Friedrich Nietzsche on Tragedy: Why Do We Like Tragic Art?

Author: Matthew Sanderson
Categories: Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art, Phenomenology and Existentialism, Historical Philosophy
Word Count: 999

Tragic art is creative work that depicts the painful and catastrophic aspects of life. A classic example is the genre of theatre called “tragedy.” Like tragedy in real life, tragic art makes us feel unpleasant emotions, such as fear and sadness. Unlike real-life tragedy, however, we also like and derive aesthetic pleasure from such art.

Philosophers call this “the paradox of tragedy.” The bittersweet pleasure caused by tragic art is known in philosophy as the “tragic effect,” and there’s much debate about exactly why we enjoy such art.^[1] 

This essay summarizes German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche’s (1844-1900) theory of why we enjoy tragic art.^[2]

1. Dionysian Reality and Art

In his 1872 book The Birth of Tragedy, Nietzsche says we like tragic art because of its existential value, i.e., how it helps us cope with “the terror and horror of existence”—specifically death and suffering.^[3] Tragic art does this, according to Nietzsche, by allowing us to feel “one” with what he calls the Dionysian, the indestructible life force at the heart of nature. Identifying with the Dionysian is comforting because it makes us feel immortal and puts our suffering into perspective.

Nietzsche defines the Dionysian as both a type of reality and a kind of art.^[4] Dionysian art causes an experience of Dionysian reality, which he understands as the undifferentiated, formless unity or “oneness” many people seem to perceive in ecstatic experiences such as sex and listening to music.^[5] Nietzsche thinks of Dionysian reality as an eternal energy at the core of nature—a wild and chaotic life force that flows through all things.^[6]

Because Nietzsche views this energy as eternal, he thinks ecstatic experiences where we “lose” ourselves and feel “one” with Dionysian life give us a sense of vicarious immortality. They also provide us with a “zoomed out,” big-picture perspective on our suffering.^[7]

Dionysian art causes us to undergo such ecstatic experiences and thereby feel absorbed in Dionysian reality.^[8] Nietzsche considers music the ultimate Dionysian art because it’s not an object in physical space (unlike, e.g., sculpture). Thus, music seems formless, allowing us to feel in touch with formless Dionysian life.^[9]

2. Apollonian Reality and Art

Nietzsche contrasts the Dionysian with the Apollonian, which also refers to both an aspect of reality and a type of art.^[10] Apollonian reality is the everyday world of different finite, individual beings (e.g., people, objects, etc.) perceived in space and time by ordinary consciousness.^[11] Apollonian art is depictions of these beings made beautiful (e.g., still life painting).^[12] Apollonian art is then Apollonian reality beautified.^[13]

Nietzsche compares Apollonian art to dreams because, he says, such art consists of beautiful dream-like illusions.^[14] Nietzsche thinks they are illusions in the sense that the artworks make Apollonian beings (e.g., people, fruit, etc.) appear more attractive than they really are.^[15] For instance, portraits typically depict people in a flattering light, omitting flaws (e.g., skin blemishes). Thus, Nietzsche believes a kind of aesthetically pleasing deception is involved in Apollonian art.^[16]

3. Tragic Art

The best tragic art, for Nietzsche, involves an ideal combination of the Apollonian and the Dionysian.^[17] That combination gives us a sense of our mortality as finite Apollonian beings, but an even stronger sense of Dionysian immortality and perspective.^[18] As a result, tragic art helps us to cope with both death and suffering.

For instance, in classic tragedies, a person (i.e., a finite Apollonian being) experiences tragic circumstances (e.g., arrogance causes a downfall). This “tragic hero,” according to Nietzsche, represents the weakness and limitations of humanity, thereby symbolizing our finitude and suffering as Apollonian beings. Thus, by identifying with the tragic hero, we feel fearful upon realizing we too are finite Apollonian beings who suffer.^[19]

However, Nietzsche says the Dionysian music or “soundtrack” in the tragedy—traditionally, the chorus—intoxicates us, causing us to feel absorbed in eternal Dionysian life.^[20] This gives us a joyful feeling of immortality that consoles us in response to the fearful realization of our mortality.^[21] Thus, Dionysian art and reality comfort us in the face of Apollonian finitude.^[22]

However, Dionysian reality is itself also terrifying because it seems formless and therefore overwhelming, like a stormy sea.^[23] Furthermore, Dionysian reality is not a caring heavenly being, but instead a non-personal energy indifferent to the concerns of humanity. As a result, Nietzsche thinks it’s too scary to directly identify with Dionysian life (e.g., via the tragic chorus) without the help of Apollonian beauty.^[24]

Nietzsche says that the genius of classic tragedies is that they allow us to experience and feel “one” with Dionysian life through beautiful Apollonian beings.^[25] They do this simply by being works of Apollonian art. As such, they focus our attention on an imaginary but familiar (i.e., ordinary, non-Dionysian) world of beautified Apollonian reality: poetic dialogue, captivating performers, and dramatic action.^[26] This beautiful illusion rescues us from staring directly into the terrifying abyss of the formless Dionysian reality (i.e., becoming completely “lost” in the music).^[27]

Thus, in a tragedy, music and the eternal life of Dionysian reality save us from the horrific mortality of Apollonian reality, but the beautiful Apollonian art protects us from the overwhelming formlessness of Dionysian life.^[28]

Because Nietzsche also thinks Dionysian reality is universal and therefore everywhere, identifying with it gives us a big-picture, God’s-eye-view perspective.^[29] From this grand-scheme-of-things viewpoint it appears that everything, including even our suffering, happens for a reason.^[30] For instance, just as dissonance can contribute to the overall beauty of a song, suffering might seem to happen for the purpose of making life appear more beautiful as a whole—the sour that helps life taste sweeter overall.^[31] Thus, for Nietzsche, we like tragic art because it soothes and consoles us as mortals who suffer.^[32]

4. Conclusion

Nietzsche thinks Dionysian life is too “monstrous”—e.g., uncaring and overwhelming—for us to identify with it in the absence of dream-like Apollonian beauty. Thus, aesthetic deception is necessary for Dionysian comfort. The question, though, is whether we still find it comforting once we realize we’ve been deceived.^[33]

Notes

^[1] For an introduction to the philosophy of tragedy, see Young (2013), Eagleton (2002), Eagleton (2020), and Poole (2005). The philosophy of tragedy is a sub-field of philosophy called aesthetics and the philosophy of art. For an introduction to this sub-field, see Aesthetics vs. Art and Definitions of Art, both by Brock Rough.

^[2] This essay summarizes major ideas in Nietzsche’s book The Birth of Tragedy, first published in 1872. For helpful commentary on this book, see Young (1994), Young (2006), Daniels (2013), Burnham and Jesinghausen (2010), Allison (2001), and Ridley (2007). Nietzsche develops his theory primarily to understand the existential value of the genre of drama known as tragedy, but it is clear he believes it applies to other forms of tragic art as well. For instance, Nietzsche wrote The Birth of Tragedy in part as a tribute to the music of Richard Wagner, which Nietzsche believed heralded a renaissance of tragic art in society. Thus, it’s possible to view Nietzsche’s theory of tragedy as a general theory of tragic art (i.e., tragic art of all kinds), not just a theory of tragedy in drama. For an introduction to some key aspects of Nietzsche’s philosophy overall, see “God is dead”: Friederich Nietzsche and the Death of God by Justin Remhof.

^[3] Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 42) writes that tragic art helps us cope with “the terror and horror of existence.” Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 42) writes that tragic art was born from “a most profound need”—i.e., the need to cope with suffering and death. Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 43) says that tragic art was designed to help us cope with suffering.

For an introduction to philosophical reflections on death and mortality, see Is Death Bad? Epicurus and Lucretius on the Fear of Death by Frederik Kaufman, The Badness of Death by Duncan Purves, and Is Immortality Desirable? by Felipe Pereira. Nietzsche’s focus on the existential value of tragedy can be understood as an attempt to understand the role that tragic art plays in the meaning of life. For an introduction to what philosophers have said on the meaning of life, see Meaning in Life: What Makes Our Lives Meaningful? and The Meaning of Life: What’s the Point?, both by Matthew Pianalto. Nietzsche’s theory of tragedy can be considered an existentialist interpretation of tragedy. For an introduction to existentialism, see Existentialism by Addison Ellis and Albert Camus on the Absurd: The Myth of Sisyphus by Erik Van Aken.

^[4] Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 49) says his concepts of Apollonian and Dionysian make up an “aesthetical metaphysics.” Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 59) refers to “the worlds of everyday reality [i.e., Apollonian reality, the reality of individuals] and of Dionysian reality.”

^[5] Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 37) calls the Dionysian reality “the mysterious primordial unity [i.e., formless oneness],” “the truly existent primal unity,” and (p. 132) “the primordially One” which he says (p. 36) we experience in “blissful ecstasy.” Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 43) writes that Dionysian intoxication consists of “oneness of man with nature [i.e., Dionysian reality].”  Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 143) describes Dionysian reality as “the foundation of all existence” and the “basic ground of the world [i.e., the core or heart of all things].” Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 62) describes Dionysian reality as “the eternal life of this core of existence which abides through the perpetual destruction of appearances.”

^[6] Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 37) locates Dionysian reality in nature. Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 38) identifies Dionysian reality as an energy from nature. For evidence that Nietzsche thinks of Dionysian reality as wild and chaotic in nature, see his claim (1967/1872: p. 39) that ancient peoples experienced this reality during “festivals centered in extravagant sexual licentiousness” where “the most savage natural instincts were unleashed, including even that horrible mixture of sensuality and cruelty…” Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 127) also compares Dionysian reality to a “thundering current.”

Nietzsche (see, e.g., 1967/1872: p. 104) can also be interpreted as arguing that Dionysian reality is equivalent to Schopenhauer’s concept of the will as the thing-in-itself.

^[7] Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 36) writes that it is in “blissful ecstasy” that “we steal a glimpse into the nature of the Dionysian.” Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 38) writes that we experience Dionysian reality in “a mystic feeling of oneness” and “mystical self-abnegation.” For an introduction to the philosophy of mysticism, see Philosophy of Mysticism: Do Mystical Experiences Justify Religious Beliefs? and William James on Mystical Experience, both by Matthew Sanderson. Mystical experiences are a type of religious experience. For an introduction to the philosophy of religious experience, see Richard Swinburne on Religious Experience and Rudolf Otto on “Numinous” Religious Experience, both by Matthew Sanderson.

^[8] Nietzsche (1967/1872: pp. 33-37) refers to the experience of Dionysian art as intoxication. Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 36) writes that in Dionysian intoxication “everything subjective vanishes into complete self-forgetfulness [i.e., we ‘lose’ ourselves].” Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 46) writes of “the self-oblivion [i.e., the loss of self or ‘ego-death’] of the Dionysian states.”

^[9] Paintings and sculptures appear as finite objects located in and limited to specific physical locations in space. They have clear boundaries and borders demarcating where they leave off and other things begin. For instance, when viewing them, it is clear where they leave off and the surrounding space in which they appear begins, and it is clear where they leave off and the viewers who are experiencing them begin. When I view paintings and sculptures, I am aware of a basic difference between myself here and the paintings and sculptures over there. Music, on the other hand, seems to be everywhere all at once; it seems to surround listeners on all sides; we feel immersed in it, and it even seems to be inside our bodies, the sound reverberating in our ears and the bass thumping in our chests. When I’m listening to music, there seems to be no difference between myself and the music—no sense that I am here but the music is over there. Instead, the music seems to be all around me and even in me: I feel “one” with the music. While the speaker from which the music is emanating might be a visible, finite object located in physical space, the music itself does not appear as an object limited by its own form; instead, music seems formless, even infinite. Thus, music, for Nietzsche, puts us in touch with the formless reality of the Dionysian.

Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 100) says that music is “the Dionysian art” which is (p. 33) “nonimagistic [i.e., formless].” Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 40) writes, “The very element which forms the essence of Dionysian music (and hence of music in general) is carefully excluded as un-Apollonian—namely, the emotional power of the tone, the uniform flow of the melody, and the utterly incomparable world of harmony.” Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 49) writes that musicians “[produce] the copy of this primal unity [i.e., the Dionysian reality] as music.” Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 55) writes that music symbolizes the Dionysian reality.

If Nietzsche (see, e.g., 1967/1872: pp. 51, 103, 107) is interpreted as arguing that Dionysian reality is Schopenhauer’s concept of the will as the thing-in-itself, he can be understood as agreeing with Schopenhauer that music expresses the emotional movement of the will. However, see Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 55) for an example of where he seems to contrast his view with Schopenhauer’s.

^[10] While Nietzsche’s focus in this book is on tragedy, he considers the Apollonian and Dionysian to be the basis of all art, writing (1967/1872: p. 33) that “the continuous development of art is bound up with the Apollonian and Dionysian duality.” Nietzsche says (1967/1872: p. 33) he borrows the ideas of the Apollonian and Dionysian from the ancient Greek world that opposed “the Apollonian art of sculpture, and the nonimagistic, Dionysian art of music.”

^[11] Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 46) writes that Apollonian reality consists of “the individual, i.e., the delimiting of the boundaries of the individual [i.e., any individuated object or being].” Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 65) writes of the “Apollonian world of images [i.e., individuals or beings].”

^[12] Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 36) writes that Apollonian art is “the glorious divine image [i.e., the beautiful image] of the principium individuationis [i.e., the principle of individuation, or Apollonian reality], through whose gestures and eyes all the joy and wisdom of ‘illusion,’ together with its beauty, speak to us.” Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 66) writes of “the Apollonian state of dreams [i.e., the experience of beautiful Apollonian reality] in which the world of the day [i.e., the everyday Apollonian reality of ordinary consciousness] becomes veiled, and a new world, clearer, more understandable, more moving than the everyday world and yet more shadowy [i.e., more beautiful but also more dream-like and illusory].” Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 100) identifies Apollonian art as “beautiful forms [i.e., beautiful beings or objects].”

^[13] Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 99) writes that Apollonian art is “the transfiguring genius of the principium individuationis [i.e., the beautifying genius of the principle of individuation or Apollonian individual beings].”

^[14] Nietzsche (1967/1872: pp. 33-34) compares Apollonian art to dreams. Nietzsche says (1967/1872: p. 34) the “dream worlds” of Apollonian art consist of “beautiful illusions.” Nietzsche writes (1967/1872: p. 34), “In our dreams we delight in the immediate understanding of figures; all forms speak to us; there is nothing unimportant or superfluous.” In other words, everything appears beautiful in pleasant dreams.

^[15] Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 34) writes that Apollonian art, like illusions in dreams, consists of “mere appearance.”

^[16] Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 104) writes that Apollonian art consists of “lies.” Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 126) refers to Apollonian art as a “noble deception.”

^[17] Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 33) writes that tragedy involves a “coupling” of the Apollonian and Dionysian in “an equally Dionysian and Apollonian form of art—Attic tragedy.” Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 81) writes that tragedy consists of “the expression of two interwoven artistic impulses, the Apollonian and the Dionysian.”

^[18] Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 131) writes that while a tragedy causes us to “shudder,” it ultimately makes us feel “a higher, much more overpowering joy.” While Nietzsche’s focus is dramatic tragedy, it’s clear that his formula and standards for what counts as good tragic art can apply to any art (e.g., music, painting, sculpture, etc.) that gives the experiencer a sense of their mortality but an even stronger sense of immortality and perspective.

^[19] Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 104) writes that tragedy communicates to us that “[w]e are to recognize that all that comes into being [i.e., all individual Apollonian beings] must be ready for a sorrowful end [i.e., death]; we are forced to look into the terrors [i.e., the mortality and suffering] of the individual existence.”

^[20] Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 56) locates the aesthetic origin of tragedy in the chorus. Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 59) writes, “The metaphysical comfort—with which, I am suggesting even now, every true tragedy leaves us—that life [i.e., Dionysian life] is at the bottom of things, despite all the changes of appearances, indestructibly powerful and pleasurable—this comfort appears in incarnate clarity in the chorus…”

^[21] Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 104) writes, “The metaphysical joy in the tragic is a translation of the instinctive unconscious Dionysian wisdom [i.e., that Dionysian life is eternal] into the language of images [i.e., beautiful Apollonian reality]: the hero…is negated for our pleasure, because he is only phenomenon [i.e., a finite Apollonian being], and because the eternal life [i.e., Dionysian life]…is not affected by his annihilation. ‘We believe in eternal life,’ exclaims tragedy; while music is the immediate idea [i.e., expression] of this life.”

^[22] Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 131) writes that the spectator of tragedy “shudders at the sufferings which will befall the hero, and yet anticipates in them a higher, much more overpowering joy [i.e., the metaphysical comfort provided by identifying with Dionysian reality].”

^[23] This is a common example of what philosophers call an experience of the sublime. Nietzsche (1967/1872: pp. 45, 47, 60, 62, 124) compares the experience of Dionysian reality to the experience of the sublime. For an introduction to the philosophy of the sublime, see Immanuel Kant’s Theory of the Sublime by Matthew Sanderson. As sublime, Dionysian reality would be an example of what philosopher Jean-Luc Marion calls a “saturated phenomenon.” For an introduction to Marion’s concept of “saturated phenomena,” see Jean-Luc Marion on ‘Saturated Phenomena’: What Are Mind-blowing Experiences? by Matthew Sanderson.

^[24] Nietzsche (1967/1872: pp. 39-40) writes of how scary it is to directly identify in experience with Dionysian life, that “horrible mixture of sensuality and cruelty.” Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 45) writes that experiencing Dionysian reality requires the “pleasurable illusion” of Apollonian art.

^[25] In other words, tragedy involves the Apollonian beautification of Dionysian life, like an Instagram filter laid over a photo of a hurricane. Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 48) calls the specific combination of Dionysian and Apollonian elements in tragedy “genius.” Nietzsche (1967/1872: pp. 64-65) writes, “we must understand Greek tragedy as the Dionysian chorus which ever anew discharges itself in an Apollonian world of images.” Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 65) writes that in tragedy the Apollonian elements of characters, actions, and scenes ultimately serve as vehicles for the Dionysian chorus, thereby shielding spectators from the full brunt of Dionysian reality. Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 92) says that the “essence of tragedy” is “a manifestation and projection into images [i.e., beautiful Apollonian beings] of Dionysian states, as the visible [i.e., the Apollonian] symbolizing of music, as the dream-world [i.e., the beautiful Apollonian reality] of a Dionysian intoxication.” Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 131) writes that tragic art is “a symbolization of Dionysian wisdom through Apollonian artifices.”

^[26] Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 128) writes that, in a tragedy, “thought and word save us from the uninhibited effusion” of Dionysian reality. “Thus the Apollonian tears us out of the Dionysian universality and lets us find delight in individuals [i.e., Apollonian beings]; it attaches our pity to them, and by means of them it satisfies our sense of beauty which longs for great and sublime forms; it presents images [i.e., Apollonian beings] of life to us, and incites us to comprehend in thought the core of life they contain.”

^[27] Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 89) refers to “Dionysian abysses.” Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 129) writes that part of the purpose of “Apollonian illusion” in a tragedy is “to deliver us from the Dionysian flood and excess.”

^[28]  Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 139) writes, “Among the peculiar art effects of musical tragedy we had to emphasize an Apollonian illusion by means of which we were supposed to be saved from immediate unity with Dionysian music, while our musical excitement could discharge itself in an Apollonian field and in relation to a visible intermediary world that had been interposed.” Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 46) writes that the Ancient Greeks discovered that “Apollo could not live without Dionysus [i.e., that Dionysian art and reality are necessary for saving us from the finitude of Apollonian reality].”

^[29] Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 71) says that the spectator of a tragedy seems “to attain universality [i.e., to attain a universal perspective]…to transcend the curse of individuation and to become the one world-being [i.e., Dionysian reality].” Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 112) writes that via tragedy we attain “a comprehensive [i.e., big-picture, God’s-eye] view of the world.”

^[30] Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 41) writes that, from the standpoint of Dionysian reality, “all things, whether good or evil, are deified.” Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 43) writes that tragic art provides “the only satisfactory theodicy [i.e., theory that everything happens for a reason].” Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 45) writes that experiences of tragic art “show us how necessary is the entire world of suffering [i.e., necessary for creating the beauty of existence overall].” Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 52) writes that “it is only as an aesthetic phenomenon that existence and the world are eternally justified [i.e., it is only through art that suffering seems justified or as though it happens for a reason].” Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 104) writes that when we attain the Dionysian perspective “the struggle, the pain, the destruction of phenomena, now appear necessary [i.e., necessary for some purpose or reason] to us.” Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 143) writes that music and tragedy help us attain the Dionysian perspective and thereby “justify the existence of even the ‘worst world.’” For an introduction to how philosophers have attempted to make religious sense of death and suffering, see The Problem of Evil by Thomas Metcalf.

^[31] Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 141) explicitly compares musical dissonance to suffering and says that, from the Dionysian perspective, “The joy aroused by the tragic myth has the same origin as the joyous sensation of dissonance in music.”

^[32] Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 43) writes that tragic art allows us to “[triumph] over an abysmal and terrifying view of the world and the keenest susceptibility to suffering through recourse to the most forceful and pleasurable illusions.” Nietzsche (1967/1872: p. 108) writes that without “metaphysical comfort”—i.e., Dionysian immortality and perspective on suffering—“the delight in tragedy [i.e., why we like tragic art] cannot be explained at all.”

^[33] See Young (1994) for this criticism of Nietzsche’s theory. Nietzsche’s answer (1967/1872: p. 5) seems to be “yes” because he claims Ancient Greek audiences knew the metaphysical comfort provided by tragedy was an aesthetic deception and yet, just as we enjoy dreaming even after we’ve become aware that we are dreaming, they still found it life-affirming and inspiring, if only because tragedy offered a vision of, and thereby hope in the possibility of, overcoming death and suffering.

References

Allison, David B. (2001). Reading the New Nietzsche. Rowman and Littlefield Publishers.

Aristotle. (1997/c. 400 BC). Poetics. Penguin Classics.

Burnham, Douglas and Jesinghausen, Martin. (2010). Nietzsche’s The Birth of Tragedy. Continuum.

Daniels, Paul Raimond. (2013). Nietzsche and The Birth of Tragedy. Routledge.

Eagleton, Terry. (2002). Sweet Violence: The Idea of the Tragic. Wiley-Blackwell.

Eagleton, Terry. (2020). Tragedy. Yale University Press.

Nietzsche, Friedrich. (1967/1872). The Birth of Tragedy and the Case of Wagner. Penguin Random House.

Poole, Adrian. (2005). Tragedy: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press.

Ridley, Aaron. (2007). Nietzsche on Art. Routledge.

Young, Julian. (2013). The Philosophy of Tragedy: From Plato to Zizek. Cambridge University Press.

Young, Julian. (1994). Nietzsche’s Philosophy of Art. Cambridge University Press.

Young, Julian. (2006). Nietzsche’s Philosophy of Religion. Cambridge University Press.

Related Essays

Aesthetics vs. Art by Brock Rough

Definitions of Art by Brock Rough

Ecstatic Experiences: The Philosophy of ‘Losing Yourself’ by Matthew Sanderson

Albert Camus on the Absurd: The Myth of Sisyphus by Erik Van Aken

Existentialism by Addison Ellis

“God is dead”: Friedrich Nietzsche and the Death of God by Justin Remhof

Immanuel Kant’s Theory of the Sublime by Matthew Sanderson

Jean-Luc Marion on ‘Saturated Phenomena’: What Are Mind-blowing Experiences? by Matthew Sanderson

The Badness of Death by Duncan Purves

Is Death Bad? Epicurus and Lucretius on the Fear of Death by Frederik Kaufman

Is Immortality Desirable? by Felipe Pereira

Meaning in Life: What Makes Our Lives Meaningful? by Matthew Pianalto

The Meaning of Life: What’s the Point? by Matthew Pianalto

The Problem of Evil by Thomas Metcalf

Philosophy of Mysticism: Do Mystical Experiences Justify Religious Beliefs? by Matthew Sanderson

Richard Swinburne on Religious Experience by Matthew Sanderson

Rudolf Otto on “Numinous” Religious Experience by Matthew Sanderson

William James on Mystical Experience by Matthew Sanderson

PDF Download

Download this essay in PDF. 

About the Author

Matthew Sanderson is Professor of Philosophy and Ethics at West Shore Community College in Scottville, Michigan. He specializes in philosophy of religion, aesthetics, and 19th and 20th-century continental philosophy. philpeople.org/profiles/matthew-sanderson

Follow 1000-Word Philosophy on Facebook, Bluesky, Instagram, Twitter / X, Threads, and LinkedIn, and subscribe to receive email notifications of new essays at 1000WordPhilosophy.com.