Why Schopenhauer Hated Napoleon
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 13 сен 2024
- SUPPORT US ON PATREON:
▶ / weltgeistyt
Schopenhauer on being alone and how to deal with society:
▶ • SCHOPENHAUER: Being Al...
▶ SCHOPENHAUER'S WORKS:
Parerga and Paralipomena vol. 1: amzn.to/3pK6xCj
Parerga and Paralipomena vol. 2: amzn.to/3jJa2p0
The World as Will and Representation vol. 1: amzn.to/3FPGkIj
The World as Will and Representation vol. 2: amzn.to/3FT0nFC
Music:
"Crossing the Divide" “Peppers Theme” Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 4.0 License
creativecommons...
SUPPORT US ON PATREON:
▶ www.patreon.com/WeltgeistYT
Schopenhauer was the conscience of mankind; Nietzsche was the confidence of mankind. Schopenhauer was the “it’s so over“; Nietzsche was the “we’re so back“
Schopenhauer was d/acc, while Nietzsche was e/acc
That’s why Nietzsche comes and go’s
trite zoomerism.
Schopenhauer is light Nietz was a self indulgent Fool.
And the end of the day people wanted to fight for Napoleon. Schopenhauer could never inspire that kind of confidence, not even in his poodles.
The ending to this made me actually get teary eyed.. god damn it :(
I love these videos so much, I get chills whenever I read Schopenhauer and I think your channel has actually renewed interest in someone who I consider a real sage.
The problem with people who are not like Napoleon, in even some small way, is that you never hear about them. This makes it seem credible to believe that there are no people even modestly less egotistical than the norm.
are u claiming napoleon was egotistical?
@@niccolomachiavelli8763An assertion only contested by those of lesser insight.
@@phanomtaxskibididoodoo by your logic every single great man to have ever existed was egotistical. Napoleon wasnt egotistical because we know for a fact he was much smarter than his peers.
@@niccolomachiavelli8763 Clearly not all, however most were. Alexander thought himself a god and what more can be egotistical than creating an empire in your name.
@@phanomtaxskibididoodoo “egotistical” in today s age refers to evil people. Napoleon Alexander Caesar Were not evil. They simply were smarter and had more knowledge than their peers. The reason napoleon declared himself emperor was because noone else was competent enough to rule over france and napoleon knew it,and if he was egotistical he wouldnt be loved by his peers like caesar or alexander were. The truth is napoleon himself literally spread the ideas snd abolished the monarchies in europe and heavily influenced the american civil war and helped create america as a nation.He was a well known competent ruler.
I am French, and this difference of opinion between Nietzsche and Schopenhauer on Napoleon reminds me of all the debates on the emperor in France: for the 200 years of his death a few years ago, some wanted to pay homage to him because it is a great conqueror, and others wanted to boycott him because he was bloodthirsty. Personally I'm really proud of him :)
@lightfish6663 one side thinks pride a virtue, the other side a vice. People who like napoleon think pride is a virtue
he reinstated slavery, but that would probably be a positive to nietzsche
Napoleon repealed all the discriminatory laws against the Jews.
He's Corsican anywhow, but a man to be proud of
Napoleon was certainly a "great man" and a romantic figure, but I am not sure whether he made the world a better place.
Shopenhauer: good guy in class
Nietzsche: bad guy from streets
Fascinating Excellent Video! Having just viewed the Ridley Scott Napoleon film and caught this via RUclips's recommended video list I'm glad I caught it. It actually helps to clarify the overall feeling left behind after seeing Scott's film. Thanks for making this!
That film was terrible and not historically accurate don't make your opinion of Napoleon off of it
Yeah watch History Legends' review of Napoleon if you want to know what's wrong with that movie.
Thanks for showing so many portraits of Napoleon. Curiously, the savage monster has a baby face!
*potato baby face
Famously so, yes
Savage monster with a babyface that's a great depiction!!
Is the kernel of this thesis that if Napoleon didn’t exist the wars wouldn’t have happened? The wars created Napoleon not the other way around. If the wars were not there Napoleon would never have been heard of. The new French Republic was attacked from all sides and several able generals defended it and thousands died for it and it was the overturning of the status quo that upset these thinkers. But the way of the world is bigger than their philosophy admits and if Napoleon had been successful a peaceful united Europe might have come about and WW1 and WW11 would have been avoided. Also, while Napoleon is best known for military matters his achievements in Law, education and social reforms were even greater. Had Napoleon got ten years of absolute peace he would have made huge beneficial changes in Europe. It should be remembered that of the seven “Napoleonic” wars five were started against him largely as proxy wars of the British who could never tolerate a strong Europe on its doorstep. Schopenhauer is simply using Napoleon to make his argument about human nature which is reality and is not benign at all as he would like it to be. We are violent by our nature that’s how we have come to dominate the world and while we in the west especially pontificate about goodness while we consume everything while a lot of people starve to death and while we will throw a crumb to make ourselves feel good and condemn act of violence “over there” for the same reason, we are not willing to suffer. Christ set the bar when the rich man asked him what he should do he said, give everything that you have to the poor and come follow me. Who among us is willing to do that, so the same as Napoleon we can all justify to ourselves our own acts.
Violence isn't bad nor suffering, unless it is needles, without purpose. You still reject life...
The reason nietzsche adored Napoleon is for that which you have exposed here in your comment. He wasn't just a bloodthirsty, warmongering tyrant. He was a hero of his people who sought power in all aspects of life. That is why he was a genius. That is why he was one of the many great men that walked this earth. He thirsted for life and all that affirms it. Passions, knowledge, power, strength, vitality. In this pursuit of greatness, nothing matters. Not even pain or pleasure. The ultimate justification for life, is power in all it's varied expressions, life in all it's forms. A force that stampedes all that is towards something new. Innovation, creation. That is the will to power.
Amazing video as always. I love seeing the contrasting views of nietzsche and schopenhauer
Thank you very much!
The Schopenhauer content is much appreciated. Thank you. Sometimes I wonder why there is no biopic movie of the greatest thinker of over two centuries. The “Eadem, sed aliter” bit is especially wonderful if you are acquainted with his work.
Thank you!!
Kid: I want Schopenhauer!
Mother: We have Schopenhauer at home.
Schopenhauer at home: Fredrich Nietzche
Of course the Schopenhauer fanboy is a fucking My Little Pony fan, what a low testosterone philosophy
Nietzsche mogs tf out of Schopenhauers Buddhistic larp
Pony pfp your opinion is worthless
😅😅
No sense
Nietzche > Schopenhauer
I’d be grateful if you could also write the name the paintings and/or sculptures in your videos! I find them fascinating!
Advice: Take screenshots and then use Google lens to know the names of the paintings and sculptures.
Could you Schmitt’s critique of Kant pls
Man, I would love a debate between Schopenhauer and Nietzche
@@JavManTube I think nietzche would smack him with the hammer haha
Schop would dominate so hard
Nietzsche is not even a philosopher he's just an edgy kid who read too much books..
@@afrosamourai400 He is definitely a philosopher and a more influential one than schop. His perspectivism is possibly his most undervalued aspect of his philosophy and inspired postmodernism and existentialism. Schopenheurs scope of influence is much more limited.
@@tangerinesarebetterthanora7060 he's not a philosopher, he was a philologist not a philosopher he had no methodical thought and is overappreciated by edgy kids..schopenhauer is probably the philosopher who influenced the most the writers, artists and most popular thinkers ever..nietzsche, flaubert, maupassant, tolstoy, freud, cioran, mann, jung, proust, celine, wagner, hesse, dostoeyvsky, borges, wittgenstein, beckett, bergson it's not even close..nietzsche is for kids..
Like Noam Chomsky says: There are very people who look into the mirror and say:
That person I see is a savage monster,
instead they make up some construction that justified what they do.
Chomsky is a degenerate
The ending moved me
The reason Schopenhauer hated Napoleon is because Hegel Loved Napoleon.
"Anyway, that's why I shoved my landlady down the stairs"- Schopenhauer, probably
How you doing in Palestine these days?
Schopenhauer’s mother shoved him down the stairs when he was a young man. He never spoke to her again.
He had to paid reparation fees to her for the rest of her life due to the injuries she suffered. When she died he wrote:
-" Dead the hag, dead the problem."
@@ramonserna8089so glad to hear about your new book coming out - and looking forward to your chapter on Albert Einstein! Do let us know when it’ll hit the shelves! Your book on Woodrow Wilson was a best seller here in Argentina.
He’s right. Give a man absolute power and he will behave with absolute evil.
If Napoleón was "evil" then every important Man or woman with power Is too. His biggest contribution, his civil code, Is in the right side of history.
He caused more damage than good. He never would have been known if the chaos of the French Revolution hadn't occurred.@@rmv9194
shit weak people say to justify their weakness.
@@rmv9194 Napoleon did NOT invent the civil code, you liar. The civil code was invented by Justinian over 1000 years before Napoleon was born, and was used by Continental Europe because of Justinian. And one thing that Napoleon did add to the French version of the civil code was reintroducing slavery, as well as adding a police state to monitor his enemies.
@@MacSmithVideo I know, like the lies that Napoleon invented the civil code when it predates him by over a 1000 years
Man i love you thank you for making this great content for free ❤
Schopenhauer, possibly the only philosopher worth reading.
Not the only one but he's definitively one of the deepest..
There are many worth reading, but the "Schopenhauer effect" is very real. You'll never be the same after you read this guy. Nietzsche himself is proof of that.
For miserable losers
Napoleon was a titan in history; every one of France's neighbors wanted to carve her up following the Revolution and the Emperor not only came to her rescue, but reminded them that France was Europe's preeminent military power.
Except it wasn’t and isn’t and never has been.
@@frawgeatfrawgworld On its own, none could have matched France on land purely on its military forces.
15 years@@Moroes11
15 years of so called power, hundreds of years ago. It means nothing at the end of the day lol, he conquered moscow but couldnt even save his own country.@@Moroes11
@@frawgeatfrawgworld Nor during its first republic, nor during the first empire, which is more than 15 years. It took Europe 7 coalitions, with the first one starting in 1792 and the last at 1815, to put definitely an end to the juggernaut that France was at the time. In june 1815, the all might of Europe ~800.000 men were marching toward France facing the ~300.000 frenchmen Napoleon had 😅
I'm with Schopenhauer on this one! 😂
It is odd how, just like Napoleon, we can so well hide our own monstrosity and selfishness from ourselves.
How do you want to ascertain Napoleons monstrosity and selfishness ? A random assumption.
Well said my friend blessings 🙏
Schopenhauer had 2 daughters that died.
He didn't live his philosophy. 😞
"Waterloo" 1970
Great movie👍
more videos about Schopenhauer! and Parmenides if you can..
Buddha was the ubermansch of Shopenhauer
Schopenhauer was exactly right. The same thing I say about our current leaders, world wide. These people are in the lucky position of Napoleons. Fight!
Had only that recent failure of a movie on him had a scene like that last one described here, it would have made up for a lot of the stupidity and buffoonery in the movie.
Not surprised that it wasnt good. Most big budget movies lack depth
@@rascal6 true
Art wasn't the best advertisement for his own ethics, to be sure, not in practice anyway. But he wasn't wrong in theory. Personally, I'd quibble over the degree of how much someone's a bastard, like a young boy being a bit of a prick compared to an outright bastard like Napoleon. Nobody gets to crown themselves emperor unless they're one of the biggest bastards of all.
But yea, certainly, compassion. It's just that it's so hard to practice. If I remember right, Schopenhauer admitted that in "WaW". Being able to "negate the will" was something that very few people would be able to actually achieve. But even for low creatures like me, practicing a bit more compassion in a normal, daily routine certainly isn't impossible and certainly wont hurt.
If what Schopenhauer saying is true, then plenty of other military commanders were also intelligent, great at military, and had courage, during that time, I think it's the intersection between all these traits or I should say he possessed all these traits that made him very special (with tremendous luck of course)
Great video, Schopenhauer is ultimately right even if at times he writes like a sulky adolescent lol.
I'm always in two minds about Schopenhauer. His opinions on woman are like reading a 4chan greentext, but at the same time I've never felt so understood by a philosopher as when I read his tirades against noise.
@@laurensb1byou shouldn’t be reading philosophy as it’s not the black and white world that constitutes knowledge to you.
@@sciagurrato1831 You come off as brutishly ignorant.
I love his essay about noise.
@@laurensb1bshe’s not gonna fuck you bro
Excellent!
very good. i am now a fan of schoppy
Great video!
He leaves no wonder to that inevitable break with Nietzsche, as what else can one do when grinding all down to entopic forces, eschewing the temporary glory of brilliant stars.
@@user-dj4cq2je7q
My attempt at translation: This video makes it clear to see why Nietzsche eventually turned on Schopenhauer for his anti-life philosophy. How else would a man respond when everything beautiful and great is cast down as an outgrowth of evil?
“Any foolish boy can stamp on a beetle, but all the professors in the world cannot make a beetle.”
― Arthur Schopenhauer
There you go. Here Schopenhauer refuted Nietzsche and his fanboys before they were born. He refuted every entropic tyrant.
Not really? It is with out a doubt a critic of destruction but does it really give a great argument against napoleon it only works if you already decided that napoleon is bad and that all he is a warlord if your polish and see him as the man who raised your folk from prussian tyranny then this critique only attacks the means not the result then you must argue are the means worth the ends?
Nietzsche is just an edgy kid he doesn't even make sense..
More interesting facts about Schopenhauer's life, please, please 💜
So is it reasonable to say neitzsche had “daddy issues” towards schopenhauer?
It is!!
There are two kinds of people in this world, those who admit it and those do not.
Schopenhauer saw reality clearly without the need of cope.
Lore of Why Schopenhauer Hated Napoleon momentum 100
Nietzsche is for a time. Schopenhauer speaks for all human times.
is it opposite day?
Judging by human history, I would say Is the other way around
It is the complete opposite today by the way.
Nietzsche was correct about everything.
Schopenhauer is a nihilist and relativist. He was mistaking about everything. There is good and evil, and there is will to power above all.
True, arthur speaks to the whole human race with contempt and compassion, nietzsche is just an unbearable edgy kid..
Im on Schops side. What a despicable beast. What meaning he derives from compassion echoes buddist philo.
..in Napoleons time, the soldiers had a pride in fighting across Europe, their uniforms, the sabres, calvaliers, it maybe that he just led what was already there...and if not him then someone else...
the point is "if they could" ofcourse the magic of napoleon is that many wished to be like him but could not, this is the essence of charisma, something unidentifable that is what it is cause of its escape from understanding. Tje magic is that other people can sense and feel attracted to that originality.
Napoleon could be considered a Ubermensch, whether we like it or not!
There is no one coming close to his influence on the world and that had a life with such crazy plot that you would think it was god himself that made him rise and stopped him from outshining the sun.
If napoleon is ubermensch then what is jesus? Marcus aurelius? Socrates? Diogenes? Luther king? Mandela?
Much better than nietche
nah, it is pure cynicism
@Boulanger948 Schopenhauer's compassion (which was purely theoretical and something he didn't remotely practice) was rooted in a cynical hatred of life and a yearning for all things to die.
@@MacSmithVideo Provide proof.
@@thomasfischer9259The proof is him throwing his landlady down the fucking stairs while larping about "muh compassion"
Schopenhauer is nothing but a Christian without Christ
@@thomasfischer9259 it's quite literally his entire moral philosophy.
PARAMOIC IN THE EXTREME DEGREE ........LOOK AT THE SPANISH AND THE RUSSIAN CAMPAIGN ......PURE MADNESS
Napoleon was that DUDE!!!
So this raises a question for me...
Was Nietzsche's admiration and almost idolization for Napoleon just out of spite to mr Shippuden over here....?
I think not, niche despised "shippuden" bc of his anti power philosophy and also idolised napoleon for this same reason. His seek power above all philosophy is the common denominator.
No one can say for sure, but I sure like to think that Nietzsche was being resentful in his later stages motivated by his dissolved friendship with Wagner.
@@thomasfischer9259100%, Nietzsche was seething over the breakdown of that friendship and it shows in his later works
No, he spited Schopenhauer for the same reason he admired Nietzsche, a contrast in values.
Schopenhauer was right about napoleon and that everyone is a potential napoleon given the right internal and external circumstance, most humans live their lives running at about 1% capacity, we all have different talents but very few are given the right circumstance for them to grow and develop to their full potential, however he was wrong about humans not being good, the fact that we develop and recognise our own innate wickedness means we are good, if we were truly wicked we would be happy about it and not even comment on it, even animals are innately good but they don't have the intelligence to create civilisations to develop beyond their base animal instincts
I love your videos on Schopenhauer and Nietzsche. This pair of videos on their take on Napoleon is illuminating. I thing it would be profitable to have your take on what Nietzsche would have made of a certain German chancellor of the 20th century; I think there is still a lot of anxiety that Nietzsche would have approved of him, but I think a close analysis of his philosophy (as well as his utter contempt for his racist brother-in-law and other antisemites) easily disproves this.
he wont do that
Said chancellor was a Zionist Tribe Member put in power by major Tribe Bankers to trick the German people into a scripted war for the sake of establishing Israel by rounding up ordinary tribe members and shipping them off to Palestine as part of a certain transfer agreement.
Nietzsche wasn’t an anti-Semite, and he never forgave his sister for marrying one.
Now that would be interesting....but alas, no man that brave exists. Peace be unto you.
@christopherrouse8602 Nietzsche was contradictory and was against consistency and Nietzsche was both anti-Semite and hater of anti-Semites. There is speculation by some historians that N. was cursed with syphilis from a whorehouse and that is why N. was physically sick as well as bonkers.
I find it darkly funny to think about, what would Schopenhauer have thought, had he lived during the regime of Adolf Hitler? 😝☠
Bro woulda lost his shit if he thought Napoleon was evil 😂
Hitler's favorite philosopher. Carried a copy of his essays most everywhere he went.
Hey since you really seem to like Nietzsche on this channel I would like to propose that you start reading probably one of the most well-known modern Greek authors, not just in Greece but the entire world as he has been greatly or even radically influenced by Nietzsche. His name is Nikos Kazantzakis. Two of his works I would recommend are "Ascetic" and "The Last Temptation". In these two books you will find similarities between and even the influence of Nietzsche on the guy. Maybe you have heard of him but in case you haven't, do try getting into him, his work is very radical and influential. Most of his works have been translated to multiple languages so I think you can easily just pick him up.
Just because he's white doesn't mean he's well renowned around the world, it's only in Europe where he is recognized.
Not many people know that napoleon turned up after the revolution and set the army on the revolutionary people on the streets .so the french revolution was extremely short
That dog about 3 licks away from eating it’s owner 😂
We're all the same but different
Brilliant mind
My honesy theory: he was jealous of Napoleon
With all do respect, Napoleon maintained and rescued French Revolution.Furthermore he showed the way to other oppressed nations on the continent. Let us not forget that 7 coalitions were formed to keep him quiet. His military genius were brought to light as he was defending and not attacking in first place. “You can be whatever you are able to be, no matter where you are coming from” That was and is his legacy.
Schopenhauer needed Prozac. Nietzsche needed penicillin.
The ending of this video was just Christianity
Schopenhauer was a bugman.
An unimpressive, weak man who wasn’t impressed by great man. A deer isn’t impressed by a lion, he only sees terror.
Answer: "a great, bad man"
He was no Ceasar. There will be no one like him. He was more or less like Alexander the great
Schopenhauer is right about humanity. But, I don't agree that with his claims that being a wild, horrible animal is wrong.
Napoleon was sick epic
I trust more Schopenhauer’s judgment than Nietzsche’s
As you should nietzsche is stupid..
Good. You deserve to be mediocre.
Its beautiful. You can see why Nietzsche was a astute student of Schopenhauer in his early years.
Schopenhauer understood the beauty and Melodie’s of life well, he knew the music of life well. As he was able to understand that we humans all too humanly yearn to have bonds, and feel even empathy for our enemies because we could have formed bonds with the enemies. Schopenhauers work basically denied life, so that he could affirm one particular ideal, one that wasn’t truly ascetic in nature, but rather; one which longed for a life where we could become Icarus, reaching greater heights of life, with others! To have true company as Nietzsche called it.
Napoleon probably realized that he could have had not been so lonely, if only he wasn’t so ahead of everybody…
Napoleons tears was empathy indeed, but also a reminder of his loneliness! That the dog mourning the man was Napoleon mourning his lonely fate.
Napoleons words “there is nothing we can do” we’re words full of strength, but also of weakness. Indeed, Napoleons weakness reflects all great men: that they had no one whom they could soar with into great adventures and dangers of life.
Thus, Schopenhauer masterfully noticed the same loneliness he lived in Napoleon!
He noticed that, and called it human nature. However, what he specifically noticed, was just the weakness of a strong man. All organisms have a weakness.
Weakness is evil, strength is goodness according to Nietzsche, hence, we see a political genius who had no one around to even challenge him! What true loneliness!
What I see in Nietzsches predictions of the 200 years of nihilism is this: that great men won’t live in eras all by themselves anymore! That they won’t be mere chances, but rather, predicted and strategized occurrences. So that not just one great men lives in one era, but a few live in it, and are able to meet each other due to the determinism of what our 200 years worth of nihilism produces.
Basically what I mean is this, there won’t be a lonely Napoleon (or genius) anymore.
Napoleon had to live rather violently, because there wasn’t anyone around, he only saw people as tools. But when he saw the dog, he realized that he was lonely, only left with the choice to use everyone in his time as tools…
His level of strength and weakness, of genius and courage, indeed all this was too ahead of everyone.
so everyone naturally co-depended on him, or worshiped his morals because of cowardice. No one would challenge this great man! And as the Japaneses nobility of samurai shows us, no nobility can relate to ignobility, no matter how hard he would try, people would WANT to be Napoleons tool!…
This explains the loneliness his tears expressed.
Schopenhauer hated everybody... apparently.
Weltgeist, should we take Neitzsche seriously?
I found this qoute by E.M Cioran.
Well, I realised that he wasn’t a philosopher, but was more: a temperament. So, I read him now and then, but never systematically. But I really don’t read him anymore. I consider his letters his most authentic work, because in them he’s truthful, while in his other work he’s a prisoner to his vision. In his letters one sees that he’s just a poor fellow, that he’s ill, exactly the opposite of everything he claimed. […] His work is an unspeakable megalomania. When one reads the letters he wrote at the same time, one sees that he’s lamentable, it’s very touching, like a character out of Chekhov.
I was attached to him in my youth, but not later on. He’s a great writer, though, a great stylist."
Nietzsche was definitively a great stylist and a bad philopher..he made no sense..the fact that so many people praise his stupid way of thinking is really alarming.
I love Cioran and will do a video on him. But I think he’s wrong about Nietzsche’s worth ads a philosopher
@@WeltgeistYT Please do, I was torn when I read. It made me doubt if Nietzsche was making it up and in letters different.
And Reddit is a mess to even ask questions or get replies.
Womt ever go there for answers.
@@afrosamourai400 Have you read his works?
@@unknowninfinium4353 which one nietzsche or cioran? I read both more nietzsche than cioran but i definitively agree more with cioran..i hate nietzsche and i read him more than cioran.
Schopenhauer hated everyone
Napoleon drained his country of a lot of blood. He couldn't and wouldn't stop war making. That said, the man was a tactical genius and brilliant in many ways. I admire him as a great, but flawed man. Schopenhauer is a brilliant philosopher. I tip my hat to him.
Napoleon was the enlightenment on horseback!
Schopenhauer was right.
I liked the ethereal music 🎶
Did you ever make the Tolstoy Napoleon video? It’s killing me that everyone is calling Napoleon a military genius (including you) but no one is mentioning that Tolstoy wrote this famous book about how Napoleon is just a butthead like the rest of us…
Then I,definitely need his pov about napoleon
Well, he was basically Adolf Hitler, ruined the whole continent for his ambition.
He's nowhere near Hitler lol.
Due to him you have democracy and liberalism
Napoleon is Napoleon there is no one coming close to him, Hitler was just another Bismarck who ruined the whole continent for his ambition, certainly not Napoleon that made the world a much better place and would have been better if the heat and cold of Russian summer and winter of 1812 weren't so terrible.
Napoleon wasnt a hitler but hitler was way closer to napoleon than to bismarck. Bismarck was methodic, manipulative, he was able to create europe stronger empire without a world war by manipulating his adversaries. napoleon started with a disadvantaged foreign policy situation because of the french revolution however emboldened by his military talent he made it only worse with the unstable tilsit peace, the continental system and the futile, stupid and self inflicted invasions of spain and russia. Hitler instead managed to drop a continent in war that did all the possible to avoid war with him, declared war on the isolationist us and invaded the soviet union because like napoleon he was emboldened by the early success of his army
Napoleon was a brilliant tactician but a terrible strategist. Yeah he won a bunch of battles against neighboring land states but completely failed to take out Britain and his attack on Russia was idiotic at best and left his entire empire open to attack. The man saw the world as a bunch of nails. He ultimately exhausted France and one could say he was almost Stalinistic in his approach to wasting manpower to achieve victory. He would not have conquered as much as he did without Republican France offering up an entire generation of men.
I'm inclined to agree with Schopenhauer here. Napoleon cowardly abandoned his whole army twice. Once at Egypt and once at Moscow. He also had about 5,000 prisoner-of-war Ottoman Turks executed after they surrendered. He cited "lack of food." This was a scandal and unusual in that age.
Luckily the world had the British Navy to contain Napoleon, particularly one Lord Admiral Horatio Nelson. 🇬🇧
Bruh if he hadnt run from the egypt fiasco he wouldnt acoplished what he did. Braindead chatter
Napoleon Bonaparte should have become a physician or a scientist, instead of a soldier...
❤
The world of will and the phenomenal world are not different worlds. They are the self-same one world we live everyday. So, while beings-in-the-world are bits of will, they never all are going to be evil. They will be the people we meet everyday in our living. Napoleon just happened to be a great gangster who was also a great general. He conquered Europe to make his family rich and powerful just like all the other Lords and Ladies. Remember, France was actually being attacked to crush the revolution. It was kind of do or die and not the do or die of a philosophy classroom. With all dye respect, there is a difference. Thank you for the interesting discussion.
Because he was g... word you aren't allowed to call people on ziontube anymore since the Ziongle acquisition ruined the site.
Hey hey
Is Nietzsche's concept of ressentiment applicable to Nietzsche's own works? He was very gelous of Wagner in many respects. He wanted to be a composer, but failed, so his philosophy was kind of ressentiment against Wagner?
Anyway, vive l'Empereur !
ew
Vive l'Emperur et vive la France
It's not a mirror but a comment on a RUclips video, refrain yourself next time when you see your reflection.@@dedopest3305
Napoleon lost go cry about that.
@@OSY_PB_ATHEIST_PALKU I'm totally fine, thank you. 😘
see this as a man trying to get attention from hating and he won
While Napoleon was without a doubt an egotistical bastard, I think it's kinda bullshit to see the coalition wars as his faults. Napoleon declared war just 2 times: against Portugal and Russia. So it's bullshit to pin all those loses on him lol.
I pretty much agree with Schopenhauer's impression of human nature, to an extent. I agree that we are animals and have a beastly nature, but I differ from him on the point of viewing that as a problem. I feel our base insticts have a healthy purpose to propel our lives and bloodlines forward, and strengthen humanity. And I believe there are noble, uplifting characteristics of man that not only balance out our cruelty, but overpass it. And I don't think all that many people are truly very choleric, at least not to the extent of a conqueror like Napoleon. I don't see death as all that awful of an outcome, either. It is inevitable, and some of us die on battlefields. So it has always gone. There are worse fates. Material reality is just a veil of maya at the end of the day, an intricate and beautiful and horrible illusion. It's a story.
All phenomena are empty and free from conceptual elaboration.
Everybody likes napoleon. Until he becomes your leader.
Strangely, none of his soldiers regret having fought alongside them, only today they say that. but at the time many soldiers were proud to fight and die for him.
short men were much more common back then... lol @@giannid.7794
If you want to study good charactered military commanders of his time, study Gouvion Saint Cyr. Napoleon marshals David chandler. Napoleon marshals R P Dunn Pattison and Vie du marecal laurent de gouvion saint cyr
Some id… ots do not know that he was loved by soldiers only because they were allowed to loot enemy territories and live off the land. They also do not know that if it were not the British mercy, other enẹ. mies would have had his head o n a p ike.
Only stupid people like tyrant..i must admit that most people are stupid tho..
“From the moral point of view, he is indeed Antichrist. From the point of view of art, he is with Christ, the only spirit recognized by Prometheus on Earth in his own way went to the utmost limits of his powers, towards a goal which was invisible to him and invisible to us.
He suppresses a part of himself to maintain a share in God- the only part of Him with which he has anything to do. The hero is a conquerer. His whole being marches forward to meet God.”
~Elie Faure
What a weird, pessimistic and sad man Schopenhauer was. I don't understand what drove him to be so incredibly insufferable. I can understand why Nietzsche and Hegel didn't like him. A kind of guy you invite to a party and would just ruin it. Good video by the way.
how goes the saying, ignorance is bliss
A party thrown by Nietzsche would be so animalistic.
@@shubhamkumar-nw1ui Haha, would be also bad I guess.
Yall act like todlers lol, he's so gloomy i don't like that lol, it's not about what you like it's about the truth..
@@afrosamourai400 Surely you meant 'what he perceived as truth'. For a depressive personality, life may seem bad, but if you're not such a person you can just enjoy life and other people.
Schopenhauer was right about women.
indeed. also about men. and all with a deep dark humor. he would be immediatly canceled today.
@@MRFLOPPYmr Don't worry, Arthur's view on women and men is on the way back. Peace be unto you.
I guess I would have to read the guy’s works to comprehend how he can utterly despise humanity yet raise “compassion” to God status. If humanity has no worth, we’d have no compassion.
Yes. You will have to read. If not palatable, there are many good games and videos you can spend time with.
Every person has as much potential to be a Napoleon or an Alexander as they do to be a Jesus or a Buddha. Schopenhauer is wrong to assume an innate cruelty in humanity. It is the world we are brought up in which shapes who we become, and there is a near infinite potential in every person to become anyone.
Bro look at history how many jesus or buddha do you see? Be honest lol
AS A GREEK I AGREE WITHNTHE FILOSOPHER.HE IS UNIQUE. AS A GREEK TOO I DISPISE ALEXANDER NOT EVEN CONSIDERING MY OWN RACE AT ALL. NAPOLEON CEASAR ALEXANDER KRASSOS OF ROME AND MANY MORE THE SAME SH@T