For what concerns intellectual and cultural pursuits, are the views of Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860) fully original or do they rely on prior philosophers? They are original because they are adding unique, innovative elements to the insights of prior thinkers. If we want to find philosophers that somewhat anticipate Schopenhauer in this respect, we need to go back twenty-two centuries. I am referring to Ancient Stoic philosophers such as Zeno of Citium (334-262 BC). Zeno held wisdom, reason and virtue in high regard, but not as an end in themselves. He regarded them as tools, as methods of achieving inner peace, meaning and happiness. Like Schopenhauer, Zeno rejected intellectual pursuits that play against inner peace, meaning and happiness. He strongly advised people to refrain from unworkable desires and goals. The choice of the right intellectual pursuits, argued Zeno, is essential for achieving happiness. Which pursuits are right and which are wrong? Zeno favoured intellectual pursuits that raise self-awareness and wisdom, especially in the ethics field, that is, in the field of decision-making. To the Ancient Stoic arguments, Schopenhauer added two entirely new insights, namely, the acknowledgement that the will (nature) is chaotic and that it’s irrational. Neither Zeno nor any other Ancient Stoic had made these remarks. In his book “The world as will and representation” (1818), Schopenhauer underlined that nature (for which he employed the term “the will” or “life force”) is chaotic, unpredictable and wild. It pushes in a certain direction, but its influence creates a wide array of unexpected problems. Schopenhauer also underlined that nature is irrational due to its inability to weigh off risks, costs and consequences. Nature prompts people to secure their own survival and reproduction, and seek short-term pleasure, but remains oblivious to long-term effects. Chaos and irrationality undermine the Ancient Stoic views on intellectual pursuits. For instance, Seneca (4-65 AD) spoke highly of intellectual pursuits, expecting those to help people live more rationally and in alignment with nature. Seneca considered nature as harmonious and rational. When he wrote about the universe, he praised its orderliness. He was blind to the severe flaws in his arguments. In contrast, Schopenhauer perceived those flaws right away. He found it ludicrous to call nature harmonious, rational and orderly; the Ancient Stoics were employing nonsensical, poetic images that do not correspond to reality. The truth is that nature is wild, irrational and merciless, not harmonious, rational and orderly. That’s precisely why we need to rate intellectual pursuits carefully. Here is the link to the original article: https://johnvespasian.com/origin-of-schopenhauers-views-on-intellectual-pursuits/