ently a ground of faith in
the supremacy of the good.

FOOTNOTES

1 Schopenhauer, indeed, who makes much of it, was a good critic,
but his psychology suffered much from the pessimistic generalities
of his system. It concerned him to show that the will was bad, and,
as he felt beauty to be a good if not a holy thing, he hastened to
convince himself that it came from the suppression of the will. But
even in his system this suppression is only relative. The desire of
individual objects, indeed, is absent in the perception of beauty,
but there is still present that initial love of the general type and
principles of things which is the first illusion of the absolute, and
drives it on to the fatal experiment of creation. So that, apart from
Schopenhauer's mythology, we have even in him the recognition
that beauty gives satisfaction to some dim and underlying demand
of our nature, just as particular objects give more special and
momentary pleasures to our individualized wills. His psychology
was, however, far too vague and general to undertake an analysis
of those mysterious feelings.

2 Cf. Stendhal, _De L'Amour, passim._

3 This is not the place to enter into a discussion of the
metaphysical value of the idea of space. Suffice it to point out that
in human experience serviceable knowledge of our environment is
to be had only in spatial symbols, and, for whatever reason or
accident, this is the language which the mind must speak if it is to
advance in clearness and efficiency.

4 The discussion is limited in this chapter to visible form, audible
form is probably capable of a parallel treatment, but requires
studies too technical for this place.

5 The relation to stability also makes us sensitive to certain kinds
of symmetry; but this is an adventitious consideration with which
we are not concerned.

6 Cf. Fechner, _Vorschule der Aesthetik,_ Erster Theil, S. 73, a
passage by which the following classification of forms was first
suggested.

7 See Introduction, p. 12.

8 The contention of Burke that the beautiful is small is due to an
arbitrary definition. By beautiful he means pretty and charming;
agreeable as opposed to impressive. He only exaggerates the then
usual opposition of the beautiful to the sublime.

9 When we speak of things definite in themselves, we of course
mean things made definite by some human act of definition. The
senses are instruments that define and differentiate sensation; and