He may have been a misanthropist and an athiest, but there all similarities to Satanism end. Everything else in his philosophies seems to me to be both life and pleasure denying, and as he admits himself, he was strongly influenced by both Buddhism and other Eastern philosophy...
Same bullshit, different name.
By the way, I'll admit to only having a passing knowledge of his philosophy because what little I have gleaned of it I find it both very unappealing and, like most philosophies, overly cerebral - so instinctively it warranted no further investigation to me. If you have found some actual misanthropic gems in there, please do share - but otherwise, I cannot see anything else that is even remotely compatible with Satanism...
I'm reading Counsels and Maxims and that seems more promising than many of his other works. From the couple of chapters I've read so far, I'd say it probably would be enjoyably readable for someone who generally disagrees with him. It makes some points I'd consider Satanic or more simply, generally sound.
The thing is I don't agree with large portions of Schopenhauer- but that is why he is useful. He questions my worldview and forces a refining of it. He points out some "pleasures" aren't really pleasurable for example- and often times I have to concede, "he's indeed correct in that case. Now what?" And then I experiment with a different direction.
I first encountered Schopenhauer through Boyd Rice's recommended reading list (http://www.boydrice.com/readinglist.html
). At the time I was gung ho about Satanism, a "fresh convert" so to speak, and I wanted to read anything which was recommended by anyone associated with the Church of Satan
. At the time, I was also spouting Satanic ideas like "life is the great indulgence" without meditation on what they really meant.
When I read Schopenhauer, I was offered the opposite proposition: perhaps life is a great Hell. Indeed, at that time, I was pretty miserable, so I had to face that perhaps that was a serious possibility. This forced me into a prolonged examination of the points raised by Schopenhauer, Nietzsche and Dr. LaVey, both in agreement and disagreement towards each other. It is hard to describe but without Schopenhauer, I would be missing key pieces in understanding life and Satanism.
He proposes in some of his writings, for example, that the most reliable pleasure is gaining insight and watching life unfold rather than actively pursued pleasures (section 3 chapter 1 of Counsels and Maxims.) I would say this is true and realizing it helps avoid countless false pleasures pursued by the herd. It also provides one way life is the great indulgence- even if you were to say life was Hell, life would still be an indulgence in that way.
In short, Magister Rice's promise of gold and lead was certainly fufilled. Schopenhauer's ideas are both.
As far as things Schopenhauer said I found Satanic, they relate mostly to the herd, literature, and solitude. Examples can be found in his aphoristic collections but I don't have many off the top of my head. I remember "On Thinking For Yourself" from Essays and Aphorisms and the insights on books in that volume impressed me. I by no means claim he was a Satanist by any stretch of the imagination but merely that some aspects of his thought that are potentially useful are too often overlooked.