Context: Plato seemed to leave the Arts in a position of having to defend themselves and their service to all that Reason would accomplish in the soul of the person and the health of the city. Each in his own way, Schiller, Schopenhauer, and Nietzsche offer that defense. Schiller claims, for example, that an aesthetics transformation of society will complete the shaping power of reason such that political freedom will be attained. Schopenhauer, for example, claims that aesthetics experience offers one a glimpse of the eternal Ideas,E a knowledge of truths unencumbered by Will or the limits of nonrepresentational thinking. Nietzsche, for example, claims that the marriage of the Apollinaire and Dionysian drives embodied (in ancient Greek tragedy and culture) an empowering nearness to the metaphoric basis of truth as opposed to the abstractions of intellectual concepts.E Overall, one might conclude that (a) these developments gradually establish a liberating gap between Reason and Imagination, privileging the latter. Alternatively, one might say that (b) the developments recover and animate a deep truth-serving kinship between the two.
Question: Write an essay that: (1) explains each thinkers most important ideas on the Reasoner relationship; (2) determines whether a/b (noted above), or somewhere in between, is the right account; and (3) argues for your own view on the Reasoner relationship by way of response.
Note: If you used Schiller in your last essay do not simply repurposed that exact material in this one.If it helps your case, you may briefly (say, 1 page) refer to a work of art (as a contributor to the conversation. If you do so you may go 6pp total. If you refer to an image, please include it as an appendix (wont count toward total page count).
Use your Introduction to set up the topic and indicate how your argument will proceed in treating the three parts of the question. Keep in mind that the assignment needs to be written in a systematic way, skillfully involves several brief textual quotations per paragraph, and advances a case for the best understanding of the topic as it is treated in the texts and the inter-textual conversation.
