Contradiction

[markf2]

Although Emerson constantly contradicts himself and changes his views quite often, I feel that his main point in both Nature and Self-Reliance is, in itself, a contradiction. He spends page after page discussing how to find your true self, you must step away from society and not conform to it. That you must not go along with what others say and do and come up with your own original ideas. However, what is Emerson doing in his essays other than what he states society does to individuals? He is telling the society that reads his work how to go about their business. He may offer a bit more freedom of thought than the society that he criticizes offers, but he is overall taking the role of society by telling individuals what to do. I understand that transcendentalism is about contradiction and forming new thoughts, but it seems odd that such a main point should be so clearly contradictory.

[kiranp02]

I agree that it may seem strange that Emerson is, in essence, telling people not to conform to society, but rather to follow his path to enlightenment. However, I do not believe that what he is saying is truly contradictory. He is not telling people that they must follow a strict set of guidelines, but rather he is showing them a way to better understand themselves and the world around them. He simply offers them a way to come up with their own set of values, without the "pollution" of society's ideals. After this, it is up to the individual to decided what to do with their supposed newfound wisdom.

[tarah07]

I agree with Kiran on this. I don't think Emerson's goal is to present another set of guidelines to live by, but rather to present a general set of guidelines that will lead each individual to a different destination. It is ironic that Emerson encourages everyone to adopt the same general mind-set in order to ultimately form a "unique relationship with the universe," and differentiate oneself, but I think Emerson is more or less encouraging the public to look within themselves and form this "unique relationship" without being influenced by society.

[davep02]

I agree with Mark and Kiran that Emerson is contradicting himself but I believe that Emerson being hypocritical of his ideas completely goes along with the idea of transcendentalism. Emerson wants people to move away from society's norms and expectations. Therefore, when he contradicts himself he is applying his theory. He is going against the norm that you should follow the beliefs that you preach to others. He is going beyond the usual ideas of society and hopes that society does use his ideas to better themselves and everyone in society.

[amandac02]

Well, let's take a look at the topic "Nature" which lends itself immediately to contradiction. The essay discusses man as a presence, an "occult relation between man and the vegetable", the two bound by the oversoul. And isn't nature in itself spontaneous? As often as man tries to grasp it and take a hold of it, nature will always take whichever path it wants to. Look at fronts and snowstorms: weathermen predict snow, but how often does this actually occur? "Intuition" is an excellent word for this; Emerson is suggesting that man take in as nature does and then act without prior review, as human nature instructs.

[daniellez07]

I would have to say that I am in agreement with Kiran, and therefore in disagreement with Mark. Although I do understand the point that Mark makes, there is no distinct point where Emerson demonstrates a force on society to follow his beliefs. He is merely offering a set of views that differs from the general views accepted amongst society. He believes that his views, because they are different and new, will work, but never says that this is the only way to achieve results. When reading Mark's comment, along with David's, I was reminded of Benjamin Franklin's text where he provides a series of steps to follow in order to achieve success. I feel as though Mark believes that Emerson is executing this same form of writing that Franklin does, and I believe that is true given that he does suggest a way to achieve succes, however unlike Franklin, he does not make it seem as if people must follow this and it is the only way. Lastly, I do not really understand why David said that Emerson is hypocritical. I think that that is an interesting thought, however, I have not found any examples of him contradicting himself to make him seem hypocritcal.

[viveks02]

I think that Emerson's continual contradiction of himself is his greatest flaw. Despite his explanation of this, his critics would say that Emerson believes that people should find their own paths yet he is trying to convince them of his path. He could be viewed as hypocritical, so much fault can be put on Emerson for this contradiction, even though it is a natural human instinct.