/lit/ - Literature

>>20219756
Will is literally that fact that you are alive. Instincts aren't synonymous with life itself, you can't say instinct experiences music, but you may say life does because of instinct.

>>20219788
>>20219756
is his only basis for claiming the will to be free the fact that guilt exists?

>>20219756
Love the hair.

depends what you mean by instinct

will is dopamine

>>20219788
No.

>>20219756
No.

>>20219805
Yes.

>>20219828
This.

>>20219839
No.

>>20219828
Survival instinct, instinct to reproduce, compete, etc. The natural inclination for a living thing to do what's best to stay alive and procreate.

>>20219756
He elaborates on that at length. Stop being lazy and reading only Wikipedia summaries and actually read the book.

>>20220127
I plan on it but I already have a stack im reading and the will and representation is also weird in that only the first volume seems readily available online.

>>20220127
I don’t get why /lit/ards don’t read books. They are clearly interested since they come here, but then why not just read them?

>>20219788
>>20219794
Have not read schop, But Is it correct to assume that will is the a priori motive force before any thought or act is done? So instinct isnt quite right as that is a post hoc explaiation of biological processes. Why do I want to know the truth? is is because it is useful? or because it is aesthetically pleasing? etc.

in line of the
>I can do what I will, but I cannot will what I will

>>20220151
>Why do I want to know the truth? is is because it is useful? or because it is aesthetically pleasing? etc.
If you try to justify that internal force you will miss that force, The ''motive force'' of it is it itself.

That's why one need to go to Nietzsche after Schopenhauer. Thus I recommend to the posters here.

>>20220147
Not OP but because every book you read has an opportunity cost, you are depriving yourself of the reading of another book, a potentially far greater book. It is more prudent to get recommendations on books, to figure out which books are actually personally worth your time reading at the expense of others.

>>20220221
>That's why one need to go to Nietzsche after Schopenhauer.
*Back to Goethe and his Urphaenomen.

>>20219756
>Is the "will" just instinct? Or is it deeper than that?
Be spends about 200 pages explaining in painful detail what he means by Will, and then another 400 in the second volume. Why won't people just read him?

>>20219756
will is the golden order(logic) of our world