Quackery as an aesthetic-philosophical problem in Schopenhauer

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5902/2179378639684

Keywords:

Style, Communication, Pedantry, Obscurity

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to present the philosophical questions that revolve around the ordinary Schopenhauerian accusation of quackery against his opponents. The study of these satellite-questions shows that quackery can be understood as a philosophical problem and not merely an offense empty of theoretical relevance, as commonly understood. They can be summarized as aesthetic or rhetorical questions, because they problematize the style of the philosophical text, its use and its communicative function. Close to the pedant and the sophist, the charlatan is one who abuses obscurity because of his distancing from concreteness by an option for abstract writing.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Danilo Bilate de Carvalho, Federal Rural University of Rio de Janeiro, Seropédica, RJ

PhD in Philosophy at Université Paris 1 Pantheon-Sorbonne

Professor of Philosophy at Federal Rural University of Rio de Janeiro

References

DIDEROT, Denis. Charlatannerie. In: DIDEROT, Denis & D’ALEMBERT, Jean le Rond. Encyclopédie ou dictionnaire raisonné des sciences, des arts et des métiers. Vol. 3. Paris: Briasson, David, Le Breton & Durand, 1751-1772.

GOETHE, Johann Wolfgang von. Faust. Trad. G. Nerval. Paris: Librio, 1995.

GRACIÁN, Baltasar. El Criticón. Tomo Tercero. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1940.

HEIDEGGER, Martin. Nietzsche I. Trad. Marco Antonio Casanova. Rio de Janeiro: Forense universitária, 2010.

KIVISTÖ, Sari. The vices of learning: morality and knowledge at early modern universities, Leiden / Boston, Brill, 2014.

PHILONENKO, Alexis. Schopenhauer, une philosophie de la tragédie. Paris: Vrin, 1999.

RAMOS, Flamarion Caldeira. A “miragem” do absoluto: sobre a contraposição de Schopenhauer a Hegel. Crítica, especulação e filosofia da religião. Tese de doutorado. São Paulo: USP, 2008, 252 p.

ROOS, Richard. Introduction. In: SCHOPENHAUER, A. Le monde comme volonté et représentation. Paris: P.U.F., 2009, pp. xi-xxii.

ROSSET, Clément. Schopenhauer, philosophie de l’absurde. Paris: PUF, 1994.

SCHOPENHAUER, Arthur. O mundo como vontade e como representação. Trad. Jair Barboza. São Paulo: UNESP, 2005.

SCHOPENHAUER, Arthur. Crítica da filosofia kantiana. In: O mundo como Vontade e como representação. Trad. Jair Barboza. São Paulo: UNESP, 2005.

SCHOPENHAUER, Arthur. Suppléments. In: Le monde comme volonté et représentation. Trad. A. Burdeau. Paris: P.U.F., 2009.

SCHOPENHAUER, Arthur. Parerga et Paralipomena. Trad. J-P. Jackson. Paris: CODA, 2010.

SCHOPENHAUER, Arthur. Die Beiden Grundprobleme der Ethik. In: Sämtliche Werke, Mannheim: F. A. Brockhaus, 1988, t. 4.

UCCIANI, Louis. Comment Heidegger évince Schopenhauer. In: Philosophique, 9, 2006, pp. 89-102.

Hipocampo

Downloads

Published

2019-12-18

How to Cite

Carvalho, D. B. de. (2019). Quackery as an aesthetic-philosophical problem in Schopenhauer. Voluntas: International Journal of Philosophy, 10(3), 199–211. https://doi.org/10.5902/2179378639684

Issue

Vol. 10 No. 3 (2019): Dossier Philosophies of Memory + Schopenhauerian Studies

Section

Schopenhauerian Studies

License

The submission of original manuscripts to this journal implies the transference, by the authors, of the copyrights for printed and digital publication. The copyrights of a published manuscript belong ultimately to the author, and only the copyright for its first publication is reserved to the journal. Authors may only use the same results in other publications explicitly indicating this journal as the medium of the original publication. 

Licence

Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) - This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon your work non-commercially, as long as they credit you and license their new creations under the identical terms.