Philosopher views
Download 5.81 Mb.
|
Henry David ThoreauStatements such as “if a man does not keep pace with his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer” and “the mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation” have become emblematic of Henry David Thoreau’s commitment to the power of the individual. High school and college students, energized by the romantic echoes of authors such Walt Whitman, Ralph Waldo Emerson, and Thoreau, related to the popular movie “Dead Poet’s Society,” which was replete with references to individual power, transcendental philosophy, and the oft-quoted phrase “carpe diem.” In the movie, it is Thoreau’s words “I went to the woods because I wished to live deliberately, to front only the essential facts of life, and see if I could not learn what it had to teach, and not, when I came to die, discover that I had not lived . . . I wanted to live deep and suck out all the marrow of life” that provided the motivation for the students to reconvene the society that their inspirational teacher had started. Although the transcendentalism of nineteenth century New England stresses the importance of the individual, it is significant to note that there are curious differences between the individualism that Thoreau explains in Walden and demonstrates in The Duty of Civil Disobedience and the individualism that we may be accustomed to in present-day America. Particularly with the recent emergence of communitarian thought on the political and philosophical radar screen, it is critical to examine and differentiate the roots of Thoreau’s affinity for individualism. Therefore, in order to explore Thoreau’s thoughts and how they may possibly be used in an academic debate, it is important to first offer a biographical sketch of Thoreau and highlight some elements of his life that influenced his writings and philosophy. Second, a philosophical overview of New England transcendentalism will be offered to supply a foundation from which to understand Thoreau’s writings. Third, Thoreau’s positions on the individual, its relationship to nature social change will be discussed. Finally, this essay will offer some possible positions and arguments that Thoreau could claim, taking care to delineate the arguments about individualism that Thoreau would not likely make. David Henry Thoreau was born in Concord, Massachusetts on July 12, 1817, which, as a historical note, is important because, while New England Transcendentalism was centered in Concord in the nineteenth century, Thoreau was the only noted transcendentalist--member of the “Concord Group”--born in the Massachusetts village. While he graduated from Harvard College, Thoreau did not move into a profession that might be expected of a nineteenth century Harvard graduate. Although he accepted a teaching position in the Concord schools, he quickly resigned after he was informed that he was to use corporal punishment for discipline. He and his brother opened a private school soon thereafter, but it closed after six months due to the failing health of John. Thoreau, now referring to himself as Henry David, then lived with Ralph Waldo Emerson, serving as a handyman and gardener to have access to Emerson’s substantial library. “In 1843 Emerson decided it was time for Thoreau to see more of the world and obtained a position for him as tutor for his brother William Emerson’s sons on Staten Island. Thoreau accepted, thinking it would give him an entree into the publishing world in New York City. But the experiment was a failure. Thoreau was homesick from the moment he left Concord in early May. A visit home at Thanksgiving time was too much for him, and he returned to Staten Island for only long enough to pack up his belongings.” Thoreau, reflecting on his experience, said New York was “a thousand times meaner than I could have imagined.” Thoreau occasionally worked for his father manufacturing pencils, writing for the Dial, a transcendental quarterly founded by Emerson, lecturing, and performing odd jobs as a handyman. Before he moved to the famed cabin on Walden pond, “an incident occurred that blackened Thoreau’s reputation among his fellow townsmen for generations to come.” While fishing with the son of one of Concord’s most prominent families, Thoreau started a fire to cook the day’s catch, and proceeded to burn experiences that perhaps define Thoreau’s place in modern literary and social history occurred. First, he was jailed in Concord for failure to pay his poll tax, which inspired his essay The Duty of Civil Disobedience. Second, Thoreau spent his two years “in solitude” at Walden Pond. Thoreau waited until August 1854 to publish Walden , and died eight years later from tuberculosis. These biographical observations are illuminative for two reasons. First, Thoreau’s turn to his personal simplicity embodies the intuitive individualism central to the transcendentalist movement. Thoreau, as a Harvard graduate, with above-average marks and the expectation to be a minister, lawyer, farmer or teacher, was content doing odd jobs, performing manual labor, and writing to sustain himself. In so many words, Thoreau proclaimed in Walden “simplify, simplify.” Michael Myers states in his introduction to Walden and Civil Disobedience that Thoreau “sympathized with the Transcendentalists’ desire to move beyond the surfaces of American life--its commerce, technology, industrialism, and material progress--to a realization that these public phenomena were insignificant when compared with an individual’s spiritual life.” Thoreau, for the most part, lived a simple life that parallels the force of transcendental thought. Second, Thoreau’s concern for nature, particularly after the fishing accident, exposes his use of intuition in the construction of transcendental individuality. “Genuinely encountering reality is to be found only by separating oneself from the artificialities of city, economic, and family life and communing directly with nature, where one could front only the essential facts of life. Nature preserves spontaneity and wildness that civilization suppresses.” The communion with nature, in other words, provides the individual with the opportunity to exercise intuition, which is necessary for the achievement of ultimate knowledge. Throughout his life, Thoreau continuously turned to nature, whether it be on long walks with his brother in the woods to living in the cabin on Walden Pond. These experiences illustrate Thoreau’s influence and place in the emergence of the transcendental individuality of nineteenth century Concord. The Oxford Companion to Philosophy sheds some light on the philosophical motivations of New England transcendentalism. Transcendentalism is a “doctrine which stressed the spiritual unity of the world and the superiority of intuition as a source of knowledge as opposed to logical reasoning and sense-experience . . . . It supplied a foundation for the ‘spiritual religion’ [transcendentalists] upheld against the natural religion of the Enlightenment and the revealed religion of Calvinism.” The distinction between knowledge through the senses and knowledge through intuition is critical not only in understanding transcendentalism, but in grasping its relationship to the power of the individual. Walter Harding continues in A Thoreau Handbook “Thoreau classified himself as a Transcendentalist. If we use the popular definition that a Transcendentalist is one who believes that one can (and should) go beyond Locke in believing that all knowledge is acquired through the senses, that in order to attain the ultimate knowledge one must “transcend” the senses, we can unquestionably classify Thoreau as a Transcendentalist.” Why is this distinction important? It may important because it informs the source of individual power, which in turn, reveals its relationship to outside institutions, such as government, community, and law. Harding extrapolates on this unique individualism by sharing “From the beginning of his life to the very end, Thoreau believed that all reform must come from within and cannot be imposed by any outside force. We cannot reform society; we can reform only the individual. When each individual reforms himself, then the reformation of society will automatically follow. Reformation through legislation may achieve temporary results, but lasting reformation will be achieved only when each individual convinced himself of its desirability. Such is the basic belief of Transcendentalism.” By placing the power of individual knowledge and power within the realm of intuition rather than sense, Thoreau thought that individuality that may not necessarily be applicable to the arguments civil libertarians or modern liberal rights advocates make. These distinctions will certainly be explored further later in this essay, but it is important to note the philosophical distinction transcendentalists make regarding individuality--the distinction between intuition and the senses as a source of knowledge. Thoreau, as a transcendentalist, used Walden and The Duty of Civil Disobedience to articulate his vision of individuality and its relationship to government, religion, spirituality, and citizenship. It is important to note that Thoreau’s transcendentalism was crafted as the industrial revolution was running at full steam. As Americans were increasingly viewing the accumulation of wealth as an end, and not simply a means to a better life or stronger government, Thoreau urged movement beyond the conception of knowledge advocated by Locke and other empiricists. Myers states, “Thoreau demanded a singular relationship with nature that would allow him to leave behind the average and the mundane so that he could discover the liberating divinity within himself and his world. He pledged allegiance not to the Republic but to the individualism for which he stood. . . . In Thoreau’s mind, individual discipline, intellectual growth, and spiritual development were the only true methods of reform, methods that required neither conventions, membership lists, nor contributions. True reform was interior, private, and wholly individual. Reforming one’s self means discovering the divinity within one’s self.” Myers continues “the Transcendentalists solved [the problem of the lack of American integrity] by using other analytical means to affirm that one soul circulates through all of creation. Rejecting the Lockean sensationalism and Common Sense philosophy then prevalent, which argued that knowledge could only come through the senses, the Transcendentalists insisted that this empirical argument was not responsive to a higher, ultimate reality, the world of the spirit.” Thoreau contributed heartily to this transcendental emergence. Thoreau’s individuality was focused on the cultivation of the self, through intuition and the gathering of knowledge by transcending the senses. This is distinguished from “the civil liberties democracy provides [which] are far less important than the spiritual freedom nature embodies and inspires Transcendental individuality is not about the exercise of civil liberties and rights; spiritual individuality is more important than civil individuality. This view of individuality is further focused by Thoreau’s essay The Duty of Civil Disobedience. First “he famously begins by accepting the motto 'that government is best which governs least’” and moves to delineate between matters of conscience and matters of law. “Civil disobedience is the classic defense of conscience above unjust law. One must not support an immoral law and can protest by, for example, not paying taxes that implement it, or refusing to obey it and accepting a jail term.” By relying on intuition, or by transcending the senses, individuals identify a commitment greater than that to unjust laws or governments. Myers states in his introduction that Thoreau “calls on his readers to make a distinction between law and justice and to assert the truth in their hearts over the laws on the books.” The distinction between the government and the individuals that comprise the government will be important in evaluating how Thoreau’s transcendental individuality may be used in debate rounds. The most important observation to make from Civil Disobedience is how Thoreau applies distinctions--between intuition and sense, between conscience and law, between government and moral citizens. Finally, before turning to specific debate arguments and applications of Thoreau’s individuality, it is important to once again stress the place of nature in Thoreau’s argument. Nature is the source, the path to awaken the intuition. The lack of American integrity, the preoccupation with material desires, commerce, and industry, and the dissonance between the moral responsibilities of individuals and government are all obstacles to acquiring knowledge by transcending the senses. As transcending the senses is an indispensable element of acquiring knowledge, it is solitude and nature that provides for the exercise of individuality. With a biographical review of Thoreau, a philosophical overview of transcendentalism, and illustration of Thoreau’s exposition of transcendental individuality through his writings, we can now turn to particular arguments that Thoreau could make, and perhaps more importantly, the applications of Thoreau that may not be persuasive. There are several arguments and observations that are applicable to competitive debate. First, Thoreau’s individuality may not necessarily mesh with civil liberty or rights arguments. By embracing the distinction between intuition and the senses, the transcendental individuality is not dependent, and actually claims to be above that of government and the liberal tradition. Once again, it is important to stress Thoreau’s sentiment that “we cannot reform society; we can reform only the individual. When the individual reforms himself, then the reformation of society will automatically follow. Reformation through legislation may achieve temporary results, but lasting reformation will be achieved only when each individual convinces himself of its desirability.” Thoreau’s individuality is not the individuality of liberal rights theory or civil liberties. Consequently, an argument, for example, to protect civil liberties or extend a liberal conception, an American conception of rights, does not necessarily follow from Thoreau. In fact, if the value in the round is individuality, for example, Thoreau may subsume the individuality protected and illustrated by civil liberties. In making arguments for individuality or autonomy, it is critical to distinguish between the sources of individuality. In a related argument, Thoreau’s conception of individuality may actually feed a communitarian critique. A brief description of communitarian thought is important before we examine this argument. Recently, thinkers such as Amitai Etzioni, Mary Ann Glendon, Charles Taylor, and Michael Sandel have offered the communitarian perspective on many political, legal, and social problems. “Primarily, communitarians emphasize the social nature of life, identity, relationships, and institutions. They emphasize the embedded and embodied status of the individual person, by contrast with central themes in particular in contemporary liberal thought which are taken to focus on an abstract and disembodied individual. They tend to emphasize the value of specifically communal and public goods, and conceive of values as rooted in communal practices, again by contrast with liberalism, which stresses individual rights and conceives of the individual as the ultimate originator and bearer of value.” If communitarians essentially value the community and Thoreau values transcendental individuality, how can Thoreau feed a communitarian position in a debate? We return to the distinctions that are important to understanding Thoreau’s individuality. Particularly in Civil Disobedience, Thoreau “disentangle[s] the moral responsibilities of government and citizens . . . Thoreau immediately suggests that the reason government is able to pursue unjust and immoral policies is because the citizenry has failed to live up to its moral responsibilities.” In placing the exercise of the moral individual within the realm of civil society, Thoreau recognizes that the transcendental individual has moral obligations, despite the solitude of Walden. Bob Pepperman Taylor states in his book America’s Bachelor Uncle: Thoreau and the American Polity “When we are honest . . .about out obligations as free and independent citizens, we will necessarily resist [slavery and imperialism] and view the government as illegitimate to the degree that it is associate responsibilities, which in this case requires political resistance to injustice, in the name of independence we claim to hold dear.” Thoreau distinguishes the government in the development and recognition of individuality--communitarians simply claim that individuals are embedded in a community and that there are certain commitments that individuals may contribute to the function of that community, of that civil society. If a competitor makes a communitarian argument, it may not be proper to use Thoreau’s transcendental individuality to subsume it; it may only feed the commitments that Thoreau himself recognized. The greatest strategic use of Thoreau’s transcendental individuality may be perhaps as an a priori argument. By noting the distinctions between liberal individuality and transcendental individuality, a debater may argue that the best method to accomplish the advantages of the opponent is to embrace transcendental individuality, without the encumbrances of civil liberties or government. Furthermore, by using Thoreau to get to intuition as the source of knowledge and individuality, a debater may circumvent communitarian and governmental arguments and make a legitimate argument for universal human rights. An opponent, for example, may make the argument that rights can only be recognized by a government or a nation, and consequently, universal human rights and civil individuality cannot be the same. In order for individuality to be protected, the state must protect it by recognizing a right. By relying on transcendental individuality, there is no reliance on government, and consequently, a gateway into the recognition of universal human individuality. With nature as a spark for the human intuition, and consequently knowledge and individuality, Thoreau may be used philosophically in an environmental debate. In fact, “modern environmentalists frequently interpret Thoreau as a forebear of radical contemporary environmentalism.” Taylor continues “while the whole of Thoreau’s work can be viewed as an extended contribution to this project--aiming to understand the history of the human experience within the context of the natural world--there is no work for which this is more true than The Maine Woods.” Perhaps most importantly, Thoreau’s transcendental individuality may allow a debater to place humanity within the context of nature because it is nature, in fact, for Thoreau that allows for the acquisition of knowledge. Nature is essential to realize individuality. This appears to resonate with writers such as Jeremy Rifkin, who in his book Time Wars argues “lost in a sea of perpetual technological transition, modern man and woman find themselves increasingly alienated from the ecological choreography of the planet.” Thoreau, in his disdain for industry, commerce, and the American preoccupation with wealth in the mid-nineteenth century, could likely make a very similar argument. Essentially, there is an indisputable bond between the realization of human potential and nature. This could prove valuable to an environmental debate. In “Dead Poet’s Society,” the character Neil is engaged by his teacher, Mr. Keating, who urges Neil and the other students to “seize the day.” By evoking the words of transcendentalists Walt Whitman and Henry David Thoreau, Keating sought to enliven a search for individuality, a communion to transcend external obstacles to discover the individual. Thoreau, particularly through his primary works of Walden and The Duty of Civil Disobedience, demonstrates a unique view into the recognition of individuality by the transcendentalist movement of nineteenth century New England. Thoreau and other transcendentalists differed from contemporary views of individuality in that they argued that knowledge was acquired by intuition and not merely the senses. By advocating a relationship with nature and a simple life to achieve individuality, Thoreau reconceptualized the meaning of the individual, and it is this difference that must be recognized in academic debate. Although it may be tempting to use Thoreau with John Stuart Mill or John Locke, their views of individuality, particularly in its relationship to the state, government, and laws are different, at times conflicting. Thoreau’s transcendental individuality, while useful to an individuality debate, must be studied carefully so as not to conflict with competing or differing versions of individuality and autonomy. Furthermore, Thoreau’s use of nature to achieve individuality through intuition is not only critical to understanding transcendentalism, but may be useful in an environmental debate. A comprehension of the sources and relationships of the transcendental individuality of Henry David Thoreau is the most important recognition to his application in an academic debate round. If his individuality is used properly and strategically, Thoreau may prove an effective thinker and writer to a successful Lincoln-Douglas position. Directory: uploads uploads -> 587 Return function, r i(X) r i(0) r i(1) r i(2) r i(3) 1 0 2 4 6 Thermal Station, I 2 0 1 5 6 3 0 3 5 6 10 uploads -> Department of science and humanities department of mathematics part-a questions and answers uploads -> The Case Against the nypd’s Quota-Driven ‘Broken Windows’ Policing What Is It? uploads -> For want of a nail uploads -> Ownership Models There are two different types of ownership models uploads -> Police Militarization uploads -> City of rising star regular meting thursday, july 14, 2016 uploads -> Township of winfield uploads -> Stop Militarizing Law Enforcement Act of 2014 uploads -> The Black Panther Party’s Ten-Point Program What We Want Now! Download 5.81 Mb. Share with your friends:
|