Emersons self reliance Essay Example

cautious attitude of adults, who place excessive importance on reputation, approval, and others' opinions, leading to hesitation and uncertainty in their actions. Consequently, adults find it challenging to act spontaneously or genuinely.

Emerson emphasizes the significance of an individual's resistance to conforming to external norms, society's included, which aims to undermine self-reliance. Emerson challenges the idea that "maturing" involves conforming. In the paragraph beginning with the phrase "Whoso would be a man, must be a nonconformist," he takes a radical stance on the issue. He addresses the objection that following one's inner voice is wrong because it may lead to evil, stating, "No law can be sacred to me but that of my nature . ."

. According to Emerson, the only right is what aligns with his constitution, while the only wrong is anything that goes against it. This means that it is preferable to be true to one's evil nature than to conform for the sake of societal expectations. Emerson's non-conformist perspective leads him to reject many of society's moral beliefs. As an example, he believes that an abolitionist should focus more on their own family and community rather than worrying about distant black communities. He also criticizes those who donate money to the poor.

According to him, he asks if they are my poor people and he rejects supporting morality by donating to organizations instead of individuals. The act of charity itself is more valuable and genuine than theoretical or abstract morality. Emerson, speaking calmly and softly, claims that it is preferable to live authentically and quietly rather than having one's virtue praised publically.

Regardless of whether his actions are praised or ignored, it is of

no significance to him. The crucial aspect is to act autonomously: "All that concerns me is what I must do, not what the people think . . . the truly great person is the one who maintains the independence of solitude with perfect sweetness amidst the crowd." It should be noted that Emerson juxtaposes the individual with society "the crowd" but does not endorse the idea of physically isolating oneself from others. There is a distinction between appreciating solitude and becoming a social recluse.

Emerson explains why he opposes conformity, stating that it is a waste of a person's life. Compliance with public opinion prevents others from truly knowing who you are. Moreover, dedicating time to conforming to "communities of opinion" drains the energy necessary for creative endeavors, which are the most crucial activities in our lives. It also diverts our attention from making any distinct contributions to society. Conformity spreads a sense of falsehood that taints our lives and influences all our actions: ".

. . every truth is not quite true." In conclusion, those who follow public opinion are considered hypocrites due to the insincerity of their facial expressions. Emerson also discusses the challenges faced by independent thinkers, specifically society's disapproval and the need for personal consistency. The theme of consistency emerges as a barrier to independence and personal development. While the disapproval of the educated elite is unpleasant, Emerson suggests that it can be disregarded as it is typically expressed politely.

The outrage of the masses is a different story, as only a remarkably independent individual can withstand societal rancor. The desire to adhere to past actions and beliefs restricts the complete expression of one's

true self. Comparing an individual afraid of contradiction to a corpse holding memories is a startling yet accurate metaphor. This vivid image portrays the "corpse of" an individual.

In his exploration of memory, Emerson questions why people cling to outdated beliefs simply because they have held these beliefs in the past. The fixation on staying consistent in our beliefs and conforming to societal norms drains our energy and hinders our ability to fully live. As we mature, it is crucial to constantly review and reassess our past decisions and opinions. If necessary, we should be willing to abandon flawed ideas, similar to Joseph's escape from a seductive individual by leaving his coat behind. This metaphor powerfully illustrates the allure and degradation associated with the pressure to conform.

In this discussion on consistency, it is worth noting the famous phrase "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds." The term "hobgoblin," a symbol of fear of the unknown, enhances the impact created by the "corpse" of memory and reinforces Emerson's criticism of a society that demands conformity. Emerson mentions cultures that traditionally disapprove of inconsistency and highlights how history's greatest thinkers were ostracized and scorned by their peers for their original ideas. Jesus Christ is particularly noteworthy among these individuals. What may seem like inconsistency is often a misunderstanding due to distortion or perspective.

Emerson expands on this idea by likening the progression of a person's thoughts to a ship maneuvering against the wind: To move forward, the ship must tack, or navigate in a zigzag pattern that ultimately leads to a discernible destination. Similarly, an individual's seemingly contradictory actions or choices demonstrate coherence when their entire

life is examined rather than fragmented portions. We must disregard superficial impressions and act in accordance with what is righteous or essential, without regard for others' opinions or criticisms. Society does not hold ultimate authority; it is the individual who does. "A genuine person," Emerson's description of the ideal individual, "does not belong to any other time or place, but rather is at the core of everything.

"Wherever he is, nature is present." Nature encompasses not only the objects surrounding us but also our own individual characteristics. These individual traits allow for the intellectual and philosophical individual to defy societal norms and expectations.

Self-Reliance and the Individual

The second part of "Self-Reliance" provides further guidance for those seeking to achieve self-reliance. Emerson begins by instructing individuals to recognize their own value and maintain control over their surroundings. Material possessions, especially grandiose ones like magnificent structures, impressive works of art, or expensive books, often have a tendency to intimidate people into feeling inferior. However, this belief of inferiority is misguided since humans assign value to objects rather than the other way around.

Emerson demonstrates this idea by sharing a story about a drunkard who is treated like a prince, comparing it to individuals who live without thinking deeply. He believes that people's lack of critical thinking is one reason why they don't use reason. He criticizes the tendency to prioritize famous people over books about ordinary goodness and virtue. Emerson questions why society values the actions of prominent individuals more than the actions of regular citizens, even though the behavior of ordinary people can have equally significant consequences. He also criticizes the excessive respect given to European monarchs and ponders

why common people are not given the same level of importance. In rejecting the argument that royalty symbolizes the "royal" nature within everyone, Emerson questions how individuals can maintain confidence in their abilities when faced with conformity and commonness.

The concept of Spontaneity or Instinct is the key to understanding the answer. According to the text, this source embodies genius, virtue, and life. Intuition is the wisdom that arises from spontaneous instinct, allowing for direct knowledge of an object. In contrast, other knowledge is mere tuition, acquired from others rather than a personal response ignited by the source itself. This understanding of Intuition aligns with a central idea in transcendentalism: the universe is infused with an all-encompassing "soul" that serves as the origin of all wisdom and inspiration. Intuition, or direct knowledge, is a gift derived from this immense source. However, Emerson admits that comprehending the true meaning of "Intuition" and "soul" proves challenging even for himself: "If we ask whence this comes, if we seek to pry into the soul that causes, all philosophy is at fault."

The presence or absence of intuition is the only thing we can affirm, according to Emerson. He introduces a contrasting idea: the thoughtless person who cannot comprehend the profound truth understood by the self-reliant and intuitive individual. Thoughtless individuals struggle to understand the seeming inconsistencies of self-reliant people because they are too preoccupied with meeting societal expectations of consistency. Transcendence can only be achieved through intuitive knowledge. Describing this transcendent quality is challenging because there are no concrete words for such an abstract state of mind. It goes beyond language and can only be expressed through negatives, by conveying

what it is not: "And now at last the highest truth of this subject remains unsaid; probably cannot be said; for all that we say is the far-off remembering of the intuition." This understanding does not come from any teacher or intermediary and transcends any kind of emotion, such as hope, gratitude, or joy. In relation to the discussion on self-reliance, Emerson highlights the vital process of eternal improvement.

The self-reliant individual is not obligated to society as society remains stagnant, while the individual constantly evolves, becoming more virtuous and noble. This person acquires something that others in society lack: specifically, the knowledge and subsequent power of the pervasive spirit that animates all things, whether they are natural entities like plants, animals, or trees, or social endeavors such as commerce or war. In the preceding paragraphs leading to this section's conclusion, Emerson transitions from analysis to urging, providing recommendations on how we should behave. While anyone can embody self-reliance as a role model for societal improvement, he asserts that "we" - the indolent and reliant individuals - form a "mob." Numerous people, he claims, become influenced by suggestions, desires, and a sense of obligation. Instead of practicing independent self-reliance, we succumb to others' demands. He implores us to prioritize truth over politeness, treasure integrity more than comfort, and relinquish hypocrisy in favor of honesty.

Self-Reliance and Society

In this essay, the author acknowledges that being self-reliant may result in others perceiving one as selfish or self-indulgent. However, the author argues that individuals who unwaveringly adhere to their own morals are more akin to gods than those who conform to societal laws. Later in the essay, the author explores

the benefits that self-reliance can bring to society. By examining society, the author emphasizes the importance of a self-reliant ethical code and criticizes contemporary Americans for their lack of original thinking. Specifically, educated urban youths are condemned for their fear of failure while young people in general are deemed timid. In contrast, a hypothetical farm laborer is presented as an example of someone who is enterprising and self-taught, engaging in various occupations. This comparison between city dwellers and rural individuals aligns with Emerson's established views on quality of life in each environment.

Emerson's inclination towards the bucolic life is unsurprising. Currently, he directs his attention towards four social arenas that necessitate self-reliant individuals: religion, which is afraid of creativity; culture, which devalues individualism; the arts, which solely teach imitation; and society, which falsely esteems so-called progress. Self-reliance could greatly benefit religion, as it redirects one's focus from trivial, self-centered desires to a benevolent concern for the common good. Religion faces a major obstacle in its fear of individual creativity. Consequently, it chooses to imitate rather than genuinely connect with others: "I am continually hindered from encountering God in my fellow man because he has closed off his own sacred space and merely repeats stories about his brother's or his brother's brother's God." While any religion can introduce fresh ideas and thought systems to an individual, rigid religious beliefs are hazardous since they substitute autonomous thinking, a prerequisite for self-reliant individuals, with a set of predetermined answers.

Emerson highlights the connection between travel and religion, suggesting that both rely on seeking wisdom from an external source rather than trusting one's own inner wisdom. He argues that those who

travel with the sole aim of discovering something greater than what they already know are actually moving further away from themselves and becoming stagnant in old, familiar surroundings. The mention of youth serves as a reminder that true self-reliance is characterized by childlike originality, while traveling for the wrong reasons leads to a lack of innovation and a preference for being surrounded by things of the past. Emerson identifies the urge to travel as a symptom of the educational system's failure to cultivate individuality by encouraging imitation. As a result, people often choose to travel to witness others' artistic creations instead of creating their own.

In "The American Scholar," Emerson advises young scholars to break away from European literary traditions. He also addresses American artists in "Self-Reliance" using similar arguments, stating that "Beauty, convenience, grandeur of thought, and quaint expression are as accessible to us as to anyone," if only American artisans would consider factors such as "the climate, the soil, the length of the day, the wants of the people, the habit and form of the government." However, Emerson's criticism of society, particularly its flawed belief in progress, is different from his previous thoughts on this topic. The idea of progress represented by the zigzag line of a ship is not what he is discussing here. He contends that society does not necessarily improve due to material changes.

Advances in technology result in the loss of certain types of wisdom. For instance, a person who relies on a watch no longer possesses the ability to tell time based on the sun's position in the sky. Additionally, advancements in transportation and war machinery do not lead to

improvements in either the physical or mental stature of individuals. A wave serves as the most effective image to represent the static nature of society. While a wave moves in and out from the shoreline, the water it comprises remains unchanged. Similarly, changes may occur within society, but true progress is never achieved.

The final two paragraphs of "Self-Reliance" criticize dependence on material possessions and fortune. Emerson condemns reliance on property, just as he previously criticized dependency on the thoughts of others, as a means to attain fulfillment in life. Instead of admiring wealth, a refined individual feels ashamed of it, particularly if it is not acquired through honest labor.

Respecting property causes political life to become distorted: Those who view government's main duty as protecting property rather than individuals corrupt society. In conclusion, Emerson encourages individuals to take risks. According to him, no external circumstance, whether positive or negative, can alter one's core self-esteem. "You can only find peace within yourself. The only path to peace is the victory of principles." Therefore, self-reliance represents the triumph of a principle.