ABSTRACT
Connections between moral and artistic value have pre-occupied philosophers at least since Plato and Aristotle, but have really exercised Anglo-American aestheticians for the past twenty years. Two main questions lie at the heart of this debate: Is ethical criticism of art legitimate? And do artworks in general have an edifying, corrupting, or ethically neutral influence on us? Much scholarly ink has been spilled on what Kant had to say here, but it is not clear what Schopenhauer has to say on these questions. This chapter argues that Schopenhauer, like Kant, makes no real trouble for the ethical criticism of art, despite the fact that for both thinkers aesthetic experience is disinterested (or, in Schopenhauer's formulation, will-less [willenlos; interesselos]). But the reasons for the legitimacy of ethical criticism differ between them. On the second question—regarding aesthetic education—the chapter argues that there is a striking difference between them, one that makes Schopenhauer the philosopher who goes further in the direction of autonomism, in theorizing a greater separation than Kant had done between the moral and aesthetic realms.
