organ function pg 47 49 he completely depreciates the role of the subconscious In this respect Herbart and Carus are superior They at least recognized that motivations and knowledge are partially unconscious Apparently Schopenhauer doesn’t accept any of thatTo Schopenhauer’s credit he can’t be labeled a materialist He has an appreciation for metaphysics and religion but those elements don’t seem to gel in his own system very well His influence on Nietzsche is obvious throughout this work His asides regarding the sufferings of genius I found interesting I give this work around 2 and a half stars It’s about average


  3. J J says:

    The book is not voluminous but it is deep and wide in subject matter It is a book to mull over Some say Schopenhauer is redundant but rather than saying the same things than once he uses multiple examples to support his arguments I find these numerous examples helpful and part of the philosopher's artistryA little about Schopenhauer sandwiched between two popular thinkers Kant and Nietzsche sits a clearer and uotable writer a pragmatic philosopher who also dealt with metaphysics and a greater influence on authors musicians and artists than any philosopher save maybe Plato Some may overlook or discount him He does not purport a system for academics to disentangle His pessimism has been panned as depressing or futileBut Schopenhauer is a superior realist who can live in a world of ideas He presents problems for humanity and offers solutions They may not be solutions many folks would like to try; indeed Schop did not practice aestheticism though he prescribed it as a way to escape the suffering of the world If a doctor who smoked recommended not to smoke is it bad advice?The writing is refreshing insightful and grounded in reason than most There is truly original thought here If one were to chart his influences and those he influenced the latter list would be far longer than the former He is present in the work andor mentioned directly by Darwin Freud Tolstoy Nietzsche Thomas Hardy Thomas Mann Richard Wagner Edgar Saltus Ivan Turgenev Oscar Wilde Carl Jung Dostoevsky Faulkner Einstein Joseph Campbell Joseph Conrad Kurt Vonnegut Wittgenstein and Thomas Ligotti to name only some heavyweights Now for the book itselfThe Will is not only energy All living things and even non living objects are manifestations of the Will Kant was right that we cannot know the thing in itself wholly However through one's consciousness in relation to the body in voluntary and involuntary movements and processes we can gather an idea of the Will which does the moving and motivates all action and the Will knows and is party to the thing in itself We intuitively relate all objects around us and everything we experience only as far as how they relate to other objects and especially how they relate to us how they affect us how we perceive themThe Will is in eternal flux; thus the world is in eternal flux This takes us back to Heraclitus but we need reminded every few centuries it seemsWithout a subject to acknowledge and play by the same rules as an object the object is nothing The world is full of many subjects and many objects We are subjects to objects which are subjects to us Objects don't know firsthand that they're objects Pretty much everything save humans feel that it is a subject exclusively and that everything else is an object But everything is both That is the only way it works The subject and object are mutually dependentA sensation should not be held as the cause of or come from an object but as merely something that our senses one of them at least has sensed We only know that an object is real because it stimulates at least one of our senses Our objective comprehension is subjectiveWhen we say something is matter we not only say that something exists but also that it is perceivedAn easy starting point to ponder the Will involuntary acts of the body unwanted thoughts innate desires absent minded gestures of the hands while speakingThe Will apart from the body is still only knowable abstractly This means Kant's thing in itself as unknowable still holds much validity But Schopenhauer has taken these beyond KantThe Will is present in non living objects It gives objects their particular ualities In living things the Will can be subordinated in a overt manner A stone rolls down a hill an animal hunts its prey both are manifestations of the Will Gravity does not cause the stone to fall to earth The cause is the stone's proximity to earth Gravity is always thereCausality is only present in time and space Gravity the Forms and all energy is eternal and exists outside time and space Schopenhauer's Will takes Plato's Forms and expresses them in the myriad replicas we see in time and space Though we harness fire electricity etc these things would exist if we did not harness them Nature's laws sometimes seem extraordinary to us but they are not The laws are consistent We become shocked when we see a natural phenomenon that is new to us but we should not be It has always been so and will always be so when circumstances dictateAnimals must eat plants and one another Everything preys on something andor is preyed upon by something This displays the constant strife the essential discord of the Will The Will feeds on itself Humanity devours itself Everything is trying and striving to express its highest Form and to do so generally impinges on the striving of something elseThe Will as the force propelling evolution is something Schop explains without of course ever using the word 'evolution'Our actions are guided by motives which are guided by the Will The Will wants strive thrive and liveNothing not gravity a stone an insect or a human ever reaches a final goal All is merely eternally becoming The Will is pure desire In humans the intellect must be called on to temper the Will The Will does not plan It desires; its motives can be hiddenHuman disposition is always cycling through three states of emotion desire momentary satisfaction and boredom Two of the three cause pain and suffering and the other is ephemeralSchop says the Kantian thing in itself is the Will but not a realized objectification of the Will It is the becoming part of the thing since Kant's thing needn't take any form Kant's unknowable thing is partially knowable and it is knowable by knowing thyselfEverything we see is only a copy of an Idea Form coming and going in time and spaceKnowledge can break free from the Will When an individual is involved in producing or contemplating or executing something artistic the individual breaks free from the awareness of time and space; thus it can break from the Will But this can only be temporarySchop describes losing individuality as perceiving the object as the Idea without relationships to other things subject to causality An individual can become a pure subject of knowing This respite from the Will is fleeting though One must sustain this higher level to produce artOn nostalgia we look back on things and see them in an objective light We forget all the worries and troubles we had in those times The time elapsed separates us from our old subjective selves even though our current selves are as subjective as everBeauty can facilitate our transference from subjective knowledge of particular things to the objective contemplation of IdeasIn music melodies represent the great striving and gratification of the will Catchy short melodies in dance music mimic everyday pleasures Winding meandering melodies with painful discord and sustained languid notes show sadness and tragedy while gratification is expressed when the music falls back to the key noteLike in Buddhism and Hinduism in Schopenhauer we are taught that the best way to live would be by denying the Will But here's it's by using the intellect knowledge art and wisdom to totally set oneself free from cravings and desires Still for the most part this is impossibleI will leave off with a few uotes from the gloomy philosopher and some from others he used in this most remarkable philosophical masterpieceSchopenhauer The world is my ideaThe body is a condition of the knowledge of the WillGenius is the clear eye of the worldThe Principle of Sufficient Reason is thus again the form into which the Idea enters when it comes to the knowledge of the subject as individualOften we don't know what we wish or what we fearFor one wish that is fulfilled there remain at least ten which are deniedon literature Man's unspeakable pain and misery the triumph of malice the tyranny of mere chance and the irretrievable fall of the just and the innocent are here presented to us; and in lies a significant hint as to the nature of the world and of existenceOptimism is not only a false but also a pernicious doctrine for it presents life as a desirable state and man's happiness as its aim and object Starting from this everyone then believes he has the most legitimate claim to happiness and enjoyment If as usually happens these do not fall to his lot he believes that he suffers an injustice in fact that he misses the whole point of his existenceAgrippa von NettesheimIt is us he inhabits not the underworld nor the stars in the sky The spirit who lives in us makes thosePlatoWhat is that which always is and has no becoming? And what is that which is always becoming and never is?Time is the moving picture of eternityGoetheNo ill can touch him who looks on human beauty; he feels himself at one with himself and with the worldTo fix in lasting thoughts the hovering images that float before the mindThomas PaineIt is only a short step from the sublime to the ridiculous


  4. Erik Graff Erik Graff says:

    Having completed a thesis about Kant's influence on CG Jung in seminary I wanted to proceed to an exhaustive study of the philsophical underpinnings of the psychiatrist's work I'd read all of Jung and all of Kant and Nietzsche cited or owned by Jung The third major influence was Schopenhauer about whom I knew little except the fact that to Germans of Jung's generation Schopenhauer was read like Nietzsche is today The place to start obviously was his magnum opus The World as Will and Representation a copy of which I'd picked up in the town of Leeds in the Hudson valley in New YorkUnlike Kant and Nietzsche Schopenhauer was a disappointment I had liked Kant for his system its clarity breadth and depth; Nietzsche as a rigorous critic and beautiful writer but Schopenhauer matched neither of them His system was basically simplified transcendental idealism His only apparent originality was his bringing Eastern thought into philosophy's field of discourse His misanthropy was difficult to relate toAs it happened the dissertation project was never completed The one philosophy professor a psychoanalyst competent to supervise it was not retained


  5. Roger Roger says:

    There's plenty about the content of Schopenhauer's work here on Goodreads and elsewhere online I won't add to it What I will say is that Schopenhauer was the most honest and sincere of the great thinkers While other philosophers in the western canon offer ideal worlds pure reason knowledge of God aesthetic affirmation concrete moral values and mystical shades of Being Schopenhauer deals earnestly and sensitively with the causes of wordly suffering the wellsprings of human motivation and the route to exaltation There's no other major thinker whose work connects so directly to the reader's experience of life Schopenhauer was free from both financial necessity and academic imperatives and so he described in his books the world just as he saw and felt it without worrying about pleasing an audience he was passionately committed to what is true His pessimism turns some people off of course but it's simply not possible to point to any of the examples of worldy suffering that Schopenhauer describes and argue that they're not true Nor is it possible to argue that Schopenhauer's account of the source of that suffering is mistaken Indeed his argument that optimism is actually a deeply wicked position to hold is irrefutable For that reason he should be respected as much as he respects the reader with his honesty Another commenter in this thread used the word 'cynicism' to describe Schopenhauer's thought there are many cynics in the history of philosophy; Schopenhauer is not one of them The World as Will and Idea is nothing if not a passionately sincere work That sincerity combined with the beauty and clarity of its style and the brilliance of Schopenhauer's metaphysical system makes it one of the very greatest booksOne final wordSchopenhauer's work is not off limits to those without any academic philosophical training but I would recommend doing two things before tackling this tome first get the Penguin Essays and Aphorisms of Schopenhauer read RJ Hollingdale's excellent introduction then read the book; second look around online and try to familiarize yourself with the basic ideas of Kant's philosophy Wikipedia is all right for this Just get a working knowledge of Kant's notions of noumenaphenomena theory of perception categories of the understanding that kind of thing and that will prepare you for Schopenhauer's refinement of Kantian idealism Some knowledge of Plato will help too


  6. Bradley Bradley says:

    Can't say I uite made it all the way through Yet his work constitutes a breath of fresh air After reading all too many postmodern philosophers Foucault Derrida Deleuze Lyotard etc Schopenhauer makes what seems to be a bold statement objective facts can be known by digging beneath interpretations yet most people never do this precisely because it takes an extreme amount of effort Therefore the human experience of reality tends to be ethereal and appears to be nothing than willling various illusory ideas that are taken to be reality he is definitely not saying 'everything is an idea the world is unknowable' being disinterested is practically impossible for the vast majority of people which means that only an elite few who have trained philosophers scientists etc will ever have access to objective reality To the great majority of people purely intellectual pleasures are always inaccessible One interesting point beautiful passage that really ushers in Nietzsche's Eternal Recurrence although Schopenhauer should be partial credit for that conceptSuppose we were allowed for once a clear glance into the kingdom of the possible and over the chains of causes and effects; if the earth spirit appeared and showed us in a tableau all the greatest men enlighteners of the world and heroes whom chance destroyed before we were ripe for their work; then showed us the great events that would have changed history and brought us periods of the highest culture and enlightenment but whihc the blindest chance the most insignificant accident hindered at the outset; lastly the splendid powers of great individuals that would have enriched whole epochs but which misled either by error or by passion or compelled by necessity they suandered on unworthy or unfruitful objects or even wasted away in play If we saw this we would shudder and lament at the thought of the lost treasures of whole period of history But the earth spirit would smile and say 'The source from which the individuals and their powers proceed is as inexhaustible and boundless as time and space no finite measure can exhaust that infinite source; therefore undiminished eternity is still open for the recurrence of any event or work that was nipped in the bud p107


  7. Professor_lgd Professor_lgd says:

    Well worth anybody's time I will not attempt write a review of this and will simply say that you will have lived a impoverished life not having read any SchopenhauerA few opinions— follow his suggestion and read the fourfold root of sufficient reason before you attempt to read this— you don't need to real the critiue of pure reason in preparation In fact this book might be a good preparation for the critiue— try to obtain a copy with translations of his lengthy Latin Greek and French uotes or you will miss out on a lot of things— to get a taste for Schopenhauer you might want to read Studies on Pessimism or some essays from his Parerga and Paralipomena first of which there are recordings on YouTubeSchopenhauer will enrich your life and be a great jumping off point into Kant Nietzsche Hume or Plato platonism Hinduism Buddhism Christianity


  8. Robert Robert says:

    Okay I've just finished rereading The World As Will and Idea for the second time and am determined to make this comment amusing if not outright fun Schopenhauer's masterwork goes this way1 Kant had almost everything right when he said that we live in a reality of mental representations phenomena and are incapable of connecting directly with the underlying things in themselves noumena2HOWEVER Schopenhauer knows what the basic thing in itself is It's Will Will in the rocks the seas everything material and everything organic you and me too3 It remains somewhat unclear to me exactly how Schopenhauer can know this if he agrees that mortals cannot transcend the phenomenal but he makes a comprehensive case for the one ness the unity of all that exists attributing a grand fatality to it that sweeps us along In fact he would say we don't exist to be swept along we only think we do because we are inseparable from the Will and can only rarely under special circumstances deduce its own existence through such things as art and the suppression of our own feeble will Be ye Shakespeare or be ye an ascetic ye shall know that what we see is us and what sees us is us and what is going on is that the Will is working its wonders through and around us More explicitly Schopenhauer cites the Chandogya Upanishad Thou Art That Tat Tvam Asi4 So dial back to the '60s and remember Ram Dass and everyone like him and then consider the fact that these colorful folk were completely anticipated by Arthur Schopenhauer a 19th century German philosopher who was not really very colorful and never danced with flowers in his hair5 The first two books of The World as Will and Idea are laborious We get the amendments to Kant and we get a trip back to Plato's Ideas The third and fourth books are spectacular If you are an artist of any kind or a connoisseur of any kind you will find that Schopenhauer makes a wonderful case for why you are enad of writing painting and most of all music We are talking about negative capability here the gift of genius that enables an individual to be than a single consciousness but rather a wide range of roaring consciousnesses in effect the full tumult of creation Goethe Beethoven name your greatest hero6 Now such apex moments and figures don't last and aren't commonplace as we know So here we get Schopenhauer the pessimist telling us that we are mere incidental twitches in Will's fury His advice then really is to abandon all hope and accept the truth of illusionthe illusion of gain of desire of immortality of personal autonomy A certain kind of Christian or Buddhist or hippie would know that the world is suffering not fight it and seek to aline herself with nothing which is Schopenhauer's last word7 I would raise a uestion or two or three My first uestion would be whether Schopenhauer's Will couldn't just as well be called Being My problem with Will is that it implies volition as in pursuing an end My second uestion would be whether the reality of human experience having and raising children doing useful work for oneself and others is necessarily as grim and pointless as Schopenhauer submits And my third uestion is whether it isn't rather ironic that to be an accomplished artist or devoted ascetic reuires immense will The blank page and empty stomach in the morning are not comforting company; it takes as much ferocity of intent to write as it does to go without eating8 There is one other book and perhaps only one other book that struck me as even bleak and depressing than The World as Will and Idea That is Consilience by Edward O Wilson a materialistic interpretation of the unity of knowledge But Schopenhauer's work is the greater intellectual triumph Wilson rides the back of science Schopenhauer rides the wings of pure thought What's unlike his European predecessors Schopenhauer easily and readily and correctly connected East and West


  9. Anthony Anthony says:

    my favorite part in schopenhauer is his discussion of music in which he ualifies leibnitz's aphorism that music is an unconscious exercise in arithmetic whereby the mind does not know it is counting with the claim that music is the unconscious exercise in metaphysics in which the mind does not know it is philosophizing i also like it when he draws parallels between indian philosophy and descartes


  10. Frater Frater says:

    Amazing many answers to be found by reading Schopenhauer


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *