Customer Reviews

Sex and Character: An Investigation of Fundamental Principles

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

Weininger thought that this book was a timeless masterpiece while he was writing it, and, amazingly, he wasn't mistaken. If you take the time to understand what Weininger is saying, his ideas are not so easy to refute, and most of the time they indelibly imprint themselves on your very soul. Some people have criticized this book as being "misogynistic", but if we take Weininger at his word, and I do, then he does not divide the human race into male and female sexes. That is indeed his whole point. Rather, he examines both the conscious and unconscious elements of our own natures - and naturally enough he sees more of the unconscious in women, because women have more of it (so sue me!). He says that he judges individuals on their own merits, and there's nothing in this book to suggest that he doesn't do this.

Apart from his writings on consciousness and unconsciousness, one can find a huge wealth of wisdom on the subjects of genius, the "I", logic, philosophy, psychology, and even "God"!

Mark my words, Weininger says more in the space of one page than modern authors commonly say in an entire book. Weininger's very life is in this book, so if you think the life of a remarkable genius can be a useful addition to your own, then get it.

I believe that many of the reviews for this book have really missed the point. If you view this book outside its historical context, there is no way by which you will understand it. Indeed, claims towards its misogyny and anti-Semitism must be put into context if we are to understand why it is that this young, sexually-confused, and Jewish man decided to write this seemingly bizarre piece at the turn of the 20th century. In particular, those who have read Michel Foucault's works on sexuality and psychoanalysis will find this work incredibly interesting.

While the work begins with a very modern conceptualization of sex, it reverts back to an extremely misogynistic view later in the book. By this I mean, whereas Weininger points to the fact that terms such as 'male' and 'female' are extremely imprecise, and that every individual fits in between this dichotomy, he later reverts to the opposite position, invoking terms that he himself diagnosed as being absolutes: 'Man', 'Woman', 'Male', and 'Female'. Thus, I believe that the interesting question with this book is the following: why does Weininger both point to a theory of bisexuality early in his work, and stick to an absolute model of sexuality later in the work?

This is very interesting from the point of the history of psychology and sexuality because as several scholars have pointed out, Freud falls into the same trap within his "Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality" in attempting to define masculine and feminine sexual instincts.

Working off the works of Michel Foucault and Arnold Davidson, I believe that these contradictory theories of sexuality point to a fundamental change that was occuring in both the field of psychology and in theories of sexuality during the early 20th century. Previous models of sexuality and sex that relied upon anatomical distinctions began to be turned into functional representations. Thus, in this conceptual framework, sex became an instinct innate to the body, which identified or characterized a type of subject.

Indeed, Weininger argued that the foundation of psychology must move towards interpretation and away from mere sensations or biological specificities, thus placing into question the whole of one's character or personality. Whereas psychiatrists such as M.P. Legrain and Sigmund Freud located individual personalities to a certain extent in the sexual instinct, Weininger goes further to seat this within sex itself.

Towards the end of the book, Weininger goes beyond merely analyzing individual genders, for he applies these archetypal notions of `man' and `woman', or `masculine' and `feminine', to the idea of civilizations and races in later chapters of the book, paying particular attention to Judaism and the Jewish people. In order for this to have made conceptual sense, the concept of sex must have, at the least, broken with a specifically biological model of the sexes. Notions of `male' and `female' had to have become detached from anatomy and, instead, applicable to and determinate of the character of individual societies and classes, to name only a few examples.

In other words, in Weininger's book, one concretely observes the manner in which sex became problematized during the late 19th and early 20th century. Weininger disassociates sex from its biological manifestation and introduces an interprative approach that was to become the hallmark of psychoanlysis. Consequently, I do suggest you read this if you are interested in the history of psychoanalysis and theories of sexuality.

I recently downloaded and read a translation of his original work. This was written around the turn of the 20th century, and its obvious at parts how influenced he was by the current views of his time. And keep in mind, men and women have changed considerably since then.
I believe Weininger does possess some excellent insight, although I don't agree with some of his ideas. There are some great insights on the nature of women, although I believe he goes too far into misogynistic thought. Still, I have gained insight into the behavior of intelligent women I have known,that until now puzzled me. I believe that true genius is much rarer in women than men, he believes no woman can be a true genius(at least by his definition). No question, some female geniuses have been hyped up by the feminist movement, and are not at the same level of genius as the males they are categorized with.
Another thing, in one section he says women are not really capable of jealousy towards another woman, when we all know this is false. One reason this error stands out is that women have become much more jealous and envious since his time.
When he goes into his views on Jews, the influence of his environment becomes more apparent. I disagree with most of what he said, and I am not Jewish. Jews are not individuals? Some of the most unique, independent thinkers I have met are Jews. And his obvious environmental bias against Jews throws his whole theory about women into question, although in my opinion it still holds up fairly well. The text is extremely verbose and heavy, he often seems to ramble on about an idea for longer than needed. Still, this book is a wortwhile read for any thinking man.

PC acadaemia translating a writer as radically opposed to that dogma as Otto Weininger cannot help but tap-dance occasionally around the issue, but this translation has, like the original, ultimately transcended its time to become a great work.

Despite this work now being over a century old, and its theories often drawing upon even older material, the book remains eerily relevant today, culminating at the end where it unmasks a Revelation-esque teaching. Weininger, himself Jewish, paints a perhaps unwitting self-portrait when he muses that "The Jew's knack is to stand beside God".

It should not also be too easily forgotten that the original 1906 English translation is riddled with flaws. Rushed to print, it omits over 30% of the text and contains thousands of mistakes, among many other shortcomings. The translators of this accurate and complete new edition have restored Weininger to his true place in philosophical literature.

In late 19th and early 20th century, misogyny ran rampant. Odd as it may seem, this period may represent the highest point of sexism, chauvinism and misogyny in modern Western culture. It was a period when being a bachelor was part of a proper life. This attitude reached unbeforeseen heights of craziness in such texts as Filippo Tommaso Marinetti's "Futurist Mafarka", a work of fiction where men successfully struggle against "the laws of matter and mechanics" that will end in men giving "supernatural birth", and the writings of some neo-Malthusians who recommended men be breast-fed until they grow breasts themselves, so that they could feed each other.

Probably the most read book of that period is this one: Otto Weiniger's "Sex and Character" - written when he was just 21 years old (he committed suicide just two years later, at 23). By contemporary standards, this book is pretty much a joke, and essentially everything in this book has been discredited scientifically, philosophically, and otherwise. Nevertheless, as usually happens with books that celebrate and justify the bigotry and fanaticism of an age, the book was tremendoulsy popular and influential.

A couple of quotes from the introduction of this book shed light on what this book is about: "The discussions, so much in favour nowadays, concerning the emancipation of women, sexuality, the relation of women to culture, and so forth, are deprived of their data by this publication. /.../ The abnormal type, the hysterical woman, leads up to a masterly psychological (not physiological) theory of hysteria, which is acutely and convincingly defined as "the organic mendacity of woman." /.../ he contrasts with the programme of the modern feminist movement, with its superficialities and its lies."

In his own words: "Where my exposition is anti-feminine,
and that is nearly everywhere..." That his book is devoid of any real scientific proof, even the author himself agrees: "My investigation may be objected to as in certain points not being supported by enough proof, but I see little force in such an objection." "Woman requires man to be sexual, because she only gains existence through his sexuality. Women have no sense of a man's love, as a superior phenomenon..." etc. etc. etc.

Later, the book turns into a run-of-the-mill anti-semitic conspiracy theory, and women (or rather, feminity) are likened to Jews. Plenty of such examples of the worthlessness and bigotry in this book abound, but I hope the above is sufficient to indicate that this book has at best some historical value, while the actual contents are utterly obsolete and laughable.

It is very unfortunate that even today there are people who truly consider this piece of completely obsolete gibberish as some sort of a Great Truth. Recommended for all the misogynic bigots out there.

When I saw the glossy reprint/translation of this shamelessly bigoted, anti-woman, white-men-are-superior ejaculation in my local library I wondered why the publisher would have wasted trees and ink on such an effort - but of course, because there is a thriving market for "throw-backs" - humans who glorify old style (read: antiquated) world views as if they were the ancient scripts of ingenious, misunderstood gods. As long as we have these xenophobic, myopia afflicted folk amongst us, I think it is important that the population at large have access to what throw-backs consume as bedtime reading. Take note: racism and sexism are not dead or waning, just some what contained, and people like our dear M. Maguire bellow are just waiting for the more enlightened of us to nod off and stop caring.

Rating - One star because I have little sympathy for people who choose to live in a vacuum and drive themselves psychotic with grandiose excursions into "white man's burden" syndrome.