Nietzsche and The Sublime

For Kant, the connection between Aesthetics and Morality is one of analogy, i. e. that Beauty is a symbol of the Good. But, in his System, the highest Good is Rational Virtue being rewarded with Happiness, so, a specifically accurate Artistic symbol of it would be a presentation of 'poetic justice'. Furthermore, in a Morality such as Spinoza's, in which Morality consists in Reason's independence from and indifference to one's suffering, the symbol of the Good would entail the Sublime, not Beauty, and Reason's superiority to it, e. g. one of Plato's depictions of Socrates, insofar as it is fictitious. Now, while for Schopenhauer, Music is an expression of the Sublime, it is not, in itself a symbol of the Good. For, for him, Morality consists in the selfless contemplation of Beautiful Form, as relief from life's tribulations, and while Music may exhibit such Form, it does not exhibit the contemplation of it. In contrast, Nietzsche finds in Tragedy, a symbol of Morality that entails the Sublime. First, he represents the latter as the 'Dionysian' principle, the source of cosmic suffering to presumed individuals. Later, the embracing of the Sublime, which he represents as the affirmation of Eternal Recurrence, is the closest element of his System to a Moral Principle. Hence, the acceptance of fate in Tragedy, e. g. Oedipus', is the Sublime functioning as a symbol of Morality. Nietzsche thus accomplishes what some of his predecessors trend towards, the supplanting of Beauty by the Sublime as the cardinal Aesthetic principle.