Letters
Upon The Aesthetic Education of Man (1794)
Schiller is the intellectual history of Germany. His
did work in history and philosophy. In the letter he wrote “Esthetic Education”
his given the philosophic basic for is doctrine of art and his view of the
place of beauty in human life. This letter was inspired by the disenchantment
Schiller felt about the France Revolution. He wrote the letter as a
philosophical inquiry into what had gone wrong and how to prevent such
tragedies in the future.
In letter 1, it will be about
Beauty and Art , his want show his researches about
beauty and art. The author explain with regard to the
ideas which predominate in the practical part of Kant's system, philosophers
only disagree, whilst mankind, his very confident of proving, have never done
so. His also has explain about his investigation where on is compelled to
appeal as frequently to feeling as to principles. Other than that, his say like
the chemist the philosopher finds synthesis only by analysis, or spontaneous works
of nature only through the torture of art. Thus in order to detain the fleeting
apparition, he must enchain it in the fetters of rule, dissect its fair
proportions into abstract notions, and preserve its living spirit in a
fleshless skeleton of words.
In letter 2, Art is can be distinguished from
utility and science is the second part of the letter . highlighted by
Schiller. But the voice of our age seems by no means favorable
to art, at all events to that kind of art to which his inquiry is directed.
For
art has to leave reality, it has to raise itself bodily above necessity and
neediness; for art is the daughter of freedom, and it requires its
prescriptions and rules to be furnished by the necessity of spirits and not by
that of matter Utility is the great idol of the time,
to which all powers do homage and all subjects are subservient. Conclusion in
this, his very hope that his shall succeed in convincing to us that this matter
of art is less foreign to the needs than to the tastes of our age; nay, that,
to arrive at a solution even in the political problem, the road of aesthetics
must be pursued. It is because it is through beauty that
his arrive at freedom.
In letter 3, he want tell about the realm of nature,
within which man lives, does not contain all of man: the work of reason allows
man to transcends the bounds of nature by elevating physical necessity into
moral necessity, from the state of nature to the moral state–without, however,
jeopardizing the realm of nature that nourishes man. Man
is not better treated by nature in his first start than her other works are;
he
can convert the work of necessity into one of free solution, and elevate
physical necessity into a moral law. It is to prevent physical society from
ceasing for a moment in time, while the moral society is being formed in the
idea; in other words, to prevent its existence from being placed in jeopardy,
for the sake of the moral dignity of man.
In letter 4, he want explain about the state of
nature works by compulsion, while the moral state works through freedom and
rational choice. Consequently, when reason brings her
moral unity into physical society, she must not injure the manifold in nature.
When nature strives to maintain her manifold character in the moral structure
of society, this must not create any breach in moral unity; the victorious form
is equally remote from uniformity and confusion. Therefore, totality of
character must be found in the people which is capable and worthy to exchange
the state of necessity for that of freedom.
In letter 5, he explain to us about the present state is characterized by lower
classes governed “animal satisfactions,” while the higher classes exhibit and
even more disgusting ”lethargy” in the form of unfettered egotism. Egotism
has founded its system in the very bosom of a refined society, and without
developing even a sociable character, we feel all the contagions and miseries
of society. We subject our free judgment to its despotic opinions, our feelings
to its bizarre customs, and our will to its seductions. Thus
the spirit of the time is seen to waver between perversions and savagism,
between what is unnatural and mere nature, between superstition and moral
unbelief, and it is often nothing but the equilibrium of evils that sets bounds
to it.
For conclusion, in this all letter what I know this
book very hard to understand what his want tell to us because all the letter
has a deep meaning to understanding. What I know his want tell to us his want
to build this world so that it can be properly arranged in a good ways. His
also give the difference about all the thing it look to explain to us. And this
is the conclusion I should give. Thank you.
