Philosophical pessimism: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
No edit summary
Line 106: Line 106:


== Development of pessimist thought ==
== Development of pessimist thought ==
{{split section|History of philosophical pessimism|date=August 2023|discuss=Talk:Philosophical pessimism#A proposal to split the History into a dedicated page}}


{{Main|History of philosophical pessimism}}
=== In religion ===


Pessimistic sentiments can be found throughout religions and in the works of various philosophers. The major developments in the tradition started with the works of Arthur Schopenhauer.{{r|Beiser|page=4}}
==== Buddhism ====
[[File:Buddha in Sarnath Museum (Dhammajak Mutra).jpg|thumb|Statue of the [[The Buddha|Buddha]].]]
Historically, philosophical pessimism seems to have first presented itself in the [[Eastern world|East]], under the partly religious aspect of [[Buddhism]].<ref>{{Cite book |last=Sully |first=James |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=yEsVAAAAYAAJ |title=Pessimism: A History and a Criticism |publisher=Henry S. King & Co. |year=1877 |location=London |page=[https://books.google.com/books?id=yEsVAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA38 38] |language=en |author-link=James Sully}}</ref><ref name="Ligotti-TCATHR" />{{Rp|page=130}} In the ''[[Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta]]'', [[Gautama buddha|Gautama Buddha]] establishes the first [[Four Noble Truths|noble truth]] of ''[[duḥkha]]'', or suffering, as the fundamental mark of existence:<ref>[https://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebsut001.htm Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta], translated from the Pali version by [[Bhikkhu Bodhi]].</ref>

<blockquote>Now this, [[bhikkhu]]s, is the noble truth of suffering: birth is suffering, aging is suffering, illness is suffering, death is suffering; union with what is displeasing is suffering; separation from what is pleasing is suffering; not to get what one wants is suffering; in brief, [[Skandha|the five aggregates]] subject to clinging are suffering.</blockquote>

This would have exerted a certain [[Greco-Buddhism|influence on Greco-Roman philosophy]] from the [[Ptolemaic dynasty|Ptolemaic]] period onwards, in particular on the pessimistic doctrine of [[Hegesias of Cyrene]].<ref>{{Cite book |last=Preus |first=Anthony |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=wjW_BgAAQBAJ&pg=PA184 |title=Historical Dictionary of Ancient Greek Philosophy |year=2015 |publisher=Rowman & Littlefield |isbn=978-1-4422-4639-3 |page=184}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last=Clayman |first=Dee L. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ceLUAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA33 |title=Berenice II and the Golden Age of Ptolemaic Egypt |date= 2014 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-537089-8 |page=33 |language=en}}</ref> This thesis is notably advanced by [[Jean-Marie Guyau]], who in the middle of the [[Pessimism controversy|controversy]] about German pessimism (1870–1890) detects in Hegesias's philosophy the pessimistic theme of Buddhism, which he sees as a "palliative of life"; he summarizes it as follows:<ref>{{Cite book |last=Guyau |first=Jean-Marie |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=XqsQAAAAYAAJ |title=Le Morale D'Épicure Et Ses Rapports Avec Les Doctrines Cntemporaines |date=1878 |publisher=Librairie Germer Bailliere |page=[https://fr.wikisource.org/wiki/La_Morale_d%E2%80%99%C3%89picure_et_ses_rapports_avec_les_doctrines_contemporaines/2#cite_ref-107 117] |language=fr |author-link=Jean-Marie Guyau}}</ref>

<blockquote>Most often, hope brings with it disappointment, enjoyment produces satiety and disgust; in life, the sum of sorrows is greater than that of pleasures; to seek happiness, or only pleasure, is therefore vain and contradictory, since in reality, one will always find a surplus of sorrows; what one must tend to is only to avoid sorrow; now, in order to feel less sorrow, there is only one way: to make oneself indifferent to the pleasures themselves and to what produces them, to blunt sensitivity, to annihilate desire. Indifference, renunciation, here is thus the only palliative of life.</blockquote>

==== Judaism and Christianity ====
[[File:Dore Solomon Proverbs.png|thumb|[[Solomon|King Solomon]], who was traditionally considered to be the author of Ecclesiastes.]]
The [[Ecclesiastes]] is a piece of wisdom literature from the [[Old Testament]].<ref>{{Cite web |date=1998-07-20 |title=Ecclesiastes: Old Testament |url=https://www.britannica.com/topic/Ecclesiastes-Old-Testament |access-date=2022-11-21 |website=Britannica |language=en}}</ref> In chapter 1, the author expresses his view towards the vanity (or meaninglessness) of human endeavors in life:<ref>{{Cite bible|Ecclesiastes|1:1–9|NIV}}</ref>

<blockquote>The words of the Teacher, son of David, king in Jerusalem: "Meaningless! Meaningless!" says the Teacher. "Utterly meaningless! Everything is meaningless." What do people gain from all their labors at which they toil under the sun? Generations come and generations go, but the earth remains forever. The sun rises and the sun sets, and hurries back to where it rises. The wind blows to the south and turns to the north; round and round it goes, ever returning on its course. All streams flow into the sea, yet the sea is never full. To the place the streams come from, there they return again. All things are wearisome, more than one can say. The eye never has enough of seeing, nor the ear its fill of hearing. What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun.</blockquote>

Death is a major component of the author's pessimism.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Sneed |first=Mark R. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=d5gsEzmW-iYC |title=The Politics of Pessimism in Ecclesiastes: A Social-Science Perspective |publisher=Society of Biblical Literature |year=2012 |isbn=978-1-58983-635-8 |location=Atlanta |pages=7–11 |language=en}}</ref> Though he views wisdom as more valuable than folly, death essentially vitiates its superiority, and because of this the author comes to abhor life:<ref>{{Cite bible|Ecclesiastes|2:13–17|NIV}}</ref>

<blockquote>I saw that wisdom is better than folly, just as light is better than darkness. The wise have eyes in their heads, while the fool walks in the darkness; but I came to realize that the same fate overtakes them both. Then I said to myself, "The fate of the fool will overtake me also. What then do I gain by being wise?" I said to myself, "This too is meaningless." For the wise, like the fool, will not be long remembered; the days have already come when both have been forgotten. Like the fool, the wise too must die! So I hated life, because the work that is done under the sun was grievous to me. All of it is meaningless, a chasing after the wind.</blockquote>

In chapter 4, the author also expresses [[Antinatalism|antinatalistic]] thoughts, articulating that, better than those who are already dead, is he who has not yet been born:<ref>{{Cite bible|Ecclesiastes|4:1–3|NIV}}</ref>

<blockquote>Again I looked and saw all the oppression that was taking place under the sun: I saw the tears of the oppressed—and they have no comforter; power was on the side of their oppressors—and they have no comforter. And I declared that the dead, who had already died, are happier than the living, who are still alive. But better than both is the one who has never been born, who has not seen the evil that is done under the sun.</blockquote>

Some parallels have been made between the Book of Ecclesiastes and an ancient Mesopotamian literary composition named the [[Dialogue of Pessimism]],<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Sexton |first=Jared |date=2019 |title=Affirmation in the Dark: Racial Slavery and Philosophical Pessimism |url=https://muse.jhu.edu/article/739699 |journal=The Comparatist |volume=43 |issue=1 |pages=90–111 |doi=10.1353/com.2019.0005 |s2cid=211657311 |issn=1559-0887}}</ref> composed around 1500 BCE in ancient [[Mesopotamia]]. Taking the form of a dialogue between a master and slave, the master in the exchange cannot decide on any course of action, giving orders to his slave before immediately cancelling them and driving him to the point of desperation, which has been interpreted as an expression of the futility of human actions.<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Dell |first1=Katharine J. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=6FrSCwAAQBAJ |title=Reading Ecclesiastes Intertextually |last2=Kynes |first2=Will |last3=Mein |first3=Andrew |last4=Camp |first4=Claudia V. |publisher=Bloomsbury Academic |year=2016 |isbn=978-0-567-66790-8 |pages=169–170 |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last=Bottéro |first=Jean |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=rygDbL2U5YEC |title=Mesopotamia: Writing, Reasoning, and the Gods |publisher=University of Chicago Press |year=1995 |isbn=978-0-226-06727-8 |pages=260–261 |language=en}}</ref>

In the Bible, [[Jesus]] sometimes showed doubts about the value of the world, for example, in the [[Gospel of John]]: "If you belonged to the world, the world would love you as its own. Because you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world—therefore the world hates you."<ref>{{Cite bible|John|15:19|nrsvce}}</ref>

==== Gnosticism ====
[[File:Paradise Lost 12.jpg|thumb|[[Gustave Doré]]'s 1866 illustration for [[John Milton|Milton]]'s ''[[Paradise Lost]]''. For the Gnostics, man has been "thrown" into the world where he is condemned to live in humiliation and suffering.]] [[Gnosticism]] is a complex religious movement steeped in Greco-Latin philosophy, most often claiming to be "true" Christianity, although it is considered heretical by [[Christian Church|Christian churches]]. It is characterized by a philosophy of salvation based on "[[Gnosis#Gnosticism|''gnosis'']]" (spiritual knowledge), in other words on the knowledge of the divine, and by its denigration of the earthly world, created by an evil power. In general, the gnostic considers his body negatively: it is the "prison", the "tomb", or the "corpse" where his authentic self has been locked up.<ref name="Hutin-LG" /> It is a foreign thing that must be endured, an "unwanted companion" or an "intruder" that drags the spirit down, plunging it into the degrading oblivion of its origin.<ref name="Hutin-LG" /> The flesh is interpreted in this sense as a state of humiliation and suffering engendered by a demonic force, perverted or weakened, lurking in matter. This state condemns all men to live in a kind of [[hell]] which is none other than the sensible world.<ref name="Hutin-LG" /> The pessimistic vision of the Gnostics extends to all the cosmos, conceived as a failed work, even fatal or criminal. Man is "thrown" into it, then locked up without hope.<ref name="Hutin-LG" />

In Gnostic thought, the [[problem of evil]] is a nagging question which leads to the adoption of a dualistic perspective.<ref name="Hutin-LG" /> Indeed, the gnostic is led either to oppose God and the spirit to matter or to an evil principle, or else to distinguish from the transcendent God, unknown or foreign to the world and absolutely good, an inferior or [[Demiurge#Gnosticism|malevolent god]], creator of the world and of bodies. In this last case, the divine, rejected entirely out of the sensible, only remains in the "luminous" part of the human soul,<ref name="Hutin-LG" /> extinguished however in the great majority of men. In addition to affirming the intrinsically evil character of the world, the Gnostic conceives it as hermetically sealed, surrounded by "outer darkness", by a "great sea" or by an "iron wall" identified with the firmament.<ref name="Hutin-LG" /> Not only is it fortified against God, but God himself has been forced to fortify himself against the world's reach. Inexorable barriers thus oppose the escape of the soul from the earthly realm.<ref name="Hutin-LG" />

Inhabited by the feeling of being a stranger to the world, where he has been made to fall, the gnostic discovers that he is in essence a native of a beyond, although his body and his lower passions belong to this world. He then understands that he is of the race (genos) of the chosen ones, superior and "hypercosmic" beings.<ref name="Hutin-LG" /> If he desperately yearns for an afterlife, it is because he experiences within himself a throbbing nostalgia for the original homeland from which he has fallen. This longing affects the upper part of his soul, which is a divine principle in exile here on earth, and which can only be saved by the recognition of its original origin—gnosis proper.<ref name="Hutin-LG" /> Those whose higher part of the soul has remained extinct, or who are devoid of it, that is to say, all the individuals whom the Gnostics call hylics (the majority of human beings and all animals), are condemned to destruction or to wander in this world, undergoing the terrifying cycle of [[Reincarnation#Gnosticism|reincarnations]].<ref name="Hutin-LG" />

=== Ancient Greece ===

==== Hegesias of Cyrene ====
[[Hegesias of Cyrene]] was a Greek philosopher born in [[Cyrene, Libya]], around the year 290 BC.<ref>{{Citation |last=Dorandi |first=Tiziano |title=Chronology |url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/CBO9781139053617A009/type/book_part |work=The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy |year=1999 |page=47 |publication-date=1999 |editor-last=Algra |editor-first=Keimpe |edition= |publisher=Cambridge University Press |doi=10.1017/chol9780521250283.003 |isbn=978-0-521-25028-3 |access-date=2022-12-01 |editor2-last=Barnes |editor2-first=Jonathan |editor3-last=Mansfeld |editor3-first=Jaap |editor4-last=Schofield |editor4-first=Malcolm}}</ref> He came from the dual [[Socrates|Socratic]] and [[Hedonism|hedonistic]] tradition of the [[Cyrenaics|Cyrenaic]] school,<ref>{{Cite web |last=Hadot |first=Pierre |title=Cyrénaïque École |trans-title=Cyrenaic School |url=https://www.universalis.fr/encyclopedie/cyrenaique-ecole/ |access-date=2022-12-29 |website=Encyclopædia Universalis |language=fr-FR}}</ref> but is clearly distinguished from it by the radical philosophical pessimism attributed to him. All his writings have been lost and we only know of his philosophy through what [[Diogenes Laertius|Diogenes Laërtius]] says about him, who considered him as "the advocate of suicide".<ref>{{Cite Lives of the Eminent Philosophers|§=86|chapter=Aristippus}}</ref> Laërtius first lends to Hegesias the explicit affirmation of the impossibility of happiness: like later philosophical pessimists, Hegesias argued that lasting happiness is impossible to achieve and that all we can do is to try to avoid pain as much as possible:<ref name="Laertius-TLAOOEP" />{{Rp|page=92}}

<blockquote>Complete happiness cannot possibly exist; for that the body is full of many sensations, and that the mind sympathizes with the body, and is troubled when that is troubled, and also that fortune prevents many things which we cherished in anticipation; so that for all these reasons, perfect happiness eludes our grasp.</blockquote>

Hegesias held that all external objects, events, and actions are indifferent to the wise man, even death: "for the foolish person it is expedient to live, but to the wise person it is a matter of indifference".<ref name="diogquote">{{cite LotEP|chapter=Hegesias}}</ref> According to [[Cicero]], Hegesias wrote a book called ''Death by Starvation'' ([[Greek language|Greek]]: ἀποκαρτερῶν),<ref name="Cicero-TD" />{{Rp|page=|pages=45-46}} which supposedly persuaded many people that death was more desirable than life – consequently earning him the nickname ''Death-persuader'' ([[Greek language|Greek]]: πεισιθάνατος).<ref name="Laertius-TLAOOEP" />{{Rp|page=89}} Because of this, [[Ptolemy II Philadelphus]] banned Hegesias from teaching in [[Alexandria]].<ref name="Cicero-TD" />{{Rp|page=|pages=45-46}}

=== Middle Ages ===
[[Al-Ma'arri]] and [[Omar Khayyam]] are two medieval writers noted for their expression of a philosophically pessimistic worldview in their poetry.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Rozveh |first=Nasser Ghasemi |date=2013 |title=The Comparative Survey of Pessimism in Abul Ala Al-Maarri and Hakim Omar Khayyam Poems |url=https://textroad.com/pdf/JBASR/J.%20Basic.%20Appl.%20Sci.%20Res.,%203(3)405-413,%202013.pdf |journal=Journal of Basic and Applied Scientific Research |volume=3 |issue=3 |pages=405–413 |issn=2090-4304}}</ref> Al-Ma'arri held an [[Antinatalism|antinatalist]] view, in line with his pessimism, arguing that children should not be born to spare them of the pains and [[suffering]] of life.<ref name="EB">{{Cite web |title=Al-Maʿarrī |url=https://www.britannica.com/biography/al-Maarri |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180221090622/https://www.britannica.com/biography/al-Maarri |archive-date=21 February 2018 |access-date=21 February 2018 |website=[[Encyclopædia Britannica]]}}</ref>

=== 17th century ===

==== Baltasar Gracián ====
[[File:Gracián Graus.jpg|thumb|[[Baltasar Gracián|Gracián]] saw the world as filled with deception, duplicity, and disillusionment.|258x258px]]

[[Baltasar Gracián]]'s novel ''[[El Criticón]]'' ("The Critic") is considered to be an extended allegory of the human search for [[happiness]] which turns out to be fruitless on Earth; the novel paints a bleak and desolate picture of the [[human condition]].<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Smith |first=Hilary Dansey |date=1988 |title=The Ages of Man in Baltasar Gracián's "Criticón" |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/43808208 |journal=Hispanófila |issue=94 |pages=35–47 |jstor=43808208 |issn=0018-2206}}</ref>

His book of [[aphorism]]s, ''[[The Pocket Oracle and Art of Prudence]]'' ("Oráculo Manual y Arte de Prudencia") deals with the cultural ideal of ''desengaño'', which is commonly translated as ''disenchantment'' or ''disillusionment''. However, Gracian is said to have asserted that the journey of life is one where a person loses the misconceptions of the world, but not the illusions.<ref name="Herdt-POV" />{{rp|page=230}} [[Jennifer A. Herdt]] argues that Gracian held that "what the world values is deceptive simply because it appears solid and lasting but is in fact impermanent and transitory. Having realized this, we turn from the pursuit of things that pass away and strive to grasp those that do not."<ref name="Herdt-POV" />{{rp|page=230}}

[[Arthur Schopenhauer]] engaged extensively with Gracián's works and considered ''El Criticón'' "Absolutely unique{{Nbsp}}... a book made for constant use{{Nbsp}}... a companion for life{{Nbsp}}... [for] those who wish to prosper in the great world".<ref name="duff-2016">{{cite web |last1=Duff |first1=E. Grant |date=2016-03-26 |title=Balthasar Gracian |url=http://fortnightlyreview.co.uk/2016/03/balthasar-gracian/ |access-date=1 February 2019 |website=The Fortnightly Review}}</ref> Schopenhauer's pessimistic outlook was influenced by Gracián, and he translated ''The Pocket Oracle and Art of Prudence'' into German. He praised Gracián for his aphoristic writing style (''[[conceptismo]]'') and often quoted him in his works.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Cartwright |first=David E. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ddmA12K0M3oC |title=Historical Dictionary of Schopenhauer's Philosophy |publisher=Scarecrow Press |year=2005 |isbn=978-0-8108-5324-9 |location=Lanham, Maryland |pages=70–71 |language=en |oclc=55955168}}</ref>

==== Blaise Pascal ====
[[Blaise Pascal]] approached pessimism from a Christian perspective. He is noted for publishing the ''[[Pensées]]'', a pessimistic series of aphorisms with the intention to highlight the misery of the human condition and turn people towards the salvation of the [[Catholic Church]] and [[God]].<ref>{{Cite web |title=Blaise Pascal |url=https://www.theschooloflife.com/article/blaise-pascal/ |access-date=2022-09-28 |website=The School of Life}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last=Pratt |first=Alan R. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=-wuuAAAACAAJ |title=The Dark Side: Thoughts on the Futility of Life from Ancient Greeks to the Present |publisher=[[Carol Publishing Group]] |year=1994 |isbn=978-0806514819 |pages=81–85}}</ref>

A [[mathematician]] and [[physicist]] of the first order, Pascal turned more and more to religion and faith since a mystical experience he had at the age of thirty.<ref name="Huisman-HDLPF" />{{Rp|page=193}} Embracing the [[Jansenism|Jansenist]] current of [[Christianity]], he considered that man is condemned, as a result of the [[original sin]], to perpetual misery. This misery we seek by all means to evade: "Being unable to cure death, wretchedness and ignorance, men have decided, in order to be happy, not to think about such things".<ref>Pascal 1669 (fragment n° 133), Denis Huisman, ''Histoire de la philosophie française'', Paris, Perrin, 2002, p. 199.</ref> In order to forget our condition, not only do we limit our thoughts to the consideration of futile things, but we multiply our gesticulations and vain activities.<ref name="Huisman-HDLPF" />{{Rp|page=199}} The will which pushes us thus towards the inessential belongs to what Pascal calls "diversion".<ref name="Huisman-HDLPF" />{{Rp|page=199}} Any life that does not involve the thought of its finitude is a life of diversion that leads away from God. Diversion takes extremely varied forms and a very large place in our ordinary existence.<ref name="Huisman-HDLPF" />{{Rp|page=199}} Pascal affirms that if the only thing that consoles us from our miseries is indeed diversion, it is also "the greatest of our miseries".<ref>Pascal 1669 (fragment n° 414), Denis Huisman, ''Histoire de la philosophie française'', Paris, Perrin, 2002, p. 199.</ref>

For Pascal, action is necessarily subject to diversion and it is therefore in thought, and not in action, that all our dignity resides.<ref name="Huisman-HDLPF" />{{Rp|page=200}} But the thought in question is not that of the geometer, the physicist or the philosopher who, more often than not, feeds on pride and leads away from God.<ref name="Huisman-HDLPF" />{{Rp|page=201}} It is the introspective discovery and knowledge of our finitude, which alone can raise us above other creatures and bring us closer to God.<ref name="Huisman-HDLPF" />{{Rp|page=200}} "Man is only a reed, the weakest in nature, but he is a thinking reed", declares in this sense Pascal in a famous maxim.<ref>Pascal 1669 (fragment n° 200), Denis Huisman, ''Histoire de la philosophie française'', Paris, Perrin, 2002, p. 200.</ref> Thought is an essence of man to which he owes his greatness, but only insofar as it reveals to him his finitude.<ref name="Huisman-HDLPF" />{{Rp|page=201}} The Christian idea of man's irretrievability is therefore not only a truth, but a belief that must be adopted, because it alone gives human existence a certain dignity. Pascal promotes in this perspective a reflexive form of pessimism, linking greatness and misery, where the disconsideration of oneself and the recognition of our impotence raise us above ourselves, making us renounce at the same time the vain search for happiness.<ref name="Huisman-HDLPF" />{{Rp|page=|pages=202–203}}

=== 18th century ===
==== Voltaire ====
In response to the [[1755 Lisbon earthquake]], [[Voltaire]] published in the following year (1756) the pessimistic "[[Poème sur le désastre de Lisbonne]]" ("Poem on the Lisbon Disaster"),<ref>[[Voltaire]], trans. [[Joseph McCabe]], ''[[s:Toleration and other essays/Poem on the Lisbon Disaster|Poem on the Lisbon Disaster]]'' (1756).</ref> which critiqued [[Alexander Pope]]'s optimistic axiom in the poem "[[An Essay on Man]]" (1733–1734), according to which, "Whatever is, is right";<ref>[[Alexander Pope|Pope, Alexander]]. [[s:An Essay on Man|An Essay on Man]] (1733), [[s:Page:An Essay on Man - Pope (1751).pdf/27|Epistle I, line 294]].</ref> Voltaire had initially praised Pope's poem, but later in life became critical of Pope's expressed worldview.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Havens |first=George R. |date=1928 |title=Voltaire's Marginal Comments Upon Pope's Essay on Man |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/2914234 |journal=Modern Language Notes |volume=43 |issue=7 |pages=429–439 |doi=10.2307/2914234 |jstor=2914234 |issn=0149-6611}}</ref> "Poème sur le désastre de Lisbonne" is especially pessimistic about the state of mankind and the nature of God.<ref name="Durant-TAOV" /> In response to the poem, [[Jean-Jacques Rousseau]] sent Voltaire a letter asserting that "all human ills are the result of human faults".<ref name="Durant-TAOV">{{Cite book |last1=Durant |first1=Will |url=https://archive.org/details/storyzat09dura |title=The Age of Voltaire: A History of Civlization in Western Europe from 1715 to 1756 |last2=Durant |first2=Ariel |publisher=[[Simon & Schuster]] |year=1935 |series=The Story of Civilization |volume=IX |location=New York |pages=[https://archive.org/details/storyzat09dura/page/720/mode/1up 720–724] |language=en |chapter=The Theology of Earthquakes}}</ref>

Voltaire was the first European to be labeled as a pessimist by his critics, in response to the publication and international success of his 1759 satirical novel ''[[Candide]]'';<ref name="Dienstag" />{{Rp|page=9}} a treatise against Leibniz's theistic optimism, refuting his affirmation that "we live in the [[best of all possible worlds]]."<ref>{{Cite web |last=Woods |first=David Bather |date=2021-02-24 |title=The promise of pessimism |url=https://iai.tv/articles/the-promise-of-pessimism-auid-1759 |access-date=2022-09-27 |website=[[Institute of Art and Ideas]] |language=en-GB}}</ref> Though himself a [[Deist]], Voltaire argued against the existence of a compassionate [[Personal god|personal God]] through his interpretation of the [[problem of evil]].<ref>{{Cite web |last=Yendley |first=David |title=Is Candide a Totally Pessimistic Book? |url=http://www.d-barfield.co.uk/Total%20pessimism%20in%20Candide.html |access-date=2022-04-29 |website=French Literature Notes 2}}</ref>

=== 19th century ===
==== Giacomo Leopardi ====
[[File:Leopardi, Giacomo (1798-1837) - ritr. A Ferrazzi, Recanati, casa Leopardi.jpg|thumb|[[Giacomo Leopardi]]'s pessimism has been labeled as "cosmic pessimism", or the belief in the radical and irreparable unhappiness of man.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Rennie |first=Nicholas |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=qmIfcxE6bIkC |title=Speculating on the Moment: The Poetics of Time and Recurrence in Goethe, Leopardi, and Nietzsche |publisher=Wallstein Verlag |year=2005 |isbn=978-3-89244-968-3 |location=Göttingen |page=141 |language=en |oclc=61430097}}</ref><ref>Michael J. Subialka (2021). [https://books.google.com/books?id=56VMEAAAQBAJ Modernist Idealism: Ambivalent Legacies of German Philosophy in Italian Literature]. University of Toronto Press. p. 264. {{ISBN|978-1-4875-2865-2}}. {{OCLC|1337856720}}</ref>]]

Though a lesser-known figure outside Italy, [[Giacomo Leopardi]] was highly influential in the 19th century, especially on Schopenhauer and Nietzsche.<ref name="Dienstag" />{{Rp|50}} In Leopardi's darkly comic essays, aphorisms, fables and parables, life is often described as a sort of divine joke or mistake.<ref name="Dienstag" />{{Rp|page=52}} For Leopardi, humans have an unlimited desire for pleasure, which cannot however be satisfied by any specific joy. In this perspective, the existential problem for human beings emerges in the actual desire for particular existent pleasures, for these are all finite and thus cannot satisfy the desire for the infinite:<ref>{{Cite book |last=Leopardi |first=Giacomo |title=Zibaldone |publisher=Farrar, Straus and Giroux |year=2013 |isbn=978-0-374-29682-7 |editor-last=Caesar |editor-first=Michael |edition= |location=New York|page=129 |language=en |translator-last=Baldwin |translator-first=Kathleen |oclc=794973811 |editor-last2=D'Intino |editor-first2=Franco |translator-last2=Dixon |translator-first2=Richard |translator-last3=Gibbons |translator-first3=David |translator-last4=Goldstein |translator-first4=Ann |translator-last5=Slowey |translator-first5=Gerard |translator-last6=Thom |translator-first6=Martin |translator-last7=Williams |translator-first7=Pamela}}</ref>

<blockquote>The sense of the nothingness of all things, the inadequacy of each and every pleasure to fill our spirit, and our tendency toward an infinite that we do not understand comes perhaps from a very simple cause, one that is more material than spiritual. The human soul (and likewise all living beings) always essentially desires, and focuses solely (though in many different forms), on pleasure, or happiness, which, if you think about it carefully, is the same thing. This desire and this tendency has no limits, because it is inborn or born along with existence itself, and so cannot reach its end in this or that pleasure, which cannot be infinite but will end only when life ends. And it has no limits (1) either in duration (2) or in extent. Hence there can be no pleasure to equal (1) either its duration, because no pleasure is eternal, (2) or its extent, because no pleasure is beyond measure, but the nature of things requires that everything exist within limits and that everything have boundaries, and be circumscribed.</blockquote>

Going against the [[Socrates|Socratic]] [[The unexamined life is not worth living#Interpretation|view]] present ever since [[Plato]]'s dialogues, which associates wisdom or knowledge with happiness,<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Klosko |first=George |date=1987 |title=Socrates on Goods and Happiness |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/27743814 |journal=History of Philosophy Quarterly |volume=4 |issue=3 |pages=251–264 |jstor=27743814 |issn=0740-0675}}</ref> Leopardi claims that philosophy, by putting an end to false opinions and ignorance, reveals to humans truths that are opposed to their happiness: "Those who say and preach that the perfection of man consists in the knowledge of truth and that all his ills come from false opinions and from ignorance are quite wrong. And so are those who say that the human race will finally be happy when all or the great majority of men know the truth and organize and govern their lives according to its norms."<ref name="Leopardi-OM" />{{Rp|page=|pages=411–413}}<ref>Leopardi, Giacomo (2014). [https://books.google.com/books?id=OOmuBAAAQBAJ Passions]. Translated by Parks, Tim. Yale University Press, New Haven. p. [https://books.google.com/books?id=OOmuBAAAQBAJ&pg=PR11 xi]. {{ISBN|978-0-300-18660-4}}. {{OCLC|892910844}}.</ref> For Leopardi, the ultimate conclusion that philosophizing leads us to is that, paradoxically, we must not philosophize. Such conclusion, however, can only be learned at one's own expense, and even once it has been learned it can't be put in operation because "it is not in the power of men to forget the truths they know and because one can more easily lay aside any other habit than that of philosophizing. In short, philosophy starts out by hoping and promising to cure our ills and ends up by desiring in vain to find a remedy for itself."<ref name="Leopardi-OM" />{{Rp|page=413}}

Leopardi regarded nature itself as antagonistic to the happiness of man and all other creatures.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Leopardi |first=Giacomo |title=Zibaldone |publisher=Farrar, Straus and Giroux |year=2013 |isbn=978-0-374-29682-7 |editor-last=Caesar |editor-first=Michael |edition= |location=New York|page=1997 |language=en |translator-last=Baldwin |translator-first=Kathleen |oclc=794973811 |quote=My philosophy makes nature guilty of everything, and by exonerating humanity altogether, it redirects the hatred, or at least the complaint, to a higher principle, the true origin of the ills of living beings, etc. etc. |editor-last2=D'Intino |editor-first2=Franco |translator-last2=Dixon |translator-first2=Richard |translator-last3=Gibbons |translator-first3=David |translator-last4=Goldstein |translator-first4=Ann |translator-last5=Slowey |translator-first5=Gerard |translator-last6=Thom |translator-first6=Martin |translator-last7=Williams |translator-first7=Pamela}}</ref> In his "Dialogue Between Nature and an Icelander", the titular Icelander relates how, in his attempt to escape from suffering, he found himself attacked by severe weather, natural disasters, other animals, diseases, and aging. At the end of the dialogue, the Icelander asks Nature: "For whose pleasure and service is this wretched life of the world maintained, by the suffering and death of all the beings which compose it?", to which Nature does not directly give a response; instead, two famished lions suddenly appear and devour the Icelander, thus gaining the strength to live another day.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Leopardi |first=Giacomo |url=https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/52356 |title=Essays and Dialogues |publisher=Trübner & Co |year=1882 |location=London |page=[https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/52356/pg52356-images.html#Page_79 79] |language=en |translator-last=Edwardes |translator-first=Charles |chapter=Dialogue Between Nature and an Icelander |chapter-url=https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/52356/pg52356-images.html#DIALOGUE_BETWEEN_NATURE_AND_AN_ICELANDER}}</ref>

Leopardi's response to these conditions was to face up to these realities and try to live a vibrant and great life, to be risky and take up uncertain tasks. He asserted that this uncertainty makes life valuable and exciting, but does not free humans from suffering; it is rather an abandonment of the futile pursuit of happiness. He used the example of [[Christopher Columbus]] who went on a dangerous and uncertain voyage and because of this grew to appreciate life more fully.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Leopardi |first=Giacomo |url=https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/52356 |title=Essays and Dialogues |publisher=Trübner & Co |year=1882 |location=London |language=en |translator-last=Edwardes |translator-first=Charles |chapter=Dialogue Between Christopher Columbus And Pietro Gutierrez |chapter-url=https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/52356/pg52356-images.html#DIALOGUE_BETWEEN_CHRISTOPHER_COLUMBUS_AND_PIETRO_GUTIERREZ}}</ref> Leopardi also saw the capacity of humans to laugh at their condition as a laudable quality that can help them deal with their predicament: "He who has the courage to laugh is master of the world, much like him who is prepared to die."<ref>{{Cite book |last=Leopardi |first=Giacomo |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=UXdjDwAAQBAJ |title=Thoughts |publisher=Alma Books |year=2018 |isbn=978-0-7145-4826-5 |location=Richmond |page=78 |language=en |translator-last=Nichols |translator-first=J. G.}}</ref>

=== German pessimism ===
Although the first manifestations of philosophical pessimism date back to antiquity,<ref>Arriagada, Ignacio Moya (2018). [https://www.academia.edu/37129994/Pesimismo_profundo Pessimismo Profundo] (in Spanish). Chile: Editorial Librosdementira Ltda. p. 35. {{ISBN|978-956-9136-56-6}}.</ref> never before did it take such a systematic turn and been so reflected upon as in Germany during the second half of the nineteenth century.{{r|Beiser|page=4}} For almost fifty years, the issue of pessimism was discussed in the context of ''[[Weltschmerz]].''{{r|Beiser|page=4}} The question of pessimism dominated German philosophical thought, and the "[[pessimism controversy]]" was its major point of dispute.{{r|Beiser|page=8}} The discussion that took place in Germany around this movement largely agreed on what constituted its central thesis: the negative value of existence.{{r|Beiser|page=4|quote=The philosophical discussion of pessimism in late 19th-century Germany shows a remarkable unanimity about its central thesis. According to all participants in this discussion, pessimism is the thesis that life is not worth living, that nothingness is better than being, or that it is worse to be than not be.}}

==== Arthur Schopenhauer ====
[[File:Arthur Schopenhauer by J Schäfer, 1859b.jpg|thumb|[[Arthur Schopenhauer]] considered the world to be the product of an irrational and insatiable metaphysical force which he called Will.]]
The first presentation of philosophical pessimism in a systematic manner, with an entire structure of [[metaphysics]] underlying it, was introduced by [[Germany|German]] philosopher [[Arthur Schopenhauer]] in the 19th century.{{r|Beiser|page=13|quote=The prevalence of pessimism in Germany after the 1860s was due chiefly to the influence of one man: Arthur Schopenhauer (1788–1860). It was Schopenhauer who made pessimism a systematic philosophy, and who transformed it from a personal attitude into a metaphysics and worldview.}}<ref>{{Cite book |last=Coates |first=Ken |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=_GolAwAAQBAJ |title=Anti-Natalism: Rejectionist Philosophy from Buddhism to Benatar |publisher=First Edition Design Pub. |year=2014 |isbn=978-1-62287-570-2 |language=en|page=7|quote=However despite a long history of literary allusions to the ills of existence, systematic philosophies, especially secular ones, which argue the case against existence are few and far between. They only date back to the 19th century, with Schopenhauer and to a lesser extent [[Eduard von Hartmann]] as the outstanding figures.}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last=Saltus |first=Edgar |url=https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/40079 |title=The Philosophy of Disenchantment |publisher=Project Gutenberg |year=2012 |page=[https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/40079/pg40079-images.html#Page_2 2] |language=en |quote=In stating that this view of life is of distinctly modern origin, it should be understood that it is so only in the systematic form which it has recently assumed, for individual expressions of discontent have been handed down from remote ages. |orig-date=1885}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last=Lugt |first=Mara van der |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Jb8lEAAAQBAJ |title=Dark Matters: Pessimism and the Problem of Suffering |publisher=Princeton University Press |year=2021 |isbn=978-0-691-20662-2 |location=Princeton, New Jersey |language=en|page=335|quote=Schopenhauer is undoubtedly a key figure in pessimism, and arguably the thinker who turns pessimism into a coherent philosophical tradition for the first time.}}</ref> Schopenhauer's pessimism came from his analysis of life being the product of an insatiable and incessant cosmic [[Will to live|Will]]. He considered the [[Arthur Schopenhauer#Philosophy|Will]] to be the ultimate metaphysical animating [[noumenon]], describing it as an aimless, restless and unquenchable striving, encompassing both the inorganic and organic realm, and whose most intuitive and direct apprehension can be attained by man through an observation of his own body and desires:{{r|Schopenhauer-WWR1|at=Book IV, § 57, page 338}}

<blockquote>Looking at the part of nature that is devoid of cognition, we already saw its inner essence to be a continual striving, without goal and without rest, and this is much more evident when we consider animals and human beings. Willing and striving constitute their entire essence, fully comparable to an unquenchable thirst. But the basis of all willing is need, lack, and thus pain, which is its primordial destiny by virtue of its essence. If on the other hand it lacks objects to will, its former objects having been quickly dispelled as too easily achieved, it is seized with a terrible emptiness and boredom: i.e. its essence and its being itself become an intolerable burden to it. Thus, its life swings back and forth like a pendulum between pain and boredom; in fact, these are the ingredients out of which it is ultimately composed. This has also been very fancifully expressed by saying that after people had placed all the pain and suffering in hell, nothing was left for heaven except boredom.</blockquote>

Schopenhauer saw human reason as weak and insignificant compared to Will; in one [[metaphor]], he compared the human intellect to a sighted lame man, who rides on the shoulders of a strong but blind man (the Will).{{r|Schopenhauer-WWR2|at=Chapter 19}} He noted that, once one's desires are satiated, the feeling of satisfaction does not last for long, being merely the starting-point of new desires, and that, as a result, humans spend most of their lives in a state of endless striving; in this sense, they are, deep down, nothing but Will.{{r|Schopenhauer-WWR1|at=Book IV, § 56}} Even the moments of satisfaction, when attained and not immediately giving way to new wants and longings, only lead one to an abandonment to boredom,{{r|Schopenhauer-WWR1|at=Book IV, § 57}} which for Schopenhauer is a direct proof that existence has no real value in itself:<ref>{{Cite book |last=Schopenhauer |first=Arthur |author-link=Arthur Schopenhauer |title=Studies in Pessimism |url=https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Studies_in_Pessimism |publisher=George Allen & Company |year=1913 |location=London |page=[https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Page%3AStudies_in_Pessimism.pdf/42 38] |language=en |translator-last=Saunders |translator-first=Thomas Bailey |chapter=The Vanity of Existence |chapter-url=https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Studies_in_Pessimism/The_Vanity_of_Existence}}</ref>

<blockquote>For what is boredom but the feeling of the emptiness of life? If life—the craving for which is the very essence of our being—were possessed of any positive intrinsic value, there would be no such thing as boredom at all: mere existence would satisfy us in itself, and we should want for nothing.</blockquote>

Moreover, Schopenhauer argued that the business of biological life is a [[Bellum omnium contra omnes|war of all against all]], filled with constant strife and struggle, not merely boredom and unsatisfied desires. In such struggle, each different phenomenon of the will-to-live contests with one another to maintain its own phenomenon:{{r|Schopenhauer-WWR1|at=Book II, § 27}}

<blockquote>This universal struggle is most clearly visible in the animal kingdom, which feeds off the plant kingdom, and in which every animal in turn becomes food and prey for another; i.e. the matter in which its Idea presents itself must give way to the presentation of another, since every animal can maintain itself in being only by constantly destroying another. So the will to life constantly lives and feeds off itself in its different forms up to the human race, which overpowers all others and regards nature as constructed for its own use. But in the Fourth Book we will also find that this is the same human race in which this struggle, this self-rupturing of the will, reveals itself with the most terrible clarity and ''[[homo homini lupus|man is a wolf to man]]''.</blockquote>

He also asserted that pleasure and pain were asymmetrical: pleasure has a negative nature, while pain is positive. By this Schopenhauer meant that pleasure does not come to us originally and of itself; that is, pleasure is only able to exist as a removal of a pre-existing pain or want, while pain directly and immediately proclaims itself to our perception:<ref>{{Cite book |last=Schopenhauer |first=Arthur |author-link=Arthur Schopenhauer |title=Studies in Pessimism |url=https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Studies_in_Pessimism |publisher=George Allen & Company |year=1913 |location=London |language=en |translator-last=Saunders |translator-first=Thomas Bailey |chapter=On the Sufferings of the World |chapter-url=https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Studies_in_Pessimism/On_the_Sufferings_of_the_World}}</ref>{{r|Schopenhauer-WWR2|at=Chapter 46}}

<blockquote>All satisfaction, or what is generally called happiness, is actually and essentially only ever ''negative'' and absolutely never positive. It is not something primordial that comes to us from out of itself, it must always be the satisfaction of some desire. This is because a desire, i.e. lack, is the prior condition for every pleasure. But the desire ends with satisfaction and so, consequently, does the pleasure. Thus satisfaction or happiness can never be anything more than the liberation from a pain or need. (...) Only lack, i.e. pain, is ever given to us directly. Our cognition of satisfaction and pleasure is only indirect, when we remember the sufferings and privations that preceded them and ceased when they appeared.{{r|Schopenhauer-WWR1|at=Book IV, § 58, pages 345–346}}</blockquote>

Regarding old age and death, to which every life necessarily hurries, Schopenhauer described them as a sentence of condemnation from nature itself on each particular phenomenon of the will-to-live, indicating that the whole striving of each phenomenon is bound to frustrate itself and is essentially empty and vain, for if we were something valuable in itself, or unconditioned and absolute, we would not have non-existence as our goal:{{r|Schopenhauer-WWR2|at=Chapter 46}}

<blockquote>What a difference there is between our beginning and our end! The former in the frenzy of desire and the ecstasy of sensual pleasure; the latter in the destruction of all the organs and the musty odour of corpses. The path from birth to death is always downhill as regards well-being and the enjoyment of life; blissfully dreaming childhood, light-hearted youth, toilsome manhood, frail and often pitiable old age, the torture of the last illness, and finally the agony of death. Does it not look exactly as if existence were a false step whose consequences gradually become more and more obvious?<ref>{{Cite book |last=Schopenhauer |first=Arthur |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=88CV8JOYUmsC |title=Parerga and Paralipomena: Short Philosophical Essays |publisher=Clarendon Press |year=2000 |isbn=978-0-19-924221-4 |volume=2 |location=Oxford |language=en |translator-last=Payne |translator-first=E. F. J. |chapter=Chapter XI – Additional Remarks on the Doctrine of the Vanity of Existence}}</ref></blockquote>

Schopenhauer saw in artistic contemplation a temporary escape from the act of willing. He believed that through "losing yourself" in art one could sublimate the Will. However, he believed that only resignation from the pointless striving of the will to life through a form of [[asceticism]], which he interpreted as a "mortification of the will" or the "negation of the will to life" (as those practiced by [[Eastern Monasticism|eastern monastics]] and by "saints and ascetics") could free oneself from the Will altogether.{{r|Schopenhauer-WWR1|at=Book IV, § 68}}

Schopenhauer never used the term ''pessimism'' to describe his philosophy but he also did not object when others called it that.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Cartwright |first=David E. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=meD1bGAjO6wC |title=Schopenhauer: A Biography |publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=2010 |isbn=978-0-521-82598-6 |location=Cambridge |page=4 |language=en}}</ref> Other terms used to describe his thought are [[Voluntarism (philosophy)|voluntarism]] and [[irrationalism]], which he also never used.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2020-04-23 |title=Voluntarism |url=https://www.britannica.com/topic/voluntarism-philosophy |access-date=2022-12-06 |website=Encyclopedia Britannica |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last=Peters |first=M. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=M8kaBgAAQBAJ&pg=PT73 |title=Schopenhauer and Adorno on Bodily Suffering: A Comparative Analysis |publisher=Springer |year=2014 |isbn=978-1-137-41217-1 |pages=54–55 |language=en}}</ref>

==== Post-Schopenhauerian pessimism<!--'Post-Schopenhauerian pessimism' and 'Transcendental realism (Schopenhauer)' redirect here--> ====
{{See also|History of metaphysical realism|Pessimism controversy}}
{{Multiple image
| image1 = Julius Bahnsen.jpg
| image2 = P.Mainländer (cropped).jpg
| total_width = 420
| footer = [[Julius Bahnsen|Bahnsen]], [[Mainländer]] and [[Von Hartmann]] are among several philosophers who developed Schopenhauer's ideas on philosophical pessimism.
| image3 = Karl Robert Eduard von Hartmann (Photographic portrait).jpg
}}

During the final years of Schopenhauer's life and subsequent years after his death, '''post-Schopenhauerian pessimism'''<!--boldface per WP:R#PLA--> became a popular trend in 19th-century Germany.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Langer |first=M. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=1x59DAAAQBAJ |title=Nietzsche's Gay Science: Dancing Coherence |publisher=Palgrave Macmillan |year=2010 |isbn=978-0-230-28176-9 |location=London |page=231 |language=en}}</ref> Nevertheless, it was viewed with disdain by the other popular philosophies at the time, such as [[Hegelianism]], [[materialism]], [[neo-Kantianism]] and the emerging [[positivism]]. In an age of upcoming revolutions and exciting discoveries in [[science]], the resigned and anti-progressive nature of the typical pessimist was seen as a detriment to social development. To respond to this growing criticism, a group of philosophers greatly influenced by Schopenhauer (indeed, some even being his personal acquaintances) developed their own brand of pessimism, each in their own unique way. Thinkers such as [[Julius Bahnsen]], [[Eduard von Hartmann]], [[Philipp Mainländer]] and others cultivated the ever-increasing threat of pessimism by converting Schopenhauer's [[transcendental idealism]] into what [[Frederick C. Beiser]] calls '''transcendental realism'''<!--boldface per WP:R#PLA-->.{{NoteTag|Beiser reviews the commonly held position that Schopenhauer was a transcendental idealist and he rejects it: "Though it is deeply heretical from the standpoint of transcendental idealism, Schopenhauer's objective standpoint involves a form of transcendental realism, i.e. the assumption of the independent reality of the world of experience."{{r|Beiser|page=40}}}}{{r|Beiser|page=213}} The transcendental ''idealist'' thesis is that humans know only the appearances of things (not [[things-in-themselves]]); the transcendental ''realist'' thesis is that "the knowledge we have of how things appear to us in experience gives us knowledge of things-in-themselves."{{r|Beiser|pages=147–148}}

By espousing transcendental realism, Schopenhauer's own dark observations about the nature of the world would become completely knowable and objective, and in this way, they would attain certainty. The certainty of pessimism being, that non-existence is preferable to existence. That, along with the metaphysical reality of the Will, were the premises which the post-Schopenhauerian thinkers inherited from Schopenhauer's teachings. From this common starting point, each philosopher developed their own negative view of being in their respective philosophies.{{r|Beiser|pages=147–148}}

Some pessimists would assuage the critics by accepting the validity of their criticisms and embracing [[historicism]], as was the case with Schopenhauer's literary executor [[Julius Frauenstädt]] and with Eduard von Hartmann (who gave transcendental realism a unique twist).{{r|Beiser|pages=147–148}} [[Agnes Taubert]], the wife of Von Hartmann, in her work ''Pessimism and Its Opponents'' defined pessimism as a matter of measuring the [[Eudaimonia|eudaimonological]] value of life in order to determine whether existence is preferable to non-existence or not, and like her husband, Taubert argued that the answer to this problem is "empirically ascertainable".<ref>{{Cite thesis |last=Dahlkvist |first=Tobias |title=Nietzsche and the Philosophy of Pessimism: Schopenhauer, Hartmann, Leopardi |date=2007 |degree=Doctoral |publisher=Uppsala University |url=http://uu.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:170685/FULLTEXT01.pdf |doi=}} p. 78</ref> [[Olga Plümacher]] was critical of Schopenhauer's pessimism for "not achieving as good a pessimism as he might have done", and was, as a result, inferior to Von Hartmann's thought on the subject, which allowed for social progress.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Janaway |first=Christopher |date=2022-03-04 |title=Worse than the best possible pessimism? Olga Plümacher's critique of Schopenhauer |journal=British Journal for the History of Philosophy |volume=30 |issue=2 |pages=211–230 |doi=10.1080/09608788.2021.1881441 |s2cid=233897050 |issn=0960-8788}}</ref> Julius Bahnsen would reshape the understanding of pessimism overall,{{r|Beiser|page=231}} while Philipp Mainländer set out to reinterpret and elucidate the nature of the will, by presenting it as a self-mortifying will-to-death.{{r|Beiser|page=202}}

==== Julius Bahnsen ====
[[File:Julius-Bahnsen– (cropped).jpg|thumb|279x279px|[[Julius Bahnsen]]; his radical pessimism excluded any possibility of progress and deliverance.]]
The pessimistic outlook of the German philosopher [[Julius Bahnsen]] is often described as the most extreme form of philosophical pessimism, perhaps even more so than [[Philipp Mainländer|Mainländer]]'s since it excludes any possibility of redemption or salvation, with Bahnsen being skeptical that [[art]], [[asceticism]] or even [[culture]] can remove us from this world of suffering, or that they provide escape from the self-torment of the will.{{r|Beiser|page=231}}

According to Bahnsen, the heart of reality lies in the inner conflict of the will, divided within itself and "willing what it does not will and not willing what it wills".{{r|Beiser|page=229}} Rather than just a variation of Schopenhauer's philosophy, but similar to Hartmann's philosophy, Bahnsen's worldview is a synthesis of Schopenhauer with [[Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel|Hegel]]. But while Hartmann attempts to moderate Schopenhauer's pessimisim with Hegel's optimistic belief in historical progress, Bahnsen's philosophy excludes any evolution or progress in history due to seeing it as cyclical and with contradiction being a constant.{{r|Beiser|page=231}} When taking Hegel's dialectic as an influence (but not his [[historicism]]), Bahnsen takes only the negative moment of his [[dialectic]], or in other words, its emphasis on contradiction. Thus, the main theme of Bahnsen's philosophy became his own idea of the ''Realdialektik'', according to which there is no synthesis between two opposing forces, with the opposition resulting only in negation and the consequent destruction of contradicting aspects. For Bahnsen, no rationality was to be found in being and thus, there was no [[Teleology|teleological]] power that led to progress at the end of every conflict.{{r|Beiser|page=231}}[[File:Ivan the Terrible & son - detail.jpg|thumb|left|258x258px|In Bahnsen's pessimistic philosophy, the notion of [[tragedy]] plays an essential role.]]Bahnsen's pessimism gives a central place to his theory of tragedy – a corollary of the contradictory character of his ''Realdialektik''.{{r|Beiser|page=263}} According to him, there can never be a clear or consistent answer as to what moral duties or values an individual should adopt. Whatever we do in our lives, particularly in the more intricate moral situations, will involve violating a conflicting duty, principle or other basic value (which deserve to be honoured no less); this happens not only due to a simple lack of moral absolutes, but also from competing conceptions of the good, which are incompatible and with there being weighty and worthy counter-motives for every single action in life.{{r|Beiser|pages=264–265}}

In his 2016 work, ''Weltschmerz: Pessimism in German Philosophy, 1860–1900'', the American philosopher [[Frederick C. Beiser]] expresses Bahnsen's theory of tragedy as follows:

<blockquote>The very heart of tragedy, for Bahnsen, consists in two fundamental facts: first, that the individual has to choose between conflicting duties or incommensurable values; and second, that he or she will be punished, or have to suffer, because he or she obeys one duty or honours one value at the expense of another. ... Because duties and values conflict, and because the tragic hero or heroine must act on some duty or value in a particular situation, he or she has no choice but to sin; they must violate another duty or disregard another basic value; and for that infraction or transgression they must be punished. The essence of a tragedy, then, is that we must do the right or act for the good, but that we will also be punished for it because we cannot help violating other duties and goods. Even with the best intentions and the most scrupulous conscience, we end up doing something bad and wrong, for which we must pay.{{r|Beiser|page=264}}</blockquote>

For Bahnsen, the only respite from such a grim view of life was through [[Humour|humor]]; in other words, in learning how to laugh at ourselves and our predicament.{{r|Beiser|page=267}} Though he insists that humor does not necessarily extricate us from our tragic situation, he does believe that it allows us to momentarily detach or abstract ourselves from it (in a similar way to Schopenhauer's view on [[Aesthetics|aesthetic]] contemplation through [[art]]). It ultimately however offers no enduring remedies, no reliable methods to escape from the suffering and moral dilemmas of life; its only power is to lighten the load and to prepare us for even more to come.{{r|Beiser|page=267}}

==== Philipp Mainländer ====
[[File:Mainländer.jpg|thumb|[[Philipp Mainländer]] published ''Die Philosophie der Erlösung'' in 1876 and committed suicide shortly afterwards.]]
[[Philipp Mainländer]] was a poet and philosopher mainly known for his ''magnum opus'' "The Philosophy of Redemption" (''Die Philosophie der Erlösung''), a work marked by a profound pessimism that he had published just before his suicide in 1876. For [[Theodor Lessing]], it is "perhaps the most radical system of pessimism known to philosophical literature",<ref>{{Cite book |last=Lessing |first=Théodore |title=Schopenhauer, Wagner, Nietzsche. Eine Einführung in die moderne Philosophie |publisher=C. H. Beck |year=1907 |location=Leipzig |author-link=Theodor Lessing}}</ref>{{Page needed|date=December 2022}} although it is part of Schopenhauer's philosophical heritage. Mainländer articulates in it the concept of the "[[God is dead|death of God]]", which quickly finds an echo in [[Friedrich Nietzsche|Nietzsche]]'s philosophy (though with a more metaphysical meaning), and the notion of the "Will to death". The Will to death, which is an inverted form of Schopenhauer's Will to live, is the principle of all existence ever since the origin of the world. Indeed, God{{NoteTag|In Mainländer's naturalistic philosophy, "God" is a metaphor for a kind of initial singularity from which the expansion of the universe began.}} gave himself death, as it were, in creating the world, and since then, annihilation constitutes the only "salvation" of being, its only possibility of "redemption". For Mainländer, life itself has no value, and "the Will, ignited by the knowledge that non-being is better than being, is the supreme principle of morality".<ref>[[Philipp Mainländer|Mainländer, Philipp]] (1876). ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=UFg-AAAAYAAJ Die Philosophie der Erlösung],'' [https://books.google.com/books?id=UFg-AAAAYAAJ&pg=PA575 p. 575]. Grieben, Berlin. "''Der von der Erkenntnis, daß Nichtsein besser ist als Sein, entzündete Wille also ist das oberste Prinzip aller Moral''."</ref> When the individual, by observing his own Will, realizes that his salvation lies in his death, his Will to live is transformed into a Will to death. The Will to live is in this perspective only the means used by the Will to death to accomplish its goal.{{r|Beiser|page=202}}

In contrast to Schopenhauer, Mainländer supports a pluralistic conception of reality, called [[nominalism]].{{r|Beiser|page=212}} This ontological [[Pluralism (philosophy)|pluralism]] implies that individual Wills are mortal, that the existence of an individual is limited in duration as well as in extension. The disappearance of an individual therefore leads to the silence of his Will, being reduced to nothingness.{{r|Beiser|page=207}} In Schopenhauer's metaphysics, on the contrary, individual Wills were only manifestations of the essence of the world itself (the Will). Therefore, the disappearance of individuals could in no way extinguish the Will.{{r|Beiser|page=207}} It would have been necessary to reduce the totality of the world to nothingness in order to do so. Mainländer's pluralist metaphysics, on the other hand, makes the annihilation of the Will possible, leading one to ascribe to death an essential negative power: that of making the essence of the world (understood as the simple sum of all individuals) disappear. Since non-being is superior to being, death provides a real benefit, even more important than all the others since it is definitive. This benefit is that of eternal peace and tranquility, which Mainländer calls "redemption",{{r|Beiser|page=206}} thus taking up the lexicon of [[Christianity]]. Indeed, he interprets Christianity, in its mystical form, as a religion of renunciation and salvation, as a first revelation of his own philosophy.{{r|Beiser|page=208}}

Mainländer insists on the decisive significance of his ontological pluralism, with reality being nothing other than the existence of individual Wills.{{r|Beiser|page=215}} Rejecting Schopenhauer's metaphysical perspective, and with it the postulate of a cosmic universal Will above and beyond the individual Will, he asserts the necessarily "immanent", empirical and representational – and therefore non-metaphysical - character of knowledge, limited as it is to the field of individual consciousness. For him, each Will, conceived as self-sufficient both from the point of view of knowledge and ontologically, is radically separated from the others.{{r|Beiser|page=215}} Nevertheless, Mainländer admits, the natural sciences show that all the beings that make up the world are systematically interconnected, so that each thing depends on each other thing according to necessary laws.{{r|Beiser|page=215}} Science thus seems to contradict the thesis that all Will is closed in on itself (and therefore free). This apparent contradiction can, however, be resolved, according to Mainländer, by introducing the dimension of time: in the beginning, before the beginning of time, there was a single, pure singularity, without any division.{{r|Beiser|page=216}} At the beginning of time, the original unity of the world became fragmented and differentiated, thus beginning a process of division that has continued ever since. From the primitive unity of the world there remains the principle of the interconnection of things according to the laws of nature, but the underlying unity of things belongs to the past and therefore does not take away the individual character of the Will.{{r|Beiser|page=216}}

[[File:August Friedrich Albrecht Schenck - Anguish - Google Art Project.jpg|thumb|left|For Mainländer, "''God is dead''", and the world itself, doomed to disappear, is his "rotting corpse".|250x250px]]

It is to shed light on this passage from the conversion of the original unity to multiplicity that Mainländer introduces his tragic concept of the death of God.{{r|Beiser|page=216}} In a vain prophecy, he declares: "''God has died and His death was the life of the world''".{{r|Beiser|page=216}} As Christianity had sensed through the figure of Christ, God – that is, the initial singularity – sacrificed himself by giving birth to the world.{{r|Beiser|page=216}} Although we cannot really know the modalities of this begetting, it is possible, according to Mainländer, to have some idea of it by analogy with us. In this perspective, he constructs a remarkable [[Anthropomorphism|anthropomorphic]] creation [[myth]]ology in which God appears as a perfectly free and omnipotent individual, but who discovers with horror his own limitation in the very fact of his existence, which he cannot directly abolish, being the primary condition of all his powers. In this narrative, God, now inhabited by anguish, becomes aware that his present existence has a negative value, that it is therefore of less value than his non-existence.{{r|Beiser|page=217}} He then decides to put an end to it; not directly, which is impossible for him, but by the mediation of a creation. By creating the world and then fragmenting it into a multitude of individual entities, he can progressively realize his desire for self-destruction.{{r|Beiser|page=217}} It is this divine impulse towards self-destruction and annihilation that ultimately animates the whole cosmos, even if the impulse towards life (the Will to live) seems to dominate it at first sight. For example, the Will to live that exists in the plants and animals of the organic realm coexists, in an indirect or unconscious manner, with the Will to death: in other words, the Will to death is "masked" or concealed by the Will to live; however, the Will to death gradually and inevitably triumphs over the Will to live, as every living being, sooner or later, dies and ceases to be – as derived from God's original yearning towards non-being.{{r|Beiser|page=218}}<ref>Mainländer, Philipp (2014). Filosofía de la redención: edición original (1876) (in Spanish). Translated by Cornejo, Manuel Pérez. Xorki, Madrid. p. 394. {{ISBN|978-84-941505-5-5}}. {{OCLC|876364519}}. "[Everything in the world is unconsciously a ''will to death''. This will to death is, above all in the human being, hidden in its entirety by the will to ''live'', because life is a ''means'' to death, which presents itself clearly for even the most feeble-minded individual: we die unceasingly; our life is a slow struggle against death, in which death daily overpowers every human being until, finally, it extinguishes the light of life in each and every one of us]".</ref> Everything that exists, from the inorganic realm to the organic realm is ultimately governed by a fatal process of cosmic annihilation that translates on the physical level into [[entropy]], and on the level of the living into struggle and conflict.{{r|Beiser|page=218}}<ref>Mainländer, Philipp (2014). [https://books.google.com/books?id=bCV8oAEACAAJ Filosofía de la redención: edición original (1876)] (in Spanish). Translated by Cornejo, Manuel Pérez. Xorki, Madrid. pp. 17–18. {{ISBN|978-84-941505-5-5}}. {{OCLC|876364519}}. "[W. H. Müller-Seyfahrt and U. Horstmann regard Mainländer's theory as a 'metaphysics of entropy', which must be linked to the problem of the existence of evil and suffering in the world]".</ref> Mainländer considers this whole process to be ineluctable, like a Greek tragedy in which the destiny that one seeks to escape always ends up being fulfilled. In this macabre tragedy, the whole world is nothing more than "the rotting corpse of God".{{r|Beiser|page=218}}

==== Eduard von Hartmann ====
[[File:Eduard von Hartmann.jpg|thumb|According to [[Eduard von Hartmann]], it is only through the constant attempt to gain happiness that humans can learn the desirability of nothingness; and when this knowledge has become universal, or at least general, deliverance will come and the world will cease.]]
In his work entitled ''[[Philosophy of the Unconscious]]'', the first edition of which appeared in 1869 and became famous already in the first years of its publication, [[Eduard von Hartmann]], while presenting himself as the heir of Arthur Schopenhauer, replaces the Schopenhauerian principle of Will with his own principle of the Unconscious. The Unconscious, being a [[Metaphysics|metaphysical]] rather than a [[Unconscious mind|psychological]] concept, is the invisible actor of history and hidden instigator of evolution,<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Nicolas |first1=Serge |url= |title=Un débat sur l'inconscient avant Freud: la réception de Eduard von Hartmann chez les psychologues et philosophes français |last2=Fedi |first2=Laurent |publisher=L'Harmattan |year=2008 |isbn=978-2-296-05649-7 |location=Paris |language=fr |oclc=470664539}}</ref>{{Page needed|date=December 2022}} including indissociably the irrational Will which pushes the world to exist (in Schopenhauer's sense), and the "Idea", in the [[Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel|Hegelian]] sense, which is the rational and organizing element of the world.<ref name="ea" />

The Unconscious is both [[Will (philosophy)|Will]], [[Reason]] (the latter concept also interpreted as Idea) and the absolute all-embracing ground of all existence. Thus, being influenced by both Hegel and Schopenhauer, he affirms that the evolution of history goes in the direction of the development of the Idea and its prevalence over the (unconscious) Will. But it is indeed the Will, considered as an irrational principle, that has produced the world. The world is therefore inevitably full of evils and pains that cannot be eradicated, and the progressive development of the Idea means the progressive awareness of these evils and their inevitability, not their replacement by consciousness. A "cosmic-universal negation of the Will"<ref>Hartmann, Eduard von (1884). [https://books.google.com/books?id=08QIAAAAQAAJ Philosophy of the Unconscious, Volume 3], [https://books.google.com/books?id=08QIAAAAQAAJ&pg=PR131 pp. 131].</ref> shall therefore appear as the only final solution for the human race that has reached full consciousness, with the Unconscious evoking Reason and with its aid creating the [[best of all possible worlds]], which contains the promise of its redemption from actual existence by the emancipation of Reason from its subjugation to the Will in the conscious reason of the enlightened pessimist.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Rupp-Eisenreich |first=B. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=v-vaAAAAMAAJ |title=Dictionnaire du darwinisme et de l'évolution |publisher=Presses Universitaires de France |year=1996 |isbn=978-2-13-046481-5 |editor-last=Tort |editor-first=Patrick |volume=2 |location=Paris |pages=2136–2138 |language=fr}}</ref>

Although Von Hartmann is a pessimist, his pessimism is by no means unmitigated. The individual's happiness is indeed unattainable either here and now or hereafter and in the future, but he does not despair of ultimately releasing the Unconscious from its sufferings. He differs from Schopenhauer in making salvation by the "negation of the Will-to-live" depend on a collective social effort and not on individualistic [[asceticism]]. Hartmann explains that there are three fundamental illusions about the value of life that must be overcome before humanity can achieve what he calls absolute painlessness, nothingness, or Nirvana.<ref>Hartmann, Eduard von (1884). [https://books.google.com/books?id=08QIAAAAQAAJ Philosophy of the Unconscious, Volume 3], [https://books.google.com/books?id=08QIAAAAQAAJ&pg=PR118 pp. 118].</ref> The first of these illusions is the hope of good in the present, the confidence in the pleasures of this world, such as was felt by the [[Ancient Greece|Greeks]]. This is followed by the [[Christianity|Christian]] transference of happiness to another and better life, to which in turn succeeds the illusion that looks for happiness in progress, and dreams of a future made worth while by the achievements of science. All alike are empty promises, and known as such in the final stage, which sees all human desires as equally vain and the only good in the peace of Nirvana.<ref name="ea">{{Americana|wstitle=Hartmann, Karl Robert Edouard von|author=Grace Neal Dolson|inline=1}}</ref> When the greater part of the Will in existence is so far enlightened by reason as to perceive the inevitable misery of existence, a collective effort to will non-existence will be made, and the world will relapse into nothingness, the Unconscious into quiescence.<ref name="eb" />

The conception of a redemption of the Unconscious also supplies the ultimate basis of Von Hartmann's ethics. We must provisionally affirm life and devote ourselves to social evolution, instead of striving after a happiness which is impossible; in so doing we shall find that morality renders life less unhappy than it would otherwise be. Suicide, and all other forms of selfishness, are highly reprehensible. [[Epistemology|Epistemologically]], Von Hartmann is a transcendental realist, who ably defends his views and acutely criticizes those of his opponents. His realism enables him to maintain the reality of Time, and so of the process of the world's redemption.<ref name="eb">{{EB1911|wstitle=Hartmann, Karl Robert Eduard von|inline=1}}</ref>

==== Friedrich Nietzsche ====
[[File:Portrait of Friedrich Nietzsche.jpg|thumb|Strongly criticizing the pessimism of his German contemporaries, "a pessimism of the weak", [[Friedrich Nietzsche|Nietzsche]] introduced his own version of pessimism: "Dionysian pessimism", or "a pessimism of the strong".<ref>[[Robert C. Solomon]], [[Kathleen Higgins]] (1998). [https://books.google.com/books?id=ma1zUXYyTF0C Reading Nietzsche], Oxford University Press, New York, [https://books.google.com/books?id=ma1zUXYyTF0C&pg=PA123 p. 123]. ISBN 978-0195066739. {{OCLC|25821927}}.</ref>]]
[[Friedrich Nietzsche]] could be said to be a philosophical pessimist even though unlike Schopenhauer (whom he read avidly) his response to the tragic pessimistic view is neither resigned nor self-denying, but a [[Life affirming|life-affirming]] form of pessimism. For Nietzsche this was a "pessimism of the future", a "[[Dionysian]] pessimism."<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Dienstag |first=Joshua Foa |date=2001 |title=Nietzsche's Dionysian Pessimism |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/3117722 |journal=The American Political Science Review |volume=95 |issue=4 |pages=923–937 |jstor=3117722 |issn=0003-0554}}</ref> Nietzsche identified his Dionysian pessimism with what he saw as the pessimism of the Greek [[pre-socratic]]s and also saw it at the core of ancient [[Greek tragedy]].<ref name="Dienstag" />{{Rp|167}} He saw tragedy as laying bare the terrible nature of human existence, bound by constant flux. In contrast to this, Nietzsche saw [[Socrates|Socratic]] philosophy as an optimistic refuge of those who could not bear the tragedy any longer. Since Socrates posited that wisdom could lead to happiness, Nietzsche saw this as "morally speaking, a sort of cowardice{{Nbsp}}... amorally, a ruse".<ref name="Dienstag" />{{Rp|172}} Nietzsche was also critical of Schopenhauer's pessimism because, he argued that, in judging the world negatively, it turned to moral judgments about the world and, therefore, led to weakness and [[nihilism]]. Nietzsche's response was a total embracing of the nature of the world, a "great liberation" through a "pessimism of strength" which "does not sit in judgment of this condition".<ref name="Dienstag" />{{Rp|178}} He believed that the task of the philosopher was to wield this pessimism like a hammer, to first attack the basis of old moralities and beliefs and then to "make oneself a new pair of wings", i.e. to [[Transvaluation of values|re-evaluate all values]] and create new ones.<ref name="Dienstag" />{{Rp|181}} A key feature of this Dionysian pessimism was "saying yes" to the changing nature of the world, which entailed embracing destruction and suffering joyfully, forever (hence the ideas of ''[[amor fati]]'' and [[eternal recurrence]]).<ref name="Dienstag" />{{Rp|191}} Pessimism for Nietzsche was an art of living that is "good for one's health" as a "remedy and an aid in the service of growing and struggling life".<ref name="Dienstag" />{{Rp|199}}

=== Victorian pessimism ===
The pessimism of many of the thinkers of the [[Victorian era]] has been attributed to a reaction against the "benignly progressive" views of the [[Age of Enlightenment]], which were often expressed by the members of the [[Romanticism|Romantic movement]].<ref name="VictorianPessimism">{{Cite newsletter |date=February 2013 |title=Victorian Pessimism |url=https://www.housman-society.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/37-housman-newsletter.pdf |magazine=The Housman Society Newsletter |issue=37 |pages=2–3 |access-date=2022-10-21}}</ref> The works of Schopenhauer, particularly his concept of the primacy of the Will, has also been cited as a major influence on Victorian pessimism,<ref name="VictorianPessimism" /> as well as Darwin's 1859 publication of ''[[On the Origin of Species]]''.<ref name="LaLuna-NITLVI">{{Cite web |last=LaLuna |first=Greg |title=Nature in the Late-Victorian Imagination |url=https://sites.udel.edu/britlitwiki/nature-in-the-late-victorian-imagination/ |access-date=2022-10-20 |website=British Literature Wiki |language=en-US}}</ref>

Several British writers of the time have been noted for the pervasive pessimism of their works, including [[Matthew Arnold]], [[Edward FitzGerald (poet)|Edward FitzGerald]], [[James Thomson (poet, born 1834)|James Thomson]], [[Algernon Charles Swinburne]], [[Ernest Dowson]], [[A. E. Housman]], [[Thomas Hardy]],<ref name="Childrey-ACSOTSMVPP" /> [[Christina Rossetti]],<ref>{{Cite thesis |last=Yang |first=Okhee J. |title=A Study of Christina Rossetti's Poems on Death |date=May 1992 |degree=Master's |publisher=University of North Texas |url=https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc501076/m2/1/high_res_d/1002778608-Yang.pdf}}</ref> and [[Amy Levy]];<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Zatlin |first=Linda G. |date=Summer 1994 |title=The Complete Novels and Selected Writings of Amy Levy: 1861–1889 |url=https://go.gale.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA15801105&sid=googleScholar&v=2.1&it=r&linkaccess=abs&issn=00393789&p=AONE&sw=w&userGroupName=anon%7E70801828 |journal=Studies in Short Fiction |volume=31 |issue=3}}</ref> the pessimistic themes particularly deal with love, fatalism, and religious doubt.<ref name="Childrey-ACSOTSMVPP">{{Cite thesis |last=Childrey |first=Frank W. |title=A critical study of the seven major Victorian pessimistic poets |date=Summer 1969 |degree=Master's |publisher=University of Richmond |url=https://scholarship.richmond.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1292&context=masters-theses}} pp. i–iii</ref> The poems of the Canadian poet [[Frederick George Scott]] have also been cited as an example of Victorian pessimism,<ref name="jrank">{{Citation |last=Djwa |first=Sandra |title=Dictionary of Literary Biography |date=1990 |volume=92: Canadian Writers, 1890–1920 |pages=337–339 |editor-last=New |editor-first=W.H. |contribution=Frederick George Scott Biography |place=Detroit |publisher=Bruccoli Clark Layman}}</ref> as have the poems of the American poet [[Edwin Arlington Robinson]].<ref>{{Cite thesis |last=Wilson |first=William Jock |title=Existentialistic Implications in Edwin Arlington Robinson's Pessimism |date=1973 |degree=PhD |publisher=The University of Nebraska |url=https://www.proquest.com/docview/287991152|id={{ProQuest|287991152}} }}</ref>

During this period, artistic representations of nature transformed, from benevolent, uplifting and god-like, to actively hostile, competitive, or indifferent. [[Alfred, Lord Tennyson]] exemplified this change with the line "[[Nature Red in Tooth and Claw|Nature, red in tooth and claw]]", in his 1850 poem ''In Memoriam''.<ref name="LaLuna-NITLVI" />

=== 20th century ===

==== Albert Camus ====
[[Image:Punishment sisyph.jpg|thumb|227x227px|[[Camus]] used the [[Sisyphus#Punishment in the underworld|punishment of Sisyphus]] as a metaphor for the human condition.]]

In a 1945 article, [[Albert Camus]] wrote: "The idea that a pessimistic philosophy is necessarily one of discouragement is a puerile idea."<ref>{{Cite book |last=Camus |first=Albert |url=http://archive.org/details/resistancerebell00camu_0 |title=Resistance, Rebellion, and Death |date=1995 |publisher=Vintage International |isbn=978-0-679-76401-4 |edition= |location=New York |page=[https://archive.org/details/resistancerebell00camu_0/page/57/mode/1up 57] |language=en |translator-last=O'Brien |translator-first=Justin |chapter=Pessimism and Courage}}</ref> Camus helped popularize the idea of "[[Absurdism|the absurd]]", a key term in his famous essay ''[[The Myth of Sisyphus]]''. Like previous philosophical pessimists, Camus saw human consciousness and reason as that which "sets me in opposition to all creation".<ref name="Camus-TMOS">{{Cite book |last=Camus |first=Albert |title=The Myth of Sisyphus |publisher=Vintage International |year=2018 |isbn=978-0-525-56700-4 |location=New York |page= |language=en |translator-last=O'Brien |translator-first=Justin |oclc=1076457902}}</ref>{{Rp|page=51}} For Camus, this clash between a reasoning mind which craves meaning and a "silent" world is what produces the most important philosophical problem, the "problem of suicide". Camus believed that people often escape facing the absurd through "eluding" (''l'esquive''), a "trickery" for "those who live not for life itself but some great idea that will transcend it, refine it, give it a meaning, and betray it".<ref name="Camus-TMOS" />{{Rp|page=8}} He considered suicide and [[religion]] as inauthentic forms of eluding or escaping the problem of existence. For Camus, the only choice was to rebelliously accept and live with the absurd, for "there is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn." Camus illustrated his response to the condition of the absurd by using the Greek mythic character of [[Sisyphus]], who was condemned by the gods to push a boulder up a hill for eternity, only for it to roll down again when it reached he top. Camus imagined Sisyphus while pushing the rock, realizing the futility of his task, but doing it anyway out of rebellion: "One must imagine Sisyphus happy."<ref name="Camus-TMOS" />{{Rp|page=123}}

==== Peter Wessel Zapffe ====
[[File:Portrait of Peter Wessel Zapffe.jpg|thumb|307x307px|[[Peter Wessel Zapffe|Zapffe]] regarded humans as a kind of biological [[paradox]].]]

[[Peter Wessel Zapffe]] argued that [[evolution]] bestowed humans with a surplus of [[consciousness]] which allowed them to contemplate their place in the cosmos and yearn for justice and meaning together with freedom from suffering and death, while simultaneously being aware that nature or reality itself cannot satisfy those deep longings and spiritual demands.<ref>{{Cite magazine |last=Tangenes |first=Gisle |date=March–April 2004 |title=The View from Mount Zapffe |url=https://philosophynow.org/issues/45/The_View_from_Mount_Zapffe |magazine=Philosophy Now |issue=45 |access-date=2022-12-27}}</ref> For Zapffe, this was a tragic byproduct of evolution: humans' full apprehension of their ill-fated and vulnerable situation in the universe would, according to him, cause them to fall into a state of "cosmic panic" or existential terror. Humans' knowledge of their predicament is thus repressed through the use of four mechanisms, conscious or not, which he names isolation, anchoring, distraction and sublimation.<ref name="Zapffe-TLM" />

In his essay "[[The Last Messiah]]", he describes these four defense mechanisms as follows:<ref name="Zapffe-TLM">{{Cite web |last=Zapffe |first=Peter Wessel |date=March–April 2004 |title=The Last Messiah |url=https://philosophynow.org/issues/45/The_Last_Messiah |access-date=2020-04-12 |website=Philosophy Now}}</ref>
* [[Emotional isolation|Isolation]] is "a fully arbitrary dismissal from consciousness of all disturbing and destructive thought and feeling".
* Anchoring is the "fixation of points within, or construction of walls around, the liquid fray of consciousness". The anchoring mechanism provides individuals with a value or an ideal to consistently focus their attention on. Zapffe also applied the anchoring principle to society and stated that "God, the Church, the State, [[morality]], fate, the laws of life, the people, the future" are all examples of collective primary anchoring firmaments.
* [[Distraction]] is when "one limits attention to the critical bounds by constantly enthralling it with impressions". Distraction focuses all of one's energy on a task or idea to prevent the mind from turning in on itself.
* [[Sublimation (psychology)|Sublimation]] is the refocusing of energy away from negative outlets, toward positive ones. The individuals distance themselves and look at their existence from an aesthetic point of view (e.g., writers, poets, painters). Zapffe himself pointed out that his produced works were the product of sublimation.
[[Terror management theory|Terror Management Theory]] (TMT), a [[Social psychology|social]] and [[evolutionary psychology]] theory, is in accordance with Zapffe's view of human beings' higher cognitive abilities bringing them a form of existential anxiety that needs to be repressed or dealt with in some way.<ref name="Ligotti-TCATHR" />{{Rp|page=|pages=158–159}} According to TMT, such existential angst is born from the juxtaposition of human beings' awareness of themselves as merely transient animals groping to survive in a meaningless universe, destined only to die and decay.<ref name="Pyszczynski-WDPNSE" /> For TMT, repression of such awareness is done through symbolic conceptions of reality that give meaning, order, and permanence to existence; provide a set of standards for what is valuable; and promise some form of either literal or symbolic immortality to those who believe in the cultural worldview and live up to its standards of value.<ref name="Pyszczynski-WDPNSE">{{cite journal |last1=Pyszczynski |first1=Tom |last2=Greenberg |first2=Jeff |last3=Solomon |first3=Sheldon |last4=Arndt |first4=Jamie |last5=Schimel |first5=Jeff |year=2004 |title=Why Do People Need Self-Esteem? A Theoretical and Empirical Review |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/8582423 |journal=Psychological Bulletin |volume=130 |issue=3 |page=436 |doi=10.1037/0033-2909.130.3.435 |pmid=15122930}}</ref>

==== Emil Cioran ====
[[File:Cioran in Romania.jpg|thumb|265x265px|[[Emil Cioran|Cioran]] described existence as an [[exile]] to which we were condemned at our births, with nothingness remaining our true home.<ref>Emil Cioran, [https://books.google.com/books?id=_tw6sloP_8EC On the Heights of Despair] (1996), [https://books.google.com/books?id=_tw6sloP_8EC&pg=PA106 p. 106]. {{ISBN|978-0-226-10671-7}}</ref>]]

[[Emil Cioran]]'s works are permeated with philosophical pessimism,<ref name="Ligotti-TCATHR" />{{Rp|page=176}}<ref>{{Cite web |last=Olszewski |first=Fernando |date=November 13, 2020 |title=Cioran, the philosophy of despair and its ethical implications |url=https://www.metaphysicalexile.com/2020/11/cioran-philosophy-of-despair-and-its.html |access-date=December 31, 2022 |website=}}</ref> and deal with topics including failure, suffering, decay, [[existentialism]] and nihilism. Lacking interest in traditional philosophical systems and jargon, he rejects very early abstract speculation in favor of personal reflection and passionate lyricism. His first book, ''[[On the Heights of Despair]]'', created as a product of Cioran's [[chronic insomnia]], deals with "despair and decay, absurdity and alienation, futility and the irrationality of existence".<ref>{{Cite book |last=Cioran |first=Emil |title=On the Heights of Despair |date=1992 |publisher=The University of Chicago Pres |isbn=978-0226106717}}</ref> Cioran considered the human condition, the universe and life itself to be a failure: "life is a failure of taste which neither death nor even poetry succeeds in correcting."<ref>{{Cite web |last=Bradatan |first=Costica |date=2016-11-28 |title=The Philosopher of Failure: Emil Cioran's Heights of Despair |url=https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/philosopher-failure-emil-ciorans-heights-despair/ |access-date=2022-09-28 |website=Los Angeles Review of Books |language=en}}</ref> [[William H. Gass]] described Cioran's ''The Temptation to Exist'' as "a philosophical [[Romance novel|romance]] on the modern themes of alienation, absurdity, boredom, futility, decay, the tyranny of history, the vulgarities of change, awareness as agony, reason as disease".<ref>{{Cite news |last=Gass |first=William H. |date=1968-08-22 |title=The Evil Demiurge |language=en |work=The New York Review |url=https://www.nybooks.com/articles/1968/08/22/the-evil-demiurge/ |access-date=2022-09-28 |issn=0028-7504}}</ref>

Cioran's view of life's futility and the totality of its failure perhaps existed from a young age. In 1935, his mother told him that if she knew he would be so miserable, she would have aborted him. This prompted Cioran to later reflect, "I'm simply an accident. Why take it all so seriously?"<ref name="weiss">{{cite book |last1=Weiss |first1=Jason |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=C7NQreIlWloC |title=Writing At Risk: Interviews Uncommon Writers |date=1991 |publisher=University of Iowa Press |isbn=978-1-58729-249-1 |page=[https://books.google.com/books?id=C7NQreIlWloC&pg=PA9 9] |language=}}</ref>

Cioran wrote several works entirely in aphorisms; in reference to this choice, Cioran stated:<ref>{{Cite web |title=E.M. Cioran |url=https://www.itinerariesofahummingbird.com/e-m-cioran.html |website=Itineraries of a Hummingbird}}</ref>

{{blockquote|text=I only write this kind of stuff, because explaining bores me terribly. That's why I say when I've written aphorisms it's that I've sunk back into fatigue, why bother. And so, the aphorism is scorned by "serious" people, the professors look down upon it. When they read a book of aphorisms, they say, "Oh, look what this fellow said ten pages back, now he's saying the contrary. He's not serious." Me, I can put two aphorisms that are contradictory right next to each other. Aphorisms are also momentary truths. They're not decrees. And I could tell you in nearly every case why I wrote this or that phrase, and when. It's always set in motion by an encounter, an incident, a fit of temper, but they all have a cause. It's not at all gratuitous.}}

In ''[[The Trouble with Being Born (book)|The Trouble with Being Born]]'', Cioran, through aphorisms, examined the problem of being brought into existence into a world which is difficult to fully accept, or reject, without one's consent.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Thacker |first=Eugene |date=2018-07-19 |title=The Patron Saints of Pessimism: A Writer's Pantheon |url=https://lithub.com/the-patron-saints-of-pessimism-a-writers-pantheon/ |access-date=2022-09-28 |website=Literary Hub |language=en-US}}</ref> His aphorisms in ''The Trouble with Being Born'' pack philosophy into single sentences. For example, Cioran summarizes the futility of life and espoused antinatalism by saying: "We have lost, being born, as much as we shall lose dying. Everything."<ref name="Cioran-TTWBB">{{Cite book |last=Cioran |first=E. M. |title=The Trouble with Being Born |date=2012 |publisher=Arcade Pub |isbn=978-1-61145-740-7 |location=New York |language=en |oclc=811238963}}</ref>{{Rp|page=56}}

Cioran rejected suicide, as he saw suicide and death to be equally meaningless as life in a meaningless world. In ''The Trouble with Being Born,'' he contrasts suicide with his antinatalism: "It's not worth the bother of killing yourself, since you always kill yourself ''too late''."<ref name="Cioran-TTWBB" />{{Rp|page=32}} He did, however, argue that contemplating suicide could lead humans to live better lives.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Trujillo |first=Glenn M. |date=January 2021 |title=The Benefits of Being a Suicidal Curmudgeon: Emil Cioran on Killing Yourself |url=https://ir.library.louisville.edu/faculty/535/ |journal=Southwest Philosophy Review |volume=37 |issue=1 |pages=219–228 |doi=10.5840/swphilreview202137123 |s2cid=238760160 |via=ThinkIR}}</ref>

=== 21st century ===

==== Julio Cabrera ====
According to [[Julio Cabrera (philosopher)|Julio Cabrera]]'s [[ontology]], human life has a structurally negative value. Under this view, human life does not provoke discomfort in humans due to the particular events that happen in the lives of each individual, but due to the very being or nature of human existence as such. The following characteristics constitute what Cabrera calls the "terminality of being", in other words, its structurally negative value:<ref name="Cabrera-DANI" />{{Rp|page=|pages=23–24}}
{{ordered list
| list_style_type = lower-alpha|The being acquired by a human at birth is decreasing (or "decaying"), in the sense of a being that begins to end since its very emergence, following a single and irreversible direction of deterioration and decline, of which complete consummation can occur at any moment between some minutes and around one hundred years.|From the moment they come into being, humans are affected by three kinds of frictions: physical pain (in the form of illnesses, accidents, and natural catastrophes to which they are always exposed); discouragement (in the form of "lacking the will", or the "mood" or the "spirit", to continue to act, from mild ''taedium vitae'' to serious forms of depression), and finally, exposure to the aggressions of other humans (from gossip and slander to various forms of discrimination, persecution, and injustice), aggressions that we too can inflict on others, also submitted, like us, to the three kinds of friction.|To defend themselves against (a) and (b), human beings are equipped with mechanisms of creation of positive values (ethical, [[aesthetic]], [[religious]], [[entertaining]], [[recreational]], as well as values contained in human realizations of all kinds), which humans must keep constantly active. All positive values that appear within human life are reactive and palliative; they do not arise from the structure of life itself, but are introduced by the permanent and anxious struggle against the decaying life and its three kinds of friction, with such struggle however doomed to be defeated, at any moment, by any of the mentioned frictions or by the progressive decline of one's being.
}}For Cabrera, this situation is further worsened by a phenomenon he calls "moral impediment", that is, the structural impossibility of acting in the world without harming or manipulating someone at some given moment.<ref name="Cabrera-DANI" />{{Rp|page=52}} According to him, moral impediment happens not necessarily because of a moral fault in us, but due to the structural situation in which we have been placed. The positive values that are created in human life come into being within a narrow and anxious environment where human beings are cornered by the presence of their decaying bodies as well as pain and discouragement, in a complicated and holistic web of actions in which we are forced to quickly understand diversified social situations and take relevant decisions, such that it is difficult for our urgent need to build our own positive values not to end up harming the projects of other humans who are also anxiously trying to do the same, that is, build their own positive values.<ref name="Cabrera-DANI" />{{Rp|page=54}}

==== David Benatar ====
[[David Benatar]] makes a case for antinatalism and philosophical pessimism in his works, arguing that procreation is morally indefensible in his book ''[[Better Never to Have Been]]'' and in ''[[The Human Predicament]]'' asserting that a pessimistic view of existence is more realistic and suitable than an optimistic one; he also takes care to distinguish pessimism from [[nihilism]], arguing that the two concepts are not synonymous.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=James |first1=Rachel M. |last2=Shackelford |first2=Todd K. |date=September 2018 |title=The Harms of Existence: A Review of David Benatar, The Human Predicament: A Candid Guide to Life's Biggest Questions |url=https://toddkshackelford.com/downloads/James-Shackelford-EPS-2018.pdf |journal=Evolutionary Psychological Science |language=en |volume=4 |issue=3 |pages=347–349 |doi=10.1007/s40806-018-0146-8 |s2cid=158563884 |issn=2198-9885}}</ref>

To support his case for pessimism, Benatar mentions a series of empirical differences between the pleasures and pains in life, such as the most intense pleasures being short-lived (e.g. [[orgasm]]s), whereas the most severe pains can be much more enduring;<ref name="Benatar-THP" />{{Rp|page=77}} the worst pains that can be experienced being worse in quality than the best pleasures are good, offering as an example the [[thought experiment]] of whether one would accept "an hour of the most delightful pleasures in exchange for an hour of the worst tortures",<ref name="Benatar-THP" />{{Rp|page=77}} in addition to citing Schopenhauer, who made a similar argument, when asking his readers to "compare the feelings of an animal that is devouring another with those of that other";<ref>{{Cite book |last=Schopenhauer |first=Arthur |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=88CV8JOYUmsC |title=Parerga and Paralipomena: Short Philosophical Essays |date=2000 |publisher=Clarendon Press |isbn=978-0-19-924221-4 |location=Oxford |page=292 |language=en}}</ref> the amount of time it may take for one's desires to be fulfilled (with some of our desires never being satisfied);<ref name="Benatar-THP" />{{Rp|page=79}} the quickness with which one's body can be injured, damaged, or fall ill, and the comparative slowness of recovery (with full recovery sometimes never being attained);<ref name="Benatar-THP" />{{Rp|page=|pages=77–78}} the existence of [[chronic pain]], but the comparative non-existence of chronic pleasure;<ref name="Benatar-THP" />{{Rp|page=77}} the gradual and inevitable physical and mental decline to which every life is subjected through the process of [[ageing]];<ref name="Benatar-THP" />{{Rp|page=|pages=78–79}} the effortless way in which the bad things in life naturally come to us, and the efforts one needs to muster in order to ward them off and obtain the good things;<ref name="Benatar-THP" />{{Rp|page=80}} the lack of a cosmic or transcendent meaning to human life as a whole (borrowing a term from [[Baruch Spinoza|Spinoza]], according to Benatar our lives lack meaning from the perspective of the universe, that is, ''sub specie aeternitatis'');<ref name="Benatar-THP" />{{Rp|page=|pages=35–36}} and, finally, Benatar concludes that, even if one argues that the bad things in life are in some sense necessary for human beings to appreciate the good things in life, or at least to appreciate them fully, he asserts that it is not clear that this appreciation requires as much bad as there is, and that our lives are worse than they would be if the bad things were not in such sense necessary.<ref name="Benatar-THP" />{{Rp|page=85}}

<blockquote>Human life would be vastly better if pain were fleeting and pleasure protracted; if the pleasures were much better than the pains were bad; if it were really difficult to be injured or get sick; if recovery were swift when injury or illness did befall us; and if our desires were fulfilled instantly and if they did not give way to new desires. Human life would also be immensely better if we lived for many thousands of years in good health and if we were much wiser, cleverer, and morally better than we are.<ref name="Benatar-THP" />{{Rp|page=|pages=82–83}}</blockquote>

Benatar's suggested strategy for dealing with the above-mentioned facts is through what he calls "pragmatic pessimism", which involves engaging in activities that create terrestrial meaning (for oneself, other humans, and other animals). He asserts that such pragmatic pessimisim allows for ''distractions'' from reality, but not ''denials'' of it; in contrast to "pragmatic optimism". ''In extremis'', he admits that [[suicide]] may be the preferable option, but until such a threshold is reached, he advocates for a response within the domain of pragmatic pessimism.<ref name="Benatar-THP" />{{Rp|page=211}}


== Regarding non-human animals ==
== Regarding non-human animals ==

Revision as of 15:51, 13 September 2023

For the negative mental attitude, see pessimism.
Melancholy by Domenico Fetti (1612). Death, suffering and meaninglessness are the main themes of philosophical pessimism.

Philosophical pessimism is a family of philosophical views that assign a negative value to life or existence. Philosophical pessimists commonly argue that the world contains an empirical prevalence of pains over pleasures, that existence is ontologically or metaphysically adverse to living beings, and that life is fundamentally meaningless or without purpose.[1] Their responses to this condition, however, are widely varied and can be life-affirming.[2][3]

Philosophical pessimism is not a single coherent movement, but rather a loosely associated group of thinkers with similar ideas and a resemblance to each other.[4]: 7  In Pessimism: A History and a Criticism, James Sully describes the essence of philosophical pessimism as "the denial of happiness or the affirmation of life's inherent misery".[5] Although adherents of philosophical pessimism rarely advocate for suicide as a solution to the human predicament, many of its proponents do favour the adoption of antinatalism, that is, non-procreation.[6]

Definitions

The word pessimism comes from Latin pessimus, meaning "the worst".

Philosophers define the position in a variety of ways. Byron Simmons writes "[p]essimism is, roughly, the view that life is not worth living".[7] Frederick C. Beiser writes "pessimism is the thesis that life is not worth living, that nothingness is better than being, or that it is worse to be than not be".[8]: 4  According to Paul Prescott, it is the view that "the bad prevails over the good".[9] Per Christopher Janaway, Olga Plümacher "specifies philosophical pessimism as comprising two propositions: ‘The sum of displeasure outweighs the sum of pleasure’ and ‘Consequently the non-being of the world would be better than its being’".[10][11]

Ignacio L. Moya[12] defines pessimism through four claims:
1. The essence of existence can be known (either fully or partially).
2. Due to this nature of existence, life is characterized by needs, wants, and pain. Thus, suffering is inescapable.
3. There are no ultimate reasons for, no cosmic plan or purpose to suffering.
4. Non-existence is preferable to existence.

Tenets

There are many ways at arriving at a pessimistic conclusion and many arguments supporting the view, but there are a couple of recurring themes.

Life is not worth living — one of the most common arguments of pessimists is that life is not worth living. In short, pessimists view existence, overall, as having a deleterious effect on living beings. To be alive is to be put in a bad position.[13]

The bad prevails over the good — generally, the bad wins over the good.[14] This can be understood in two ways. Firstly, one can make a case that — irrespective of the quantities of goods and evils — the suffering cannot be compensated for by the good.[15][7] Secondly, one can make a case that there is a predominance of bad things over good things.[16]

Non-existence is preferable to existence — since existence is bad, it would have been better had it not have been. This point can be understood in one of the two following ways. Firstly, one can argue that, for any individual being, it would have been better had they never existed.[15] Secondly, various pessimists have argued that the non-existence of the whole world would be better than its existence.[17]

Main arguments

The most common arguments for the tenets of philosophical pessimism are briefly presented here.

Life contains uncompensated evils

One argument for the negative view on life is the recognition that evils are unconditionally unacceptable. A good world, or a good life, is not possible with evils in it. This line of thinking is based on a Schopenhauer's statement "the ill and evil in the world... even if they stood in the most just relation to each other, indeed even if they were far outweighed by the good, are nevertheless things that should absolutely never exist in any way, shape or form" in The World as Will and Representation.[18]: 181  The idea here is that no good can ever erase the experienced evils, because they are of a different quality or a kind of importance.

The argument can be further expanded upon by analyzing in detail the reasons why the goods cannot make up for the evils in the world. Byron Simmons analyzes[19] the case made by Schopenhauer in The World as Will and Representation:[18]: 591 

[I]t is fundamentally beside the point to argue whether there is more good or evil in the world: for the very existence of evil already decides the matter since it can never be cancelled out by any good that might exist alongside or after it, and cannot therefore be counterbalanced.

[E]ven if thousands had lived in happiness and delight, this would never annul the anxiety and tortured death of a single person; and my present wellbeing does just as little to undo my earlier suffering.

Simmons argues that the goods can only compensate the evils, when they a) happen to the same subject, and b) happen at the same time. The reason why the good has to happen to the same subject is that the miserable cannot feel the happiness of the joyful, hence it has no effect on him. The reason why the good has to happen at the same time is because the future joy does not act backwards in time, so it has no effect on the present state of the suffering individual.

Simmons' interpretation of Schopenhauer's argument can be put into the following syllogism:
1. Life is worth living when it doesn't contain uncompensated evils.
2. But life contains some uncompensated evils.
Conclusion: Therefore, life is not worth living.

Striving is suffering: Schopenhauer's a priori argument

Patrick Hassan[20] defends an interpretation of Schopenhauer's a priori argument for pessimism. According to the argument, non-existence is preferable to existence, because suffering is the fundamental feature of experience.

The argument can be clearly presented as:
P1. Suffering is the fundamental aspect of experience.
P2. If suffering is the fundamental aspect of experience, then the balance of hedonic value of life is negative.
C1. Hence, the balance of hedonic value of life is negative. // Modus ponens from P1 and P2
P4. But, if the balance of hedonic value of life is negative, then non-existence is preferable to existence.
C2. Therefore, non-existence is preferable to existence. // Modus ponens from C1 and P4

The basis of the argument is the recognition that sentient organisms—animals—are embodied and inhabit specific niches in the environment. Because of that, they need certain things. Striving to satisfy wants is the essence of all organic life.

The following claims are supporting the argument:

Satisfaction is elusive: organisms strive towards various things all the time. Whenever they satisfy one desire, they want something else and the striving begins anew.

Happiness is negative: while needs come to us seemingly out of themselves, we have to work to get some joy. Moreover, pleasure is only ever a satisfaction—or elimination—of a particular desire. So, it is only a negative experience as it temporarily takes away striving or need.

Striving is suffering: as long as striving is not satisfied, it's being experienced as suffering.

Boredom is suffering: the lack of an object of desire is experienced as a discomforting state.

The terminality of human life

Julio Cabrera in his book Discomfort and Moral Impediment advances an argument for the structural valuelessness of human life.

Particular (bad) events cannot be predicted. But human life has some structural features that can be known in advance. These include:
a) humans start to "decay" as soon as they come into being, and their life can end at any moment.
b) the decreasing character of being is characterized by three frictions: physical pain, discouragement, and aggression from others.
c) humans have to constantly create positive value to guard themselves against both a) and b).

These structural features constitute the "terminality of being".

The structural discomfort argument states that life (having the features (a)–(c)) entails discomfort, both physical and moral. Further, the argument claims that such a life is structurally valueless. Positive values appear only within life, amidst the constant struggle against the terminal being given at birth.[21]

Dukkha as the mark of existence

Constant unsatisfactoriness or ennui — dukkha — is a mark of all sentient existence. Any living creature wants what he doesn't have, avoids what he doesn't like, and feels loss for the things he has lost. All of these types of striving (taṇhā) are sources of suffering, and they are not external but are rather inherent vices (such as greed, lust, envy, self-indulgence) of all living creatures. Furthermore, since in Buddhism one of the central concepts is that of liberation or nirvana, this highlights the miserable character of existence, as there would be no need to make such a great effort to free oneself from a mere "less than ideal state". Since enlightenment is the goal of Buddhist practices through the Noble Eightfold Path, the value of life itself, under this perspective, seems doubtful.[22]

Development of pessimist thought

Main article: History of philosophical pessimism

Pessimistic sentiments can be found throughout religions and in the works of various philosophers. The major developments in the tradition started with the works of Arthur Schopenhauer.[8]: 4 

Regarding non-human animals

See also: Predation problem and Wild animal suffering
Henri Rousseau's The Hungry Lion Throws Itself on the Antelope (1905). Suffering seems to be inseparable from the life of wild animals. "The lion, being hungry, throws itself on the antelope, [and] devours it. The panther anxiously awaits the moment when it too can claim its share. Birds of prey have each torn a piece of flesh from the top of the poor animal which sheds a tear. The sun sets."

Aside from the human predicament, many philosophical pessimists also emphasize the negative quality of the life of non-human animals, criticizing the notion of nature as a "wise and benevolent" creator.[13]: 42–44 [18]: 364–376 [23] In his 1973 Pulitzer Prize winning book The Denial of Death, Ernest Becker describes it thus:[24]

What are we to make of a creation in which the routine activity is for organisms to be tearing others apart with teeth of all types—biting, grinding flesh, plant stalks, bones between molars, pushing the pulp greedily down the gullet with delight, incorporating its essence into one's own organization, and then excreting with foul stench and gasses the residue. Everyone reaching out to incorporate others who are edible to him. The mosquitoes bloating themselves on blood, the maggots, the killer-bees attacking with a fury and a demonism, sharks continuing to tear and swallow while their own innards are being torn out—not to mention the daily dismemberment and slaughter in "natural" accidents of all types: an earthquake buries alive 70 thousand bodies in Peru, automobiles make a pyramid heap of over 50 thousand a year in the U.S. alone, a tidal wave washes over a quarter of a million in the Indian Ocean. Creation is a nightmare spectacular taking place on a planet that has been soaked for hundreds of millions of years in the blood of all its creatures. The soberest conclusion that we could make about what has actually been taking place on the planet for about three billion years is that it is being turned into a vast pit of fertilizer. But the sun distracts our attention, always baking the blood dry, making things grow over it, and with its warmth giving the hope that comes with the organism's comfort and expansiveness.

The theory of evolution by natural selection can be said to justify a form of philosophical pessimism based on a negative evaluation of the lives of animals in the wild. In 1887, Charles Darwin expressed a feeling of revolt at the notion that God's benevolence is limited, stating: "for what advantage can there be in the sufferings of millions of the lower animals throughout almost endless time?"[25] The animal activist and moral philosopher Oscar Horta argues that because of evolutionary processes, not only is suffering in nature inevitable, but that it actually prevails over happiness.[26] For evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins, nature is in no way benevolent. He argues that what is at stake in biological processes is nothing more than the survival of DNA sequences of genes.[27]: 131  Dawkins also asserts that as long as the DNA is transmitted, it does not matter how much suffering such transmission entails and that genes do not care about the amount of suffering they cause because nothing affects them emotionally. In other words, nature is indifferent to unhappiness, unless it has an impact on the survival of the DNA.[27]: 131  Although Dawkins does not explicitly establish the prevalence of suffering over well-being, he considers unhappiness to be the "natural state" of wild animals:[27]: 131–132 

The total amount of suffering per year in the natural world is beyond all decent contemplation. During the minute it takes me to compose this sentence, thousands of animals are being eaten alive; others are running for their lives, whimpering with fear; others are being slowly devoured from within by rasping parasites; thousands of all kinds are dying of starvation, thirst and disease. It must be so. If there is ever a time of plenty, this very fact will automatically lead to an increase in population until the natural state of starvation and misery is restored. ... In a universe of blind physical forces and genetic replication, some people are going to get hurt, other people are going to get lucky, and you won't find any rhyme or reason in it, nor any justice. The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.

Influence outside philosophy

TV and Cinema

The character of Rust Cohle in the first season of the television series True Detective is noted for expressing a philosophically pessimistic worldview;[28][29] the creator of the series was inspired by the works of Thomas Ligotti, Emil Cioran, Eugene Thacker and David Benatar when creating the character.[30]

Literature

  • Dostoevsky, Fyodor (1864). Notes from Underground
  • Le Guin, Ursula K. (1973). The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas
  • Leopardi, Giacomo (1835). Canti
  • Ligotti, Thomas (2018). The Conspiracy Against the Human Race: A Contrivance of Horror. Penguin Books ISBN 978-0143133148
  • McCarthy, Cormac (1992/1985). Blood Meridian; or, The Evening Redness in the West. Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group ISBN 978-0679728757
  • McCarthy, Cormac (2006). The Road. Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group ISBN 978-0307387899
  • Pessoa, Fernando (1982). The Book of Disquiet
  • Thacker, Eugene (2018). Infinite Resignation. Repeater ISBN 978-1912248193
  • Thomson, James "B.V." (1874). The City of Dreadful Night
  • Yalom, Irvin D. (2005). The Schopenhauer Cure. HarperCollins ISBN 978-0-06-093810-9 (The novel switches between the current events happening around a therapy group and the psychobiography of Arthur Schopenhauer).
  • Voltaire (1759). Candide

See also

References

Notes

Citations

  1. ^ For discussions around the views and arguments of philosophical pessimism see:
  2. ^ Sorgner, Stefan Lorenz; Fürbeth, Oliver, eds. (2011). Music in German Philosophy: An Introduction. Translated by Gillespie, Susan H. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. p. 158. ISBN 978-0-226-76839-7.
  3. ^ Miller, Ed L. (2015). God and Reason: An Invitation to Philosophical Theology (2nd ed.). Eugene, Oregon: Wipf and Stock Publishers. p. 180. ISBN 978-1-4982-7954-3.
  4. ^ Dienstag, Joshua Foa (2009). Pessimism: Philosophy, Ethic, Spirit. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-14112-1.
  5. ^ Sully, James (1877). Pessimism: A History and a Criticism, p. 4. London: Henry S. King & Co.
  6. ^ For discussions of suicide and antinatalism in the context of philosophical pessimism see:
  7. ^ a b Simmons, Byron (2021). "A thousand pleasures are not worth a single pain: The compensation argument for Schopenhauer's pessimism". European Journal of Philosophy. 29 (1): 120–136. doi:10.1111/ejop.12561. S2CID 225685721.
  8. ^ a b Beiser, Frederick C. (2016). Weltschmerz: Pessimism in German Philosophy, 1860–1900. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-876871-5. OCLC 929590292.
  9. ^ Prescott, Paul (2012). "What Pessimism Is" (PDF). Journal of Philosophical Research. 37: 337–356. doi:10.5840/jpr20123716.
  10. ^ Janaway, Christopher (2021). "Worse than the best possible pessimism? Olga Plümacher's critique of Schopenhauer". British Journal for the History of Philosophy. 30 (2): 211–230. doi:10.1080/09608788.2021.1881441. S2CID 233897050.
  11. ^ Plümacher, Plumacher (1994). Der Pessimismus in Vergangenheit und Gegenwart [Pessimism in Past and Present] (in German). Heidelberg: Georg Weiss.
  12. ^ Moya, Ignacio L. (2023). Human Extinction in the Pessimist Tradition (PhD thesis). The University of Western Ontario.
  13. ^ a b Benatar, David (2017). The Human Predicament: A Candid Guide to Life's Biggest Questions. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-063381-3.
  14. ^ Baumeister, Roy F.; et al. (2001). "Bad is Stronger than Good" (PDF). Review of General Psychology, 2001. Vol. 5. No. 4. 323-370. doi:10.1037//1089-2680.5.4.323.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  15. ^ a b Benatar, David (2006). Better Never to Have Been: The Harm of Coming into Existence. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0199296422.
  16. ^ Hassan, Patrick (2021). "Striving as Suffering: Schopenhauer's A Priori Argument for Pessimism". Philosophia. 49 (4): 1487–1505. doi:10.1007/s11406-020-00316-0. S2CID 234157970.
  17. ^ Hassan, Patrick (2021). "Individual vs. World in Schopenhauer's Pessimism". The Southern Journal of Philosophy. 59 (2): 122–152. doi:10.1111/sjp.12401. S2CID 234303325.
  18. ^ a b c Schopenhauer, Arthur (2018) [1844]. Welchman, Alistair; Janaway, Christopher; Norman, Judith (eds.). The World as Will and Representation. Vol. 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/9780511843112. ISBN 978-0-521-87034-4.
  19. ^ Simmons, Byron (2021). "A thousand pleasures are not worth a single pain: The compensation argument for Schopenhauer's pessimism". European Journal of Philosophy. 29 (1): 120–136. doi:10.1111/ejop.12561. S2CID 225685721.
  20. ^ Hassan, Patrick (2021). "Striving as Suffering: Schopenhauer's A Priori Argument for Pessimism" (PDF). Philosophia. 49 (4): 1487–1505. doi:10.1007/s11406-020-00316-0. S2CID 234157970.
  21. ^ Cabrera, Julio (2019). Discomfort and Moral Impediment: The Human Situation, Radical Bioethics and Procreation. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. pp. 23–24. ISBN 978-1-5275-1803-2. OCLC 1078636651.
  22. ^ Cooper, David E. "Buddhism as Pessimism". Journal of World Philosophies. 6 (2): 1–16. doi:10.2979/jourworlphil.6.2.01 (inactive 2023-09-06). eISSN 2474-1795.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: DOI inactive as of September 2023 (link)
  23. ^ Pedatella, Stefan (March 2009). "Images of Animal Predation in Giacomo Leopardi's Dialogo della Natura e di un Islandese". Italian Culture. 27 (1): 25–42. doi:10.1179/155909009X401665. ISSN 0161-4622. S2CID 159793645.
  24. ^ Becker, Ernest (2007). The Denial of Death. Free Press. pp. 282–283. ISBN 978-1-4165-9034-7.
  25. ^ Darwin, Charles (1958). Barlow, Nora (ed.). The Autobiography of Charles Darwin. London: Collins. p. 90.
  26. ^ Horta, Oscar (2015). "The Problem of Evil in Nature: Evolutionary Bases of the Prevalence of Disvalue". Relations. Beyond Anthropocentrism. 3 (1): 17–32. doi:10.7358/rela-2015-001-hort. Retrieved 8 May 2016.
  27. ^ a b c Dawkins, Richard (1995). River Out of Eden: A Darwinian View of Life. London: Orion Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-297-81540-2.
  28. ^ Patches, Matt (2014-02-28). "Ask a Philosopher: What's Up With True Detective's Rust Cohle?". Vulture. Retrieved 2022-12-06.
  29. ^ Janning, Finn (December 2014). "True Detective: Pessimism, Buddhism or Philosophy?" (PDF). Journal of Philosophy of Life. 4 (4): 121–141.
  30. ^ Calia, Michael (2014-02-02). "Writer Nic Pizzolatto on Thomas Ligotti and the Weird Secrets of 'True Detective'". WSJ. Retrieved 2020-05-31.

Cite error: A list-defined reference named "Cabrera-DANI" is not used in the content (see the help page).
Cite error: A list-defined reference named "Cicero-TD" is not used in the content (see the help page).
Cite error: A list-defined reference named "Herdt-POV" is not used in the content (see the help page).
Cite error: A list-defined reference named "Huisman-HDLPF" is not used in the content (see the help page).
Cite error: A list-defined reference named "Hutin-LG" is not used in the content (see the help page).
Cite error: A list-defined reference named "Laertius-TLAOOEP" is not used in the content (see the help page).
Cite error: A list-defined reference named "Leopardi-OM" is not used in the content (see the help page).
Cite error: A list-defined reference named "Ligotti-TCATHR" is not used in the content (see the help page).

Cite error: A list-defined reference named "Schopenhauer-WWR1" is not used in the content (see the help page).

Bibliography

Primary literature

Books
Academic papers

Secondary literature

Academic papers
Books

External links

Look up pessimism in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
Wikisource has original text related to this article:
Wikiquote has quotations related to Philosophical pessimism.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Philosophical_pessimism&oldid=1175228479"