It’s not correct to say that Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860) embraced a form of metaphysical determinism. His philosophy rests on the assumption that the will (which I translate as “life force”) influences all events, but there is a substantial distance between influencing and determining. The difference between influence and determinism has large consequences. I am not pointing to a trivial linguistic variance. If you want to make good decisions and keep anxiety at bay, it is crucial that you understand the difference. In his major work “The world as will and representation” (1818), Schopenhauer argued that the will is the fundamental force underlying reality. He described the will as irrational and blind. It’s ceaseless energy that propels all existence. According to Schopenhauer, the will manifests itself in all animal and human actions. It helps shape human desires, goals and decisions, although we experience those as free-chosen. In all cases, Schopenhauer argued, we are subject to the relentless influence of the will. Yet, we are neither helpless nor enslaved. Schopenhauer’s philosophical stance is that it’s hard to slow down or minimize the influence of the will. As individuals, we are convinced that we possess free will, but to a large extent, we are driven by the “life force” that propels the cosmos. I would not use the term “determinism” for describing how the will is influencing human life. We are driven to achieve the goals inherent in the will (pleasure, reproduction, etc.) but we are not blind brutes unable to figure things out. Although Schopenhauer employs the concept of “necessity” to underscore the nature of the will, he does not mean that one is unable to escape or minimize the influence of the life force. Here is the link to the original article: https://johnvespasian.com/schopenhauer-on-determinism/