So what of Schopenhauer's understanding of morality? What was the place of ethics in Schopenhauer's philosophy? He insisted that each of us is identical with this Ultimate Reality. He further insisted that since we are all one we should act with sympathy, agape, mercy and compassion toward one another. He called for these displays because, according to Schopenhauer, we are all ontologically unified. In other words, we are all in this tragic situation of life motivated by the slavish desire of the Will and therefore toleration and sympathy is required between us. In short, the human bond demanded compassion toward others according to Schopenhauer.
Ultimately, we are all part of one will. Schopenhauer's ethic is applied Metaethics. He proposed the metaphysical view that we are all ultimately one. When I injure you I am also injuring myself as a result of this ontological unity between persons. To harm you is to harm myself in Schopenhauer's thought.
However, Schopenhauer's philosophy was not without its flaws. For example it seems as though there is a contradiction within his work. On the one hand, Schopenhauer understood "Will" as a metaphysical reality which is awful, evil and nightmarish. On the other hand, Schopenhauer understood "Will" as a basis for compassion and mercy. However, while some contend that Schopenhauer's work contains a contradiction at this point, it seems that these two perspectives are not necessarily mutually exclusive. The one thought seems to require the other.
Schopenhauer saw "Will" as evil, frightening and nightmarish. He concluded that ultimately we must reject or deny this reality. In this respect Schopenhauer embraced asceticism or self mortification as seen in the world religions. He thought that this constituted the final rejection of the Will. It seems that Schopenhauer almost stated that there is an ultimate requirement for this introspective and ultimately ascetic existence in order for one to either into a Nirvana like existence and Schopenhauer may have even entertained the idea that the preferable thing for the individual to do is to turn to the nothingness of non existence. Schopenhauer resemblance to like Hinduism and differing perspective from Christianity was reflected in his call for a rejection of this life and its will whereas Christianity seems to call at least ideally for a transformational embracing of this life.
Finally, Schopenhauer's work contained an interesting paradox in that whereas he called for the Will to be rejected and ultimately escaped, the Will's work is required for this process to be accomplished. Consequently, we should entertain the question as to how this is process is actually achievable.
