On Schopenhauer's Compassion

“The conviction that the world, and therefore man too, is something which really ought not to exist is in fact calculated to instil in us indulgence towards one another: for what can be expected of beings placed in such a situation as we are? From this point of view one might indeed consider that the appropriate form of address between man and man ought to be, not monsieur, sir, but fellow sufferer, compagnon de misères. However strange this may sound it corresponds to the nature of the case, makes us see other men in a true light and reminds us of what are the most necessary of all things: tolerance, patience, forbearance and charity, which each of us needs and which each of us therefore owes.”

- Arthur Schopenhauer, Studies in Pessimism

"Boundless compassion for all living beings is the surest and most certain guarantee of pure moral conduct, and needs no casuistry. Whoever is filled with it will assuredly injure no one, do harm to no one, encroach on no man's rights; he will rather have regard for every one, forgive every one, help every one as far as he can, and all his actions will bear the stamp of justice and loving-kindness. On the other hand, if we try to say: "This man is virtuous, but he is a stranger to Compassion"; or: "he is an unjust and malicious man, yet very compassionate;" the contradiction at once leaps to light. In former times the English plays used to finish with a petition for the King. The old Indian dramas close with these words: "May all living beings be delivered from pain." Tastes differ; but in my opinion there is no more beautiful prayer than this."

- Arthur Schopenhauer, The Basis of Morality

"We saw earlier that hatred and malice are conditioned by egoism and that these are based on cognition caught up in the principium individuationis [the principle of individuation]. We also found that seeing through that principium individuationis is the origin and essence both of justice and, when it goes further, of love and nobility at the very highest levels. By eradicating the distinction between one’s own individual and that of others, this is the only thing that makes possible and explains perfect dispositional goodness that goes as far as the most disinterested love and the most generous self-sacrifice for the sake of others. 

But if this seeing through the principium individuationis, this immediate cognition of the identity of the will in all of its appearances, is present at a high degree of clarity, then it will at once show an even greater influence on the will. If the veil of maya, the principium individuationis, is lifted from a human being’s eyes to such an extent that he no longer makes the egoistic distinction between his person and that of others, but rather takes as much interest in the sufferings of other individuals as he does in his own, and is not only exceedingly charitable but is actually prepared to sacrifice his own individual as soon as several others can be saved by doing so, then it clearly follows that such a human being, who recognizes himself, his innermost and true self in all beings, must also regard the endless suffering of all living things as his own, and take upon himself the pain of the whole world. No suffering is foreign to him anymore."

- The World as Will and Representation

"In judging a human individual one should always embrace the point of view that his basis is something that should not at all exist, something sinful, wrong, that which is meant by the term original sin, that for which he is doomed to die; this same bad fundamental property is characterized by the fact that no one can endure close scrutiny. What can be expected of such a being? If one proceeds on this basis, then one will judge him leniently, and will not be surprised when the devils hiding in him begin to show, and will better appreciate the goodness that has made its way into him despite everything, be it as a result of intellect or some other source. Secondly, one should also be mindful of one’s situation and seriously consider that life is essentially a state of distress and often of misery, where everyone has to struggle and fight for his existence and therefore cannot always put on a happy face. If, on the contrary, the human being were in fact that which all optimistic religions and philosophies make him out to be, namely the work or even the incarnation of a God, or generally a being that in every sense ought to exist and to be exactly as he is – then how different would be the effect of our first sight of any human being, and our closer acquaintance and continued relationship with him, than is the case now! 

‘Pardon is the word to all᾽ (Shakespeare, Cymbeline, Act 5, scene 5). We should be indulgent towards every human folly, failing and vice, mindful that what we have before us here are only our own follies, failings and vices. After all, these are just the failings of mankind, to which we too belong, and accordingly all of its failings are in us, including those that fill us with indignation right now simply because they do not manifest themselves in us at this precise moment. They are not on the surface, to be sure, but they are lying down on the bottom and at the first opportunity they will show themselves, just as we see them now in someone else; and this even though one failing might be prominent in one man, and a different failing in another, or even when it cannot be denied that the total measure of all bad qualities in one man is much greater than in another. For the difference in individualities is incalculably great."

- Parerga and Paralipomena

Here are several instances in which Schopenhauer discussed compassion. He painted a picture of an ideal, limitless kind of compassion - almost utopian - but at the same time, he also acknowledged that this kind of compassion could exist, at least in some form, in the real world we live in. Like we’ve seen, Schopenhauer pointed out a pretty sad truth, and in a way, he gave a kind of excuse for it too: that humans often fall short of living up to the moral ideals they believe in. Our reason can see what’s right, but our instincts or desires often push us to do the opposite.

"Video meliora, proboque, deteriora sequor."
("I see the better path and approve it, but I follow the worse.") — Ovid, Metamorphoses

Knowing what’s right doesn’t mean we’ll actually do what’s right. Moral philosophy is something we build with our minds, but living morally is something we have to practice — and those two don’t always line up.

-----------------

Humans are born only to hurt themselves and others with a peculiar invention of the mind. The tiger growls to ward off hyenas, the gorilla beats its chest and stands still in sheer physical dominance. But man - lacking the anatomy to roar - creates a disturbance of sound, winding and wavering, to pierce hearts and drain tears from his own kind.

Herein lies a kind of miracle: these tremors in the air, these invisible contortions, act as an unseen force, a kind of sorcery that squeezes the body's every mechanism into submission. And for the child of man, this miracle is nothing short of a tragedy.

If the brutality of a primate toward its child takes form in kicks and separation - breaking the embrace between mother and an undesired offspring - then human cruelty is more insidious, requiring no touch at all.

Instruction in tongue placement, in pronunciation, in the art of listening - these are not neutral acts, but preludes. For one day, the teacher will use the very syntax of reason to dominate the one taught. And from that moment, the human has torn himself from nature and entered a silent tyranny - a life of unseen rejection, of invisible captivity. 

On social media, language ceases to be a bridge and becomes a barrier. Empathy is replaced by surface-level moral reflexes - virtue signaling - while algorithms reinforce personal biases, enclosing individuals within echo chambers where all difference is gradually erased. In such a space, where one encounters only those who mirror themselves, compassion becomes conditional - we extend sympathy only to our own tribe, to pain deemed legitimate within the lens of a virtual community.

When I look at how open-minded young people can be in this digital age, I still can’t help but feel kind of lost about the future - unless something radical happens. Even though we might not have chosen it consciously, we’ve been enslaved by this kind of one-sided way of seeing the world for a long time...