本文試圖藉由齊美爾（Georg Simmel）的社會學觀點指出現代個體的困境，並且參照齊美爾的美學觀點作為個體的出路。假若在大都會生活的社會互動中所面臨的冷漠和物化是個體能動性的宿命，那麼社會衝突和分化的機制就是個體能動性的機會。本文首先藉由「應然」的倫理學前提理解齊美爾個體生命的能動特性。然後，本文將此倫理置入理性社會與感性藝術的雙元環境中考察應然個體的可能。最後，本文將要以十九世紀印象派畫作為理論闡釋的實踐案例，意即從印象派的繪畫風格中經驗證成並且反身思考個體性的概念。 本論文的理論概念和經驗案例一致指向十九世紀作為我們討論的關鍵時期。這一方面是由於當時的西歐社會在政治面經歷了激烈的轉變（例如法國大革命促進了自由與平等的價值），此外經濟面也有了重大的改變（比如工業革命帶動了科技和藝術的發明）。但是，若我們僅是把政治經濟的理性史作為研究焦點，則將會陷入階級、國族或是群眾等集體現實的客觀陷阱，更別說已預設了革命的世俗神學。相對而言，藝術作品經常以非人事物的潛在形象當作客體追求，因而有別於政治事件總是以人群的顯著意義激化主體思辨。再者，此時社會的經濟面已明顯地趨向理性化發展，也使得人們倍感個體性喪失的威脅。因而，深入考察藝術創作與工業技術的奮戰或許反而較有助於發現個體性的潛能。 工業發展造就了攝影技術的產生，並使得傳統的繪畫藝術遭受挑戰。在擬真程度上，繪畫雖然永遠比不上攝影精準，然而印象派注重光與影的效果卻為藝術創作找到了新路。畫作上感性的自我表露反而得以創造攝影技術難以觸及的生命層次。莫內（Claude Monet）的自然紀錄與與卡莎特（Mary Stevenson Cassatt）的社會觀察儼然都是印象派藝術家以獨特的藝術作品具體實踐個體性的豐碩成果。 / This thesis attempts to illustrate the predicament of the modern individual from the sociological viewpoint of Georg Simmel. We assume that the aesthetical viewpoint of Georg Simmel could be the way out for the individual. Given the indifference and objectification of social interaction in the metropolis is the fate of individual agency, the mechanism of social conflict and differentiation is the opportunity for individual agency. This study begins with Georg Simmel’s theory that we utilize the ethics of ‘sollen’ (ought) to interpret the agency of the individual’s life. After depicting the outline of the Georg Simmel’s ethics, we place the theory into the dual condition set by rational society and affective art to explore the possibility of the ‘sollen’ individual. In the final part, we take some paintings from the 19th century impressionism as practical examples of explication. We verify and think reflexively on the concept of individuality by means of the painting style of impressionism. The theoretical concepts as well as the empirical examples of this thesis consistently point to the crucial period of the 19th century as our primal object for discussion. On the one hand, European society at the time had undergone radical changes on the political front (such as French Revolution which exalted the values of freedom and equality). In addition, there was great structural shifts on the economic front (such as Industrial Revolution which drove the inventions of technology and art). Nevertheless, if we take only the rational history of political economy as the focus of research, we would fall into a trap of objectivity interwoven in the collective realities of the classes, nations, or masses, not to mention the presumption of a secular theology of the Revolution. Comparatively speaking, the potential image of inhuman things is frequently the objective pursuit of the artwork. Therefore, it is different from the political state of affairs which always inspires and intensifies subjective speculation with those obvious meanings inherent in the human collectivity. Moreover, the economic aspect of society has now apparently developed towards rationalization, which makes people feel the doubling threat of individual deprivation. In light of these concerns, we look elsewhere into the creativity of the artwork and the struggle of industrial technique in order to discover the potentials of individuality. The development of industry brought forward the photographic apparatus, which posed in turn a challenge to the traditional art of painting. On the scale of verisimilitude, photography will always be much more accurate than painting. However, the fact that impressionism pays attention to the effects of light and shadow on the canvases opens a new way for artistic creation. The affective disclosure of individual selves represented by the impressionist style of painting can create a vital dimension that beyond the photographic technique. Claude Monet’s documentations of nature and Mary Stevenson Cassatt’s observations of society are both fruitful results from which these impressionist artists practice their concrete individualities through their singular artworks.