You are on page 1of 15

A Critical Investigation of the Sublime and the Moral in

Schopenhauer’s Metaphysical Aesthetics
Alexander Fox
Alexander Fox wrote this paper in his third year of honours at the University of
Dundee. His interests within continental philosophy include German idealism,
existentialism, and the links between philosophy and literature. It is with his
philosophical engagement with Schopenhauer, however, that his original love for
philosophy was born , as he believes, like the arch pessimist himself, that it is better to
be wise than happy. The present paper was submitted as part of an honours course,
and its final form is therefore indebted to discussions with the module co-ordinator
Dr. Rachel Jones.

Arthur Schopenhauer is one of the few philosophers to offer a system of
metaphysics that is entirely immanent in its orientation. Such an approach is
characterised by its attempt to provide a hermeneutic of existence, and so its central
concern is to delineate what the essence of the world is. For Schopenhauer, the answer
to this question, in his own words, is: ‘The world is self-knowledge of the will’,1 and
it is clear from this response that he means that the essence, or purpose of the world is
to allow the will to manifest itself in order to achieve understanding of itself. Less
obvious, however, is whether what the will learns is of purely theoretical interest, or
whether it instigates some form of fundamental change. According to Schopenhauer,
it is the latter that happens, as he advocates that the will understanding itself amounts
to two lessons, which are both of a profoundly ethical nature. Firstly, the will discerns
that it is inherent in everything, and so a person can start to realise that it is incorrect
to make a distinction between one’s underlying will and another’s. This engenders a
compassionate stance, as when another person’s will is frustrated and suffering
ensues, one can consider this as essentially one’s own suffering. Secondly, and
building upon the first, the will can not only learn that it exists in every object, and
constitutes its essential nature, but that it is also in conflict with itself, and therefore
causes its own suffering. Furthermore, as the will exists entirely within every

Arthur Schopenhauer, The World As Will And Representation, Vol. 1 (New York: Dover, 1969), 410.


each person is the supporter of this conflict and suffering. 3 For readers unacquainted with the terms mathematical and dynamic sublime. These are nothing but the forms of all of the objects of my cerebral cognitive faculty and are conditioned by them. This is my knowledge to whose truth flesh and bone bear witness. 4 Arthur Schopenhauer. and so for this reason there will not be a heavy reliance on secondary resources in this paper. 210. As for the dynamical sublime. which implies a loss of individuality. It is the purpose of this paper to argue that the mathematical sublime and the dynamic sublime are structured such that they can provide these first and second lessons respectively to the will. On the Basis of Morality (Indianapolis: Hackett. however. My true inner being exists in every human being as directly as it makes itself known in my self-consciousness only to me’. in the case of the dynamic sublime. 1995). and they threaten to annihilate the individual. everything else is non-ego and foreign to me’. In my own self alone I have my true being. It is this that bursts forth as compassion…. and the pains associated with a threat to one’s person. With this in mind. on the other hand. they mean within the context of Schopenhauer’s oeuvre that an object poses a threat to the human will. And so even plurality.3 The logical place to begin is with the examination of what the concepts of egoism and altruism mean for Schopenhauer. the pleasure in the sublime experience is explained by the individual becoming the pure subject of knowing. Schopenhauer’s own definition of the sublime shall be offered later in this paper. these kinds of objects are immensely powerful in comparison to the resistance that a human being can utilise when confronted by them. Schopenhauer defines the general feeling of the sublime as being one of pain mixed with pleasure. exist only in my representation. and it is the recognition of this culpability that leads to the ascetic position. it lies at the root of all egoism and is really expressed in every loveless. unjust and malicious action. ‘Individuation is mere phenomenon or appearance and originates through space and time. as these will more specifically delineate the content of the will’s lesson at this stage of ethical development. the following passage comprehensively defines Schopenhauer’s position: ‘Individuation is real. In the case of the mathematical sublime.4 2 The connection between the sublime and the moral within Schopenhauer’s thought is a virtually unexplored area. it shall be argued that the ascetic is strongly associated with the aesthetic.2 individual. In Sanskrit tat tuam asi (this art thou) is the formula.2 Moreover. . the object concerned makes the person’s body. Each individual is a being radically different from all others. the principium individuationis and the diversity and variety of individuals based on this are the order of things-inthemselves. the standing expression for this knowledge. Like other philosophers. As one shall see later in this paper. that is. which is an objectification of their will seem immensely small in comparison. and diversity of individuals are mere phenomenon.

the egoist. which are phenomena. and is therefore not characteristic of the thing-in-itself. and thereby provide the will with this ethical lesson. Having given the preliminaries regarding egoism and altruism. Since this requires an exploration into the sublime. although he perceives and acknowledges it. Now given this information. giving himself up entirely to knowledge. it is evident that what distinguishes the egoist from the altruist is that he or she is committing a metaphysical error. They may be opposed to it. What constitutes this mistake is that the egoist believes ‘individuation is real’ whilst the altruist knows that individuation can only exist in space and time. one can now concentrate on how the mathematical sublime can help a subject to realise the metaphysical truths that engender such altruism. whose significant forms invite us to a pure contemplation of them. forcibly tear himself from his will and its relations and. . The World As Will And Representation Vol. will-less subject of knowing. is that the mathematical sublime experience can engender such awareness. he may consciously turn himself away from it. may have a hostile relation to the human will in general. as manifested in its objectivity. according to this paper. rooted in his or her individuality fails to realise that the same will exists in everyone. as pure. as individuation is an illusion. may quietly contemplate. or their immeasurable greatness reduces it to nought [the dynamic and mathematical sublime respectively]. but. it is appropriate to offer beforehand a brief definition of what constitutes the sublime for Schopenhauer: But these very objects. 201. The answer to this. they may threaten it by their might that eliminates all resistance. In short. Nevertheless. the beholder may not direct his attention to this relation to his will which is so pressing and hostile. the human body. a natural question to ask is whether there is an experience that can motivate awareness of these features. those very objects so terrible to the will. 1969). and it is this that constitutes the real self.3 From this excerpt.1 (New York: Dover. and it is to a consideration of this that this paper shall now turn.5 5 Arthur Schopenhauer.

Fortunately it can. in becoming a pure subject of knowing. This latter feature shall be important later. originally and without independently of all reflection. but this discomfort is transcended.6 and not specifically the individual will. nevertheless makes himself the centre of the world and considers his own existence and well-being before everything else. Now from the necessary determinations we have mentioned is explained that fact that every individual. consequently as a microcosm to be valued equally with the macrocosm. or desires. and to begin to see this. 332.4 From this. and also as the complementary condition of the world as representation. always and everywhere truthful. rather than in the abstract form so far considered. and the mathematical sublime is experiential in orientation.8 Julian Young calls this feature ‘egocentricity’ and he describes it as follows: In ordinary. 8 For readers unacquainted with Schopenhauer’s work. Schopenhauer not only ensures the universality of the sublime experience. and therefore non-conceptual. it is readily apparent that egoism experientially consists of the subject placing him or herself at the centre. it is clear that the sublime experience involves something being hostile to the human will. Since one’s will reflects one’s personal strivings. . completely vanishing and reduced to nothing in a boundless world. hence why Julian Young refers to this as ‘egocentricity’. and everything else is seen only in relation to this centre. and finds himself as the whole will-to-live or as the in-itself of the world itself.. or objectified as one’s body. one can observe that since a compassionate disposition requires the overthrowing of egoism.7 From this excerpt. one’s individual will is manifested. All lines of 6 By advocating that the objects are hostile to the human will rather than merely the individual will. all spatio-temporal locating of things is relative. after a struggle. but also that contemplation can occur in an admittedly hostile environment. gives him. it is necessary to examine first whether the nature of egoism can be established concretely. Nature herself. one can look for the hints in the following passage: Every knowing individual is in truth. one can say that one’s body is a manifestation of one’s ego. this knowledge with simplicity and immediate certainty. ultimately. What therefore establishes egoism experientially is the body. 7 Ibid. to a here and a now that is determined by my own location in space-time as an embodied being. Now with this established. will-serving consciousness.

10 . as the human will. and since the body is so small in comparison. 109 Arthur Schopenhauer. 11 Ibid. is humiliated. As Schopenhauer himself expresses it: If we lose ourselves in contemplation of the infinite greatness of the universe in space and time. Hence a consideration of these always leads back.11 Nevertheless. (New York: Dover. namely that it is the same will that resides in everyone. as transient phenomenon of will. dwindling and dissolving into nothing. 1969).5 direction. thereby suggesting that the individual cannot be the genuine supporter of the world. we feel ourselves as individuals. this indicates how transient it is to be an individual. or if the heavens at night actually bring innumerable worlds before our eyes. but it also suggests the eternal. to all of which it has many different relations and connexions according to the principle of sufficient reason.. represented by the body. This is precisely what happens in the first part of the mathematical sublime encounter. Both the displacement and the feeling of being transient therefore indicate how unreal individuation is. then the metaphysical truth that individuation is an illusion will be conveyed experientially. it is clear from this discussion that if the body can be displaced from its centre. in spite of the mathematical sublime conveying in a pre-reflective fashion that being an individual is transient and therefore not genuinely real. it does not seem to have portrayed the other fundamental component. as it were. and suggested to be a nothingness. The World As Will And Representation. Schopenhauer (London: Routledge. and so impress upon on our consciousness the immensity of the universe. and to his will. 2005). as living bodies. we feel ourselves reduced to nothing.10 Now. it is difficult to see how it can convey this 9 Julian Young. to his body. 205. 176-177. as the vastness of the object not only displaces it from its centre. I shall call this mark of ordinary consciousness its ‘egocentricity’. Indeed. like drops in the ocean. meditate on the past millennia and on those to come. by a shorter or longer path. radiate out from myself as the world’s ‘centre’.9 Schopenhauer describes this situation in a comparable manner: For the individual finds his body as an object among objects.

is normally ensnared by one’s will in order to serve that will. the subject realises that there is only one true. He therefore draws nature into himself. permanent self. Dealing with the former difficulty first. 181. at least directly. it is not evident how one can discern from the mathematical sublime experience that it is one’s moral vocation to empathise with another’s suffering. 198. however. there is only one pure subject of knowing which supports the world as representation. one has to realise that to say that it is the same will in everyone is equivalent to saying that there is only one will.. An awareness that there is only one will is therefore all that is required for a subject to then deduce that his or her underlying will must be the same as another’s. and becomes the pure subject of knowing. as such. In some cases. Schopenhauer believes that one’s intellect. What this means is that the 12 To elaborate on the notion of the pure subject of knowing.12 According to Schopenhauer. one has to realise first that the experience latterly involves the emergence of the pure subject of knowing. 13 Ibid. however. so that he feels it to be only an accident of his own being…But how could the person who feels this regard himself as absolutely perishable in contrast to perishable nature?13 Elsewhere he remarks: ‘We are only that one eye of the world which looks out from all living creatures’. As one can appreciate. in the latter phase of the mathematical sublime experience. that there is only one will. and hence the supporter of the world and of all objective existence. this does not indicate. Furthermore. upon becoming a pure subject of knowing one becomes aware that. for this now shows itself as dependent on his own existence. as the mathematical sublime experience only concerns one person at a time.14 Clearly then. whilst the pure subject of knowing knows Ideas. or universals. Furthermore.. 14 Ibid. referred to him as the subject of knowing. he is the condition. and the mathematical sublime offers such an awareness. In order to see this.6 truth. this difficulty can be overcome by realising the import of the phrase that nature is ‘only an accident of his own being’. . this change in the mode of knowing is also a change in what is known: the subject of knowing knows particulars. Nevertheless. such as in aesthetic contemplation. Fortunately. the intellect breaks free from the will. and it seems clear that it requires at least two to intuit it that it is the same will.

the aesthetic experience partially involves the insight that the pure subject itself is will. Already it has been observed that the mathematical sublime provides an awareness of there being only one underlying will and self. and as the mathematical sublime experience is a species of the aesthetic. who soaring aloft in this contemplation becomes conscious of itself as pure subject. Such a subject therefore goes into crisis in both of these senses. then. most distinct instance of what the world is. another person’s suffering to realise one’s moral vocation. Indeed it can. the will knows the will. which here knows itself…15 In essence then. one does not require. come from the same source. outside the representation and all its forms. it is evident that it can provide the insight that there is only one will. and there 15 Ibid. philosophy and the arts ed. namely the will. which completely objectifies it…As will. and to adjust one’s actions in light of this. In order to see this. as Idea. is to recognise that each person has the same underlying self. one has to realise that one’s moral vocation. according to Schopenhauer. too. but what has yet to be established is whether such an experience can put a value judgement on this recognition in order to orientate someone towards this vocation. at least initially. those two [the contemplated object and the pure subject] are therefore in themselves not different. 1996)..16 As to the second difficulty. 180. as what happens in the mathematical sublime is that the vastness of the object not only prevents the human subject from centring itself. ‘the self-knowledge of the will’. by Dale Jacquette (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. for in themselves they are the will. and it is conscious of itself as in itself that very same will. but also conveys the impression of transience. In aesthetic contemplation. John Atwell sums this insight up nicely: The pure subject of knowing knows every object as a grade of the will’s objectification. 16 . and the Ideas that he or she discerns. 90. ‘Art as liberation’ in Schopenhauer. Schopenhauer puts it in the following way: The will is the in itself of the Idea. therein. it is one and the same [will] in the contemplated object and in the individual.7 subject of knowing. John Atwell. and therefore will. there arises the clearest.

the will tears itself away from this and establishes the pure subject of knowing.8 is subsequent discomfort.. Schopenhauer offers a 17 Obviously this tearing away cannot be done by the individual nor human will. In the following passage. but rather that there is still progress to be made.19 Evidently then. firstly. that there is a ‘tearing away’ from uncomfortable human willing towards establishing the painless subject of knowing. it has to be the underlying will that liberates the pure subject of knowing. but upon becoming the pure subject. it has been observed that the mathematical sublime teaches the will that the same will is inherent in everyone.17 and there is a feeling of pleasure at this transcendence. 205) In other words. in the move from the first part of the experience to the next. Fortunately. Schopenhauer believes that this stage does not constitute the termination of one’s ethical development. in contrast to the individual or human subject. is now the one that is supported by the permanent and real supporter of the world. and since it also conveys that the basis of it is the one underlying will. the mathematical sublime. and is also impermanent. a feeling of the sublime’. and that it is one’s moral vocation to attend to this will whenever suffering is present. As Schopenhauer describes it: ‘It is an exaltation beyond one’s individuality. It can thus be said that the mathematical sublime experience provides a complete lesson to the will at this stage of ethical development. . 19 This is equivalent to Schopenhauer saying. Clearly then. Nevertheless. ‘The vastness of the world. which being decentred cannot be the real centre. at the potential expense to the latter. the vastness of the object decentres the egoistic subject and puts the world at the centre. Furthermore. one is therefore committed to attending to this self. our dependence on it is now annulled by its dependence on us’. of the world. teaches one that the pure subject of knowing is of far greater value than one’s individual self. as this is precisely what one is required to be liberated from. which previously disturbed our peace of mind now rests upon us. or supporter.18 The reason for this exaltation is. even in others.(ibid.. the world being a representation. 18 Ibid. there is an exaltation in becoming the pure subject as it is both stable and permanent. So far. 206. however.

as a consequence of it being in conflict with itself. If their eyes were both opened. revealing in this form through the medium of individuation the conflict with itself which it bears in its inner nature. and final stage of ethical development. The natural question to ask at this point is what leads to such aversion. the will here fails to recognize itself.9 definition of this second. the notion of the ascetic. the inflictor of suffering 20 For readers not fully acquainted with Schopenhauer’s work. is the cause of its own suffering. it produces great suffering in another. and eternal justice might need more explanation. this will is only able to satisfy itself through one of its objectifications by causing suffering to another of its objectifications. which concerns the doctrine of eternal justice: Deceived by the knowledge bound to its service.. known as the ascetic:20 In other words. his doctrine of eternal justice is that. . These points will be discussed in greater depth in what follows. Schopenhauer suggests that what necessitates the move from the first stage to the next is that the will is no longer something to be aligned with through compassion. The suffering it brings upon itself is therefore ‘deserved’. it is no longer enough for him [the ascetic] to love others like himself. With this in mind. Quite simply. Tormentor and tormented are one. which constitutes his or her essential nature. and that every case of suffering is caused by the essence that he or she shares. to the will to life. asceticism is pursued when a person realises that the will. 380. it actually violates against itself. and his action now gives lie to his appearance and comes into open contradiction with it. Moreover. as in trying to satisfy itself. An ascetic is someone who is aware that their essence is shared by everything. one is nevertheless ultimately aligned with the guilty. but rather should be considered with deep aversion. It is such a recognition that horrifies the ascetic. He therefore renounces precisely this essence. the latter in thinking he does not share the guilt. as the world is a manifestation of the underlying will. but there arises in him an aversion to the essence whose expression is his own appearance. 21 Ibid. which is the underlying will. The former is mistaken he does not share the torment. and hence denied. and leads him or her to try and negate that essence. to the kernel and essence of that world recognized as full of misery. Schopenhauer summarises these ideas in the following highly significant passage. Thus in the fierceness and intensity of its desire it buries its teeth into its own flesh. not knowing that it always injures only itself. which appears in him and is expressed already by his body. seeking enhanced well-being in one of its phenomena. it is the realisation that even when one is seemingly innocent.21 Upon inspection of this passage.

the tormented person would see that all the wickedness that is or ever was perpetrated in the world proceeds from that will that constitutes his own inner being. in terms of how the innocent party23 can recognise that he or she is nevertheless responsible for the torment caused. Unfortunately. and proceed to deny the will. 25 Naturally. and appears also in him. endowed with the faculty of reason. and this insight can lead to a denial of the will. the harm could not be done to that person him or herself. if one were of a sadistic orientation. but rather to another. Moreover. then there would be no feeling of discomfort. Crucially.24 Such a person would be sufficiently distanced from the incident to not feel his or her individual will threatened. 24 To clarify this issue. such a person can realise that on the level of the noumenal he or she is as responsible as any individual who inflicts pain. Since such an agent is compassionate. what one is dealing with here is how one should feel. the rationale behind this procedure is that as the directly affected party cannot contemplate these truths. To resolve this problem. it is clear that Schopenhauer believes that as soon as the will offends. one would therefore have to say that for a person to have such an insight. although indirectly involved.10 would recognize that he lives in everything that suffers pain in the whole world. it punishes itself. On the other hand.. it is unlikely that they would be the ‘tormentor’. a period of time does not therefore elapse between offence and punishment. as they were responsible for the offence. Nevertheless. whose cause and guilt it does not perceive. and if. one therefore has to posit an innocent party that is indirectly affected by the incidents. this poses a problem for Schopenhauer. ponders in vain why it was called into existence for such suffering. and that this implies that they are equally guilty. What this means is that the innocent person would be so preoccupied with the harm done to his or her individual will that he or she would not be able to contemplate that they have same underlying will as the wrongdoer. as witnessing the infliction of pain is hostile to the human will25. but would nevertheless feel discomfort. what would make it especially offensive to the human will is the wrongdoer inflicting pain on the innocent party. Nevertheless. and the punished. and the latter being powerless to 22 Ibid. The reason for this is that the purpose of this investigation is to determine how a compassionate agent would move to becoming an ascetic. One is only considering the doctrine of eternal justice from the perspective of the innocent party. in their essential nature thus deserve such punishment. however. whether one actually does. 354.22 From this excerpt. 23 .

and the subject has passed out of all relation to the will. Thus if from the will. Indeed. Now. in order for this person to have this insight that leads to an aversion towards the will. In short.11 defend itself. namely the human being. and causes its own suffering. This breaking through of the boundary of another’s affirmation of will has at all times been distinctly recognized. and therefore that he or she is responsible on the level of the noumenal for all offences. appearing as the body of another. as it is only in such a state that one can intuit the Idea. he or she must recognise that the will. he in consequence affirms his own will beyond his own body by denying the will that appears in the body of another. if he or she is to discern that the same will both offends and punishes itself. or compels the powers of that other body to serve his will. one must intuit the essence of humanity. therefore. the phenomenal component of the eternal justice experience involves matters of dominance and consequent suffering.. This therefore requires a person to necessarily enter an aesthetic state. the eternal form [the essence]. time and causality. which lies outside of space. have passed out of all these forms of the principle 26 Ibid. to possess this insight. and thereby increases the power serving his will beyond that of his own body.26 Clearly then. as evidenced in the following passage: If. is eternally selfdivisive. the Idea. or essence. the object has to such an extent passed out of all relation to something outside it. . 334. Schopenhauer considers the concept of wrong to be intimately connected with the concept of power: The will of the first [the wrongdoer] breaks through the boundary of another’s affirmation of will. and its concept has been denoted by the word wrong. the immediate objectivity of the will at this grade…The pure subject of knowledge and its correlative. what is thus known is no longer the individual thing as such. which it deserves. revealing its nature in its highest objectification. he takes away the powers of this body. but these must only affect a person on the level of the human will. but the Idea. since the individual either destroys or injures this other body itself. instead of serving the will that appears in that body.

.12 of sufficient reason. this raises the difficulty of how the individual can deny the will when it is the pure subject that realises that the will is in conflict with itself. the individual that knows. as it is the will. it is the will that denies the will. to quote Julian Young. and so one still has a sense of causal impotence. Schopenhauer only refers to the dynamic sublime in connection with impersonal nature. one realises that it could not be the former. 1995). 179. 29 John Atwell. however.29 27 Ibid. Rather. if not insignificance. time and causality. Fortunately. Time. this objection has little weight. as there is initial discomfort and therefore a struggle to establish the pure subject of knowing. Immediately. though ‘in’ or ‘through’ an individual person. 116. Firstly. 160. as the essence of the dynamic sublime is. of the dynamically sublime kind. literally speaking. This is Schopenhauer’s own statement of what was said in footnote 12. As John Atwell puts it: Denial of the will is not. and more specifically. that ‘which makes us aware of our causal insignificance’. particulars are conditioned by space. It is therefore evident that it must be of the latter type. Ideas are known by the pure subject. To reiterate. and the individual that is known. For Schopenhauer. Schopenhauer (London: Routledge. there are three objections to such an analysis. As to the second objection. The answer to this is that the objection is based on a misunderstanding.27 A natural question to ask at this point is whether the aesthetic experience that arises is of the beautiful or sublime variety. as the reason for the hostility to the human will is a result of an exercise of power.28 One has already observed that the nature of wrong consists in the wronged being incapable of preventing the wrongdoer asserting his or her dominance. Schopenhauer On The Character Of The World: The Metaphysics Of Will (London: University of California Press. 2005).. whilst Ideas are only conditioned by being object for the pure subject. 28 Julian Young. have no meaning for them. something that an individual person can execute ‘at will’ (despite talk of voluntary asceticism). and so it can be construed as taking liberties with the text to apply it to the human realm. place. and not the individual who does the denying. and are universals. Unfortunately.

one can say that it is an erroneous claim. and it is this that justifies a strong link between the aesthetic and the ascetic. One can therefore characterise this particular dynamic sublime experience as one that cannot sustain itself. Consequently. albeit less powerfully. in that moment. Moreover. Whilst Schopenhauer 30 This passage raises two important points. even in this case the person would have to move through a dynamically sublime framework. and coming experientially to the insight that ‘tormentor and tormented are one’. is that it is most often30 through this form of dynamic sublime experience that the will learns its second ethical lesson. has no pain attached to it. As a result of this. The reason for this is that such a person would have to not feel their individual will that strongly. and the insight that they subsequently arrived at would involve reaching the aesthetic state via a struggle. such that ‘tormentor and tormented are one’. as there could be no exaltation in the will breaking free to become a pure subject of knowing to then discern that it is in conflict with itself. however. Over the course of this paper. as it fails to make precise phenomenological distinctions. the dynamic sublime nearly always has to be experienced in a certain form in order to progress to asceticism. namely that it is in conflict with itself. as an intimation that ‘tormentor and tormented are one’ would normally involve some degree of pain. whilst one can learn the first lesson by other means than the mathematically sublime experience. for the subject to learn the lesson of the ascetic through an experience of the beautiful. and the experience of the beautiful. The main point. the strong correlation between the dynamic sublime and the second lesson of the will is not negated even in the extremely rare case of someone being directly tortured or wronged. . In response to this. however. unlike that of the sublime. Secondly.13 Finally. precisely because the exaltation cannot be sustained. This is unlikely. there is the objection that the insight that leads to the ascetic position cannot come about as a result of a dynamic sublime experience. the reason that this correlation between the dynamic sublime and the second lesson of the will is not made more strongly is that it is possible. any discomfort would be more attributed to the human will. and would thus not be compelled to run away or retaliate. What this means is that there is some degree of exaltation in moving from being in discomfort to being a painless subject before the insight that leads to the ascetic position comes to pass. and therefore causes its own suffering. Firstly. one has seen how the mathematical sublime and dynamic sublime respectively teach the will its first and second ethical lesson.

14 himself never established the connection between the sublime and the moral. I write them down unconcerned how each will fit the whole. Vol. Thus originates an organic whole and only such a thing can live. he made the statement that: I become aware of one member. Manuscript Remains In Four Volumes. 31 Arthur Schopenhauer. and very much does live. one blood vessel.31 One can therefore say that an investigation of the connection between the sublime and the moral is not only important on its own basis. for I know that it is all sprung from one basis.1 (London: Berg. 234. one part of another.e. but also as it provides a concrete illustration that his system is indeed a unity. i. . 1988).

Indianapolis: Hackett. Manuscript Remains in Four Volumes. Schopenhauer. Vol. New York: Dover. London: University of California Press. edited by Dale Jacquette (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.15 Bibliography Atwell. . Atwell. The World As Will And Representation. 1988. Arthur. 1. ‘Art as liberation. 2005. On the Basis of Morality. Schopenhauer. Vol. London: Routledge. Arthur. Young. London: Berg. John. 1996). Arthur.1.’In Schopenhauer. Schopenhauer. 1995. Philosophy and the Arts. Translated by E. 1995. Schopenhauer.J. Payne. Schopenhauer On The Character Of The World: The Metaphysics Of Will. 1969. John. Julian.