Philosophical pessimism is the position that non-existence is better than existence. Some well-known examples include Schopenhauer, Cioran, and Mainländer. Friedrich Nietzsche is sometimes also considered a pessimist, but his position is more complex.
Though I agree with some ideas originating from this philosophy, I mostly apply them in different contexts (see IV for example). And although I was somewhat sympathetic to it around the age of 16-17 or so, I now turn away from this way of thinking as a philosophy of life, and despise some of its ideas.
I
Life has suffering, we all agree on that. "Life is suffering" is a much stronger point. Yes, we can indeed see every happiness as the resolution of suffering. We can formulate every moment of joy as a moment of release from suffering. Suffering caused by a deprivation of what you are striving for at that moment. Everything that brings me happiness can be seen as something I longed for, which, once I have it, gives me that temporary experience of happiness. In that sense, every moment of happiness is connected to the suffering that preceded it. And in that sense, if desire is unavoidable, life is suffering.
But can't desire be controlled? Can't it be given meaning? Why should this be something negative?
II
Schopenhauer speaks of the Wille zum Leben (Will to Life); an irrational, blind, animalistic impulse that makes humans strive endlessly. According to him, this striving forms the foundation of human suffering. Apparently, Schopenhauer, a man I initially considered rational and cultured, sees it as impossible to overcome an animal instinct. He is apparently unable to reflect on his striving.
Is the pessimist ultimately someone without self-control, or perhaps someone with too little time?
Asceticism, as the negation of the Will, is the core of Schopenhauer's ethics. Nevertheless, Schopenhauer was a great enjoyer of earthly things; he loved food and drinking.
III
Schopenhauer attributes suffering to a metaphysical essence. Besides being a completely nonsensical idea, it also reveals a tremendous weakness. Any form of rebellion against suffering is therefore doomed to failure and not worth attempting. Only retreating to art, thereby forgetting life, is, for him, a temporary release, just as alcohol temporarily relieves my depression.
Mainländer says that the universe is the rotting corpse of God. The Lord committed suicide; it's unfortunate for us that we live in his universe. Now we must follow his example and strive for nothingness; only then will our will be in harmony with the universe.
I think that from now on, if I fail at anything, I'll also blame a metaphysical essence; it certainly isn't my apathy that is to blame.
IV
Is this enormous suffering even inherent to humanity or existence? No. The convenience of life, the creation of artificial values, and the industrialized world we live in, are the causes. Society has imposed new expectations and values on humanity. Modern humanity is a victim of an excessive striving for completely artificial things, which has arisen. It is the tension that arises when you let go of your natural Wille zum Leben in an unnatural world.
The pessimist would not exist among primitive humanity.
Modern life has too much meaning: non-inherently artificial meaning. It is everywhere, determining everyone's choice at every moment.
Denial of this artificial meaning makes the striving bearable. Breaking free from this illusion can free one from this seemingly endless suffering. But of course, the pessimist lacks the self-control to do so. One can live very well, full of zest for life, if its suffering is authentic. When one is at peace with his striving, he also becomes more indifferent to death.
V
And what about the lack of inherent meaning? Isn't the lack of intrinsic meaning/value in life a reason for depression?
To be honest, I'd sooner commit suicide if there were absolute, if not metaphysical, meaning to life. Meaning is pressure; well, the pressure of social meaning can be overcome, but the pressure of a mysterious higher realm would be difficult for me to bear.
Even if there were intrinsic meaning to life, we would be nothing but slaves to this inescapable metaphysical responsibility. Suicide would then be my rebellion. (What would Camus think of this?)
VI
But we shouldn't get too bogged down in a romanticized delusion. For how much suffering is truly present in our lives? Many pessimists, like Schopenhauer or Mainländer, will undoubtedly have been deeply troubled by depressive moods, as will many who identify with their work. But is this suffering truly something to be defined by?
Pessimists are perhaps too unworldly. They fail to see that many find life not only bearable, but even fulfilling. They fail to realize that their pessimism is an attitude to life, rather than the hard truth, if not the (metaphysical) essence of life.
VII
And now, a word about some of their young followers.
Suffering is not a competition. Suffering is also not a direct path to deeper insights, certainly not to ethical authority. Suffering in itself is not proof of authenticity.
Edgy (teenage) "pessimists" are perhaps too unworldly to realize that the majority of people are tormented by suffering, that their suffering makes them far from unique.
In general, younger generations, who grew up with social media, are not sufficiently aware that uniqueness is anything different from authenticity.
The striving for uniqueness among these generations is very understandable, because how do you find your place in an environment of billions of people, where each is more extreme than the next? But this striving for uniqueness is arrogant, and more importantly, a neglect of oneself.
If, when you are true to yourself, you desire a "normal" and "simple" life, then that is better than letting everyone know how depressed or schizophrenic you think you are.