Does this mean that marrying someone isn’t the way to so-called salvation or finding true happiness?

The philosopher’s celibacy must also contain some kind of wisdom, a special way of interpreting life.

If we can dissect the philosopher’s celibacy, it may have a certain enlightening significance for us to understand life more deeply, and it will also help us solve the single problem of modern society.

 

(Philo-damn-single?)

In reading, I often encounter important people who influence the world. They are far from marriage and face loneliness and magnificent life alone.

Opening such a list may be too lengthy: Plato, Boccaccio, Copernicus, Descartes, Pascal, Spinoza, Newton, Voltaire, Kant, Beethoven, Schopenhauer, Andersen, Kerr Kegel, Holderlin, Nietzsche, Kafka, Wittgenstein, and Sartre… especially philosophers.

There are many reasons why great philosophers choose to be single, and the most important thing is the concept, character and life. For human beings, celibacy is not a good thing, and certainly not a bad thing, but for a lonely thinker who has already lived a life on this road, this choice is unique.

Plato said: “The beautiful concept is especially lovely than the beauty.” The ancient Greek philosopher who originated from the origin not only established the theory of destroying family and marriage from the aesthetic, political, moral and other levels, but also insisted that he was doomed to failure. Great plan. Dramatically, in a lively wedding, the 81-year-old single-born ancestors died in the midst of laughter and laughter.

Nietzsche’s voice “reassessing all values” is still echoing in the sky of philosophy, but his views on women are narrow and cruel.

He said that women are “how dangerous, sneaky, sneak little carnivores”; the basis of love is “the hatred between the two sexes”, the “poorness of a pair of souls”; the marriage “ends” Short madness is replaced by a long stupidity.”

For his own celibacy, he explained: As a philosopher, I must be free from profession, woman, child, motherland and faith.

Solitude, melancholy, and deep suspicion are common to philosophers, and such a character is not popular in the world of marriage. Wittgenstein is such a philosophical singer who doubts everything and rejects everything.

He is pessimistic, irritable, inaccessible, and demanding others with the same standards. He believes that there is no future in his own time. Naturally, he will not accept a more promising love.

Relatively speaking, Newton is much gentler, but he is intoxicated in his heart, where there is almost no place for marriage.

After reaching the peak of mathematics, optics and mechanics research, Newton’s second half of his life was devoted to alchemy, theology and other fields. It seems that there is no subject in the world that he does not study, except women. It is said that when he politely kisses a girl’s hand, he hardly puts the little finger of the person into the ignited pipe.

Kant and Holderlin both worked as tutors in the aristocratic family when they were young. They all fell in love with the beautiful and noble hostess, and ended up with a sad ending.

Kant gradually realized the benefits of being single. He lived in a simple way. He got up at 5 in the morning, walked at 3 in the afternoon, rested at 10 in the evening, and had a meal every day. He lived a monotonous and stereotyped scholar life. Holderlin was later mad. He was taken in by a friendly carpenter, often standing by the window, looking at the familiar sky and the autumn woods.

The extremely bizarre philosopher in character is Schopenhauer, a beast-like genius. His forehead is wide, his eyes are wide enough to wear glasses, and his curly hair is angered; he seems to be out of touch with the whole world, no family, no friends, especially hate women.

Schopenhauer always put a gold coin in front of the meal. As long as the guests in the hotel did not talk about women, he put the gold coins into the poverty-stricken box, but he never succeeded.

He said, “A sensible man can’t do such a stupid thing as falling in love,” because marriage means war and demand. In his later years, Schopenhauer’s pessimistic philosophy became famous, and the admirers were in constant stream, but he was only with his beloved dog. This dog was named “the soul of the world.”

Other philosophers have chosen to be single because of the hardships of life and the threat to their lives. Spinoza, who wrote 11 philosophical works in a very short life, was unable to make a living, relying on grinding lenses and friends to support the strength of the day; Copernicus and Voltaire were deeply persecuted by the church or the authorities, and their philosophical career was Spending in a dangerous environment, despite the courageous women, marriage is still a luxury for them.

In my reading, the celibacy of the three existentialist pioneers made me feel lasting and heavy. They attributed this completely private choice to the despair of human beings and the complex feelings of God. They lived in such painful thoughts for about 40 years and were sacrificed to God as sacrifices. They are Pascal, Kierkegaard, Kafka.

Pascal once had a crush on a noble girl, but he was ashamed of this passion before God. He believes that the only purpose of life is to explore infinity, and only by flying to God can this infinity be achieved. One night, the author of The Mind Record repeatedly read a prayer before Jesus’ imprisonment and wrote a sentence like this: Except for God, forget everything.

Both Kierkegaard and Kafka have married and are already engaged, and they are shuddering in front of the marriage world and cannot move forward. Fear comes from responsibility, morality, ancient guilt, and a thirst for purely spiritual life. A person who can’t live like an ordinary person (Kafka said that he lived as a dead person throughout his life), he could not practice the happiness in the promise of marriage, and giving up is the only correct choice, albeit heavy.

Kierkegaard wrote after dismissing the marriage with Reichina: “I believe that I am going to be sacrificed, because I understand that my pain has enabled me to creatively delve into the truths that benefit people.” Kafka writes To be more clear: the writer is a scapegoat for humanity.

The continuation of human beings is achieved through sexual reproduction. This is the divine law that nature is not easy to age. Since entering civilized society, human reproduction has often been manifested in the form of marriage. In other words, individuals in civilized society generally complete the “human production” through the form of marriage, that is, the glorious mission of “species reproduction.”

In quality, marriage is not only a sacred contract between the two sexes, but also a sacred responsibility of the individual to society and humanity as a whole.

We can imagine: If everyone refuses marriage, what will human society look like? First of all, there will undoubtedly be a lack of human beings and even extinction. Without human beings, everything will be impossible to talk about. Secondly, even if there is no marriage and breeding as in the primitive society, all human order and all moral norms will be thoroughly Subversion, and the so-called good love, the love of the sacred parents, the warmth of the family will never return.

Such a scene, I am afraid that we are not willing to see it in the world? This explains from the opposite side that marriage is a must for individuals to enter human society, otherwise he will risk not accepting it for human society.

However, throughout the ages, I do not know how many great people refused to enter the marriage threshold! What the hell is this? They dare to take the world by storm, what kind of power is driven by them? Or is there anything that is hard to say?

Especially in the context of modern society, singularity has gradually become popular among ordinary people, and even become a fashion. In some countries in the West, celibacy has become an important factor in the decline of the population. In our country, being alone in a big city is no longer a strange thing. This makes us have to pay attention to the study of celibacy.

As early as in school, we discovered such a peculiar phenomenon: in the long historical process of Western philosophy, single philosophers accounted for one-third of all philosophers! In the history of Chinese philosophy, the single person is simply a phoenix. We have discussed it many times about the reason for this, but it has not been conclusive.

However, one thing is certain: the philosopher’s singularity is related to the pursuit of the ultimate truth. Every word in the brilliance of the philosopher’s philosopher is telling the singularity. Perhaps, celibacy is not their purpose, but celibacy is undoubtedly a manifestation of their respective philosophical theories.

Look at these great names: Pythagoras, Protino, Augustine, Pascal, Descartes, Hobbes, Locke, Spinoza, Voltaire, Hume, Leibniz, Kant, Love Emerson, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, Spencer, Krkagor, Wittgenstein, Sartre… If there are no such famous figures, imagine the history of Western philosophy can be written down?

The so-called philosophy is not an abstract theory formed by various concepts, but first of all a kind of wisdom. Wisdom is not knowledge, nor necessarily truth, but a unique path to the truth. Every philosopher is a scholar of scholasticity, and his philosophical system is a brand new interpretation of the universe and life.

In this regard, the philosopher’s celibacy must also contain some kind of wisdom, a special way of interpreting life. If we can dissect the philosopher’s celibacy, it may have a certain enlightening significance for us to understand life more deeply, and it will also help us solve the single problem of modern society.

Therefore, our attitude is to analyze the causes and processes of each philosopher’s celibacy, to explore and explain the different aspects of its life style, and let the readers feel and let the society comment. Because we believe that for a complex singular phenomenon of philosophers (and ordinary people), it is easy to deny or certainly be rash and most important.

The philosopher’s singularity can be summarized into the following four types:

01

Transcendence

The philosophers of this type are characterized by their enthusiasm for religion and transcendence of passion, such as Pascal, Spinoza, and Kierkegaor, especially in the case of European medieval philosophers. Devotion to religion and God as the highest embodiment of life, it is their natural choice to go beyond the physical rejection of marriage.

We know that religion is an ideology that pursues transcendence. It regards life as a stage of access to the world, not all of life. In the West, the “original sin theory” of Christianity is deeply rooted in the hearts of the people, and actually reflects the moral concept of religion rejecting real life and pursuing the illusory heaven.

Perhaps everything in the world (including personal survival, destiny, feelings, etc.) is too unstable, too small, too short, so people turn to the eternal, great, and enduring transcendental world, and God and heaven become this. An avatar of yearning.

The greatness and profoundness of philosophers lies in their recognition of the great gap between the earth and the kingdom of heaven, the individual and God, the sense and the rationality, the instinct and the transcendence, thus putting their moral principles into life.

Therefore, transcendental philosophers are often single, because they think that love (marriage) is only a kind of instinct of human beings, and it belongs to the level of sensibility. It should not be regarded as the ultimate goal of life. For example, Kierkegor believes that the greatest sin of man is sexual act, because it is most closely related to the natural state of man.

It’s a real story! For example, Pascal’s fear of love, no doubt should look for reasons from this aspect. However, it is interesting to note that transcendental philosophers, despite their self-discipline in the spirit of the saints, have not hindered or even promoted their connection with the real world (such as science), thus bringing us to the world. Well-being.

They explored the mysteries of nature with transcendental ideas, which led to modern science, such as Pascal, Spinoza and so on. Therefore, their long and boring life philosophy is not a kind of wisdom in this respect?

02

Rational

The philosophers of this type are mostly characterized by calmness and reason, and celibacy is the result of their rational choice, not religious passion. This is the case, for example, Descartes, Kant, and Hume.

In modern times, the eternal, true, perfect, and omnipotent God has actually been replaced by the science of absolute, universal, inevitable, and truth (so-called rational truth). Thus, “rational courts, change The ultimate rule of people’s behavior.

We find that singular philosophers, though still acknowledging the existence of God, have no such strong pressure and anxiety, nor religious passion, but instead turn their attention to reason.

In this way, they appear calm and confident, because they feel that they hold the truth and look forward to it. Their lives are well organized. For example, Descartes and Kant are people who obey the time, and everything in daily life is carried out in a meticulous manner. Although it seems rigid, it does bring great benefits to their work and philosophical thinking.

The reason why they were single is not because they do not harm women and sacrifice themselves, but based on various realistic and rational considerations. For example, Descartes was enslaved to his physical weakness, and Kant was too economically justified in his youth.

Of course, because of the advocacy of reason, and rationality, the sensible world is not nothing, they generally appreciate women, and they have made some scandals. This is a matter of course and fully understandable. Of all the single singers, probably only this type is the easiest to accept.

03

Free type

Philosophers of this type are mostly known for their wisdom. They are witty and humorous and never admire any absolute things. Although they are single, they are mostly romantic. Voltaire, Schopenhauer, and Sartre belong to this type.

Whether God is rational or not, it seems too dull for the individual. Therefore, as early as the Renaissance, many thinkers used sensibility and flesh as objects of songs to counter the oppression of religion.

It is never thorough for a sensible martyr to rebel against God. In the depths of their souls, God has always occupied a pure land, so they still have an ascetic color in people’s eyes.

Free-style philosophers often use sensibility as a guide to their own lives, so they tend to be sharp, humorous, and exportable, and naturally sway in private life.

The Enlightenment’s tycoon Voltaire, his advocating British philosophy (experience philosophy), his favorite gambling, his involvement in drama, his affair, etc., all explain his temperament and interest in pursuing freedom.

For example, Schopenhauer, who advocates volitionalism, is also a kind of rebellion against reason, and the drama and ridiculousness of his life in different words and deeds does not indicate a desire for carnival? And Sartre, who has not accepted any honor of the palace for a lifetime, systematically proves the “truth” of “personal freedom” and “free choice” in theory, thus seems to introduce people into an infinitely broad, free and comfortable. living space.

Therefore, this type of philosopher is unique, unlike the above two types to seek religious or rational truth, but to better enjoy the happiness of the world, so they are the ones in their questions. Righteousness.

However, although we can’t deny that this attitude of life is another special way of interpreting life, we can’t deny the wisdom and free and easy, but if even an absolute thing does not exist and is believed, then this is worthy of nihilism. What is the difference?

04

Paranoid type

Most of the philosophers of this type are extreme, eccentric, and maverick, and are the products of modern society. They despise women or hostile and reject women. The most typical examples are Nietzsche and Wittgenstein.

The development of human history to this day does not mean that we have more truths than the ancients, and that our hearts are more peaceful and happy. The development of Western philosophy also shows that, in modern times, the truth is more and more confusing and mysterious.

We know that Nietzsche is the last person who “killed God”. He wants to “reevaluate all the values of mankind” and try to create a new human (Superman), but he finally entered the madhouse. Why is that?

Nietzsche is the successor and logical terminator of the Western humanist tradition. His madness undoubtedly proves the bankruptcy of irrationalism, that is, attempts to build the bankruptcy of the human value system with complete and thorough individualism.

In fact, the philosophy of pursuing absolute freedom and advocating personal values (voluntarism, existentialism, etc.) contains a deep anxiety, but madness is only its extreme performance. Unlike Nietzsche, Wittgenstein is the successor and logical terminator of the Western scientism tradition.

We know that Wittgenstein’s philosophy started from mathematical logic, which is the perfect combination of European rationalism philosophy and British and American empirical philosophy. It attempts to introduce the whole universe and human truth through a strict symbolic logic system. This is the biggest revival of scientism.

Wittgenstein was immersed in this delusion for a lifetime, until he was a little awake in his later years, thus proposing the theory of “game.”

Judging from the thought process of Nietzsche and Wittgenstein, their philosophy can be said to reflect the defects of Western culture. Correspondingly, their daily life is also extremely grotesque, such as Nietzsche’s hatred of women is very famous, and Wittgenstein seems to squint at women, like a saint who does not eat human fireworks.

Of course, they have specific social and physiological reasons for doing so, but from an intellectual point of view, the main reason is that they are trying to create a “human myth” (Superman) or “science myth” (logic Philosophy) related.

Therefore, it can be said with certainty that they are all losers in philosophy (of course, their wisdom will always shine upon the people), and in life they should also be included in the ranks of the unfortunate.

Above, we have analyzed in general terms the four types of philosophers’ celibacy. Perhaps this induction is not comprehensive, but it generally takes care of the clues of the development of philosophy, trying to find the singularity of each philosopher’s singularity with philosophical thinking. This research direction may have its merits.

This is because a single philosopher is first and foremost a philosopher. His distinctive philosophical thinking is of course the essence of his celibacy, and other factors that lead to his celibacy (social, physical, family) can only be some Non-essential things.

Therefore, the philosopher’s celibacy is metaphysical celibacy.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *