Schiller's *Letters on the Aesthetic Education of Man* argued that aesthetic experience — the contemplation of beauty — could bridge the gap between reason and feeling, producing moral improvement. Kant similarly suggested that the experience of the Sublime reveals the noumenal (beyond sense experience) dimension of reality. But Shelley's novel challenges both: Victor experiences beauty DEEPLY yet remains morally bankrupt — his aesthetic sensitivity has NOT made him a better person. This is a profound critique of Romantic aesthetics: the assumption that feeling beauty makes you good is exposed as a dangerous illusion. Victor's case proves that aesthetic sensitivity and moral responsibility are separate capacities — you can feel everything and still do nothing. Shelley thus complicates the central Romantic claim that beauty leads to goodness, presenting a character who demonstrates their complete independence.