Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Trieb and Triebe in Schopenhauer’s Metaphysics of Nature

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Concept of Drive in Classical German Philosophy

Abstract

The aim of this chapter is to analyze how Schopenhauer employed and developed the concept of Trieb in his philosophy of nature. It elucidates that Schopenhauer was adamant in distinguishing the Trieb from the will and gave the Trieb an important role in defining some characteristics of his metaphysics of nature—against reductionism and for explaining the complexity of organic life. Moreover, the chapter reconstructs how the Trieb—through Blumenbach’s Bildungstrieb—found its place in Schopenhauer’s philosophy of biology. Finally, it focuses on his criticism of physico-theology (as in Kunsttrieb) and on his most famous application of the Trieb, namely the sexual drive in organic life and its effects in human society as “sexual love”.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    See, for example, Schmidt 2004.

  2. 2.

    Drang is also used when the focus is on the effect of the will on human beings: Drang der Wünsche (WI, 231/220; 233/221), Willensdrang (WI, 231/220), Drang des Wollens (WI, 239/227).

  3. 3.

    A brutal assessment of Fortlage’s 1852 book is in GBr, 10.6.1852, 283, where its content is qualified as “falsch, schief und schlecht”.

  4. 4.

    GBr, 12.7.1852, 284 explains that an interpretation of the will as “substance” would be wrong.

  5. 5.

    This is a main point of Invernizzi’s view of Schopenhauer’s correspondence in Invernizzi 1986, 254–258.

  6. 6.

    Actually, this argument came from the quotation of Herschel’s Treatise on Astronomy that introduced the chapter “Physische Astronomie” in On Will in Nature.

  7. 7.

    On the main views in the eighteenth century, see Monti 1990 and Zammito 2017, especially chapters 3–5.

  8. 8.

    The presence of the Bildungstrieb in anthropology is evident in the second edition of De generis humani varietate nativa (Blumenbach 1781b, 1–2). For the Bildungstrieb in natural history, see Beyträge zur Naturgeschichte (Blumenbach 1790, 25). Its application to comparative anatomy appears in Handbuch der vergleichenden Anatomie (Blumenbach 1805, 65, 471).

  9. 9.

    On this aspect, see Gambarotto 2018, 10–14. Among historians there has been a lot of discussion about the meaning of the Bildungstrieb for Kant’s analysis of teleology: see, for example, Zammito 2012—but examining this subject would be beyond the scope of the present contribution.

  10. 10.

    A comprehensive overview of the Bildungstrieb during the Goethezeit is provided by Fabbri Bertoletti 1990.

  11. 11.

    See Zammito 2017, chapter 10–11 and Cooper’s contribution in this volume.

  12. 12.

    Natural history (winter semester 1809–1810), Mineralogy (winter semester 1809–1810), Comparative anatomy and physiology (winter semester 1810–1811), and physiology (summer semester 1811). The notion of Bildungstrieb appears in the lectures on physiology: see Stollberg and Böker 2013, 126 and 134.

  13. 13.

    On this definition of the Göttingen professors as “masters of Germany”, see Marino 1995.

  14. 14.

    Their correspondence is published in Werke (Deussen), 265–267 and 275–276. On the meaning of Blumenbach’s teaching for Schopenhauer’s philosophizing, see Segala 2013, section 5–6.

  15. 15.

    See WI, §§ 15, 17, 22, and 24.

  16. 16.

    The German text revolves around the term Grund: “das Unergründliche (Grundlose, d. i. Wille)”. About the notion of cause, Schopenhauer remained on Kant’s position and recalled that a cause is merely a relation between phenomena and is therefore inapplicable to forces, which are beyond the realm of phenomena. See WI, 16/35 about the inconceivability of a cause beyond the world of representation.

  17. 17.

    The Geschlechtstrieb was mentioned in Blumenbach’s lectures on physiology and on comparative anatomy: see Stollberg 2013, 92 and 104.

  18. 18.

    See Gambarotto 2018, chapter 1.

  19. 19.

    Zammito 2017, 212 underlines the importance of the distinction between Trieb and Kraft not only for Blumenbach but also for Kant, Schelling, and Goethe.

  20. 20.

    See Zammito 2017, 138–44 and the contributions 2 and 4 in the present collection.

  21. 21.

    Schopenhauer was aware that homosexuality and pederasty represented a serious counterexample to his view and in an Appendix added in the 1859 edition (WII, 643–651/576–582) he provided a more complex (and not homophobic) solution, instead of simply referring to a degenerated “tendency” (WII, 620/558).

  22. 22.

    As an example, consider this passage: “the marital fidelity is artificial in man and natural in women, and female infidelity is much less forgivable in a woman […] because of its unnaturalness” (WII, 621/558).

References

  • References to Schopenhauer’s works are abbreviated as follows. Page numbers refer to the German edition and are followed by reference to the page number of the English translation as listed here.

    Google Scholar 

  • GBr Schopenhauer, Arthur. 1978. Gesammelte Briefe. Edited by Arthur Hübscher. Bonn: Bouvier.

    Google Scholar 

  • WI Schopenhauer, Arthur. 1972. Die Welt als Wille und Vorstellung. Vier Bücher nebst einem Anhange, der die Kritik der Kantischen Philosophie enthält (1859). In Sämtliche Werke, vol. 2, Arthur Schopenhauer, edited by Arthur Hübscher. Wiesbaden: Brockhaus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schopenhauer, Arthur. 2010. The World as Will and Representation, vol. 1. Edited by Christopher Janaway. Translated by Judith Norman, and Alistair Welchman. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • WII Schopenhauer, Arthur. 1972. Die Welt als Wille und Vorstellung, welcher die Ergänzungen zu den vier Büchern des ersten Bandes enthält (1844). In Sämtliche Werke, vol. 3, Arthur Schopenhauer, edited by Arthur Hübscher. Wiesbaden: Brockhaus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schopenhauer, Arthur. 2018. The World as Will and Representation, vol. 2. Edited and translated by Judith Norman, Alistair Welchman, and Christopher Janaway. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • N Schopenhauer, Arthur. 1972. Ueber den Willen in der Natur (1854). In Sämtliche Werke, vol. 4, Arthur Schopenhauer, edited by Arthur Hübscher. Wiesbaden: Brockhaus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schopenhauer, Arthur. 2012. On Will in Nature. In On the Fourfold Root of the Principle of Sufficient Reason and Other Writings, edited and translated by David E. Cartwright, Edward E. Erdmann, and Christopher Janaway, 303–475. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Werke (Deussen) Schopenhauer, Arthur. 1929. Der Briefwechsel Arthur Schopenhauers, vol. 1. Edited by Carl Gebhart. München: Piper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blumenbach, Johann Friedrich. 1781a. Über den Bildungstrieb und das Zeugungsgeschäfte. Göttingen: Dieterich.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1781b. De generis humani varietate nativa. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1789. Über den Bildungstrieb. Göttingen: Dieterich.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1790. Beyträge zur Naturgeschichte. Göttingen: Dieterich.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1805. Handbuch der vergleichenden Anatomie. Göttingen: Dieterich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fabbri Bertoletti, Stefano. 1990. Impulso formazione e organismo: Per una storia del concetto di “Bildungstrieb” nella cultura tedesca. Firenze: Olschki.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gambarotto, Andrea. 2018. Vital Forces, Teleology and Organization: Philosophy of Nature and the Rise of Biology in Germany. Cham: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Invernizzi, Giuseppe. 1986. Schopenhauer attraverso il suo epistolario. Rivista di Storia della Filosofia 41 (2): 245–264.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marino, Luigi. 1995. Praeceptores Germaniae: Göttingen 1770–1820. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monti, Maria Teresa. 1990. Congettura ed esperienza nella fisiologia di Haller: La riforma dell’ “anatomia animata” e il sistema della generazione. Firenze: Olschki.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reimarus, Hermann Samuel. 1762. Allgemeine Betrachtungen über die Triebe der Thiere: hauptsächlich über ihre Kunsttriebe: Zur Erkenntniss des Zusammenhanges der Welt, des Schöpfers und unser selbst. Zweyte Ausgabe. Hamburg: Bohn.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richards, Robert J. 2000. Kant and Blumenbach on the Bildungstrieb: A Historical Misunderstanding. Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 31 (1): 11–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, Alfred. 2004. Von der Willensmetaphysik zur Metapsychologie: Schopenhauer und Freud. In Tugend und Weltlauf: Vorträge und Aufsätze über die Philosophie Schopenhauers (1960–2003), ed. Alfred Schmidt, 317–427. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scruton, Roger. 2015. Sexual Desire: A Philosophical Investigation. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Segala, Marco. 2013. Auf den Schultern eines Riesen. Arthur Schopenhauer als Student Johann Friedrich Blumenbachs. In “…die Kunst zu sehn”: Arthur Schopenhauers Mitschriften der Vorlesungen Johann Friedrich Blumenbachs (1809–1811), mit einer Einführung von Marco Segala, Arthur Schopenhauer, ed. Jochen Stollberg and Wolfgang Böker, 13–40. Göttingen: Universitätsverlag Göttingen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stollberg, Jochen, and Wolfgang Böker, eds. 2013. “…die Kunst zu sehn”. Arthur Schopenhauers Mitschriften der Vorlesungen Johann Friedrich Blumenbachs (1809–1811), mit einer Einführung von Marco Segala. Göttingen: Universitätsverlag Göttingen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zammito, John H. 2012. The Lenoir Thesis Revisited: Blumenbach and Kant. Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 43 (1): 120–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2017. The Gestation of German Biology. Philosophy and Physiology from Stahl to Schelling. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dipartimento di Scienze Umane, Università di L’Aquila, L’Aquila, Italy

    Marco Segala

Authors
  1. Marco Segala
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marco Segala .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany

    Manja Kisner

  2. University of Munich, Munich, Germany

    Jörg Noller

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Segala, M. (2022). Trieb and Triebe in Schopenhauer’s Metaphysics of Nature. In: Kisner, M., Noller, J. (eds) The Concept of Drive in Classical German Philosophy. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-84160-7_15

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation