Capturing the elusive Ideal by communing with Nature
Unlike Berkeleys perception of the Ideal, Emerson puts forth that the Ideal can be pursued on a metaphysical level. This cannot be pursued by mans philosophizing and excessive reliance on material facts and details, as Berkeley suggested. What Emerson offered as an alternative is to imbibe the Ideal by simply experiencing life and raising the notch of this experience. Through Nature, Emerson claimed, the human experience is heightened and the Ideal is nearly perfected.
In the introduction of Nature, he wrote that the most abstract truth is the most practical. A true theory is one that has itself as its very evidence. He stated that there are answers to everything that there is an Ideal that can be attained by man and this ideal can be clarified by our engagement with Nature. It is not man where the truth and the ideal emanate from it is from the nature -- the not man.
In the first two parts of the essay entitled Nature and Commodity, he expressed his view of Nature as an ideal thing. Nature is heavenly. It is the intercourse of heaven and earth which transports us away from the worldly and mundane. In this engagement, we derive a feeling of pleasure. This pleasure does not emanate only from nature, but from the harmony between man and nature. Moreover, Emerson stated that nature is a commodity in the sense that it provides for our human needs. In that sense, the perfection of the Nature can be achieved by our way of creating an intimate bond with it. As nature provides for our needs, what we give in return is our means of cultivating Nature.
In Chapter 6 of Emersons Nature entitled Idealism, Emerson started a philosophical gymnastic about truth and the challenges in verifying it. He said that our senses can deceive us, but that propensity of being cheated by our own body parts and understanding is dismissed immediately because we refuse to accept the fallibility of our senses. There is a difference between the observer and the spectacle. We are the observers and the Nature is the spectacle where we are subordinated we are mere observers of that grand spectacle so our senses are rendered weak in fully captivating that spectacle. Emerson gives more premium on the spiritual over the material, the mind over the matter. In that sense, he quashes the idea that Nature per se as we see it is the true beauty. It is not. Beauty lies on that abstract feeling we obtain from tasting and experiencing Nature. That is the ideal for him, the absolute. As he said, we behold unveiled the nature of Justice and Truth. We learn the differences between the absolute and the conditional. We apprehend the absolute. We do not see the absolute we just understand and feel it through engaging with the Nature.
His next argument was his admiration and flattery for the poet as he is the only one who gives justice to the beauty and splendor of nature. The poet, with his skillful manipulation of language and the extent of control he has over it, is able to render nature in ways that are entirely different from what common people can do. Emerson said that language is the emblem of our thought. It is through language that we are able to signify our feelings and our deepest concerns and ideas. In that sense, the poet can signify his own musings and observations using language. As the poet witnesses the everlasting beauty of nature, he will be invoked to translate that beauty he sees into words which he writes. This contact with Nature heightens the spiritual component of the poet and only makes his craft much better.
Emerson also provided a comparison among the poet, the scientist and the philosopher. While all three of them share a passion to explore, to create and to make human life better, they differ in cause and in concern. The poet is largely interested in beauty the beauty of language, the beauty of events he had experienced, and the beauty of the world in general, in which nature takes up a substantial part. The philosopher, however, is much concerned about the truth -- the nature of things, and how the world and everything in it came to be, whether physical or metaphysical. Emerson said that while both the poet and the philosopher likes to achieve a state of spiritual stability, the philosopher has a greater chance to be lost along the road since he has a greater tendency to let his thoughts get off his head first. He takes up most of his time seeking for an absolute truth an explanation for all of the things and looks for that in the material world. Whereas the poet communes with Nature and creates a spiritual link with it to find meaning. The philosopher has the tendency to overly rely on what is immediately present and visible, refusing to see what lies beyond the surface of those things.
In the last part of the Chapter, Emerson sought to undermine the concept of religion and spirituality, as religion and spirituality often connotes that the body and the world are evil because they are worldly. Emerson also criticizes the idea that the only truth that is available for man to entertain is religious or spiritual truth. Nature arrives at a second-rate level truth where it is no longer regarded as it should be. Emerson frowns upon this scenario as he has extensively high regards for nature. Nature should be emphasized because it is where the Ideal germinates.
Emerson finishes the Chapter by demonstrating the relationship of people and nature. He emphasizes that there is a Supreme Being greater than nature and man combined therefore he affirms the presence of God as the source of man and nature. He respects the end and recognizes the apocalyptic claims of the Christian faith.
In the chapter entitled Spirit, Emerson stated that there is a force so mysterious that it eludes the grasp of the human mind this spiritual force emerges from Nature. Having a grip of this spiritual force is an ideal case as we will be able to get out of our physical limitations. However despite our endeavors to analyze Nature and fully apprehend and experience it, we always fell short. This implies that the concept of Nature is so immense that it exceeds the breadth of mankind and our mental abilities.
The unifying spirit that binds mankind, nature, and the rest of the worlds phenomena is what keeps the process of creation revolving. But there is also a line in which Emerson said We are now so far from the road to truth (22). This tells us of the excesses we have created and brought to this world. In reference to Chapter 6, the innovation and invention we have created for ourselves are the largest forms of walls that separated us from nature. Surely, there will be more inventions to come in the future. The beginning of these inventions and the impossibility to put a stop on this technological revolution are the things that keep us away from the road to truth. What Emerson proposes is that we should revert to our old ways. We should start getting rid of excessive material things and begin living in a simplistic lifestyle. We should return to our Nature which we have forgotten with the advent of massive technology. Only by returning to Nature can we look for substance in our lives and move closer to the Truth.
Like Emerson, George Berkeley was also popular with his philosophizing about the Ideal. George Berkeley was most famous because of his Theory of Immaterialism, a theory wherein he claimed that humans can only know sensations and ideas of objects but not abstract things. Throughout the length of Nature, Emerson touched on some points made famous by Berkeley. In the middle part of Chapter 6, in the comparison among the scientist, the poet, and the philosopher, he implied that the scientist is in the worst state because he is relying mostly in abstraction. Scientists, especially mathematicians, refuse to study or begin a study with observation or anything tangible, which misleads them from finding the truth because their way of spiritualizing the physical world through mental process begins in a wrong point.
These points raised by Emerson match greatly with George Berkeleys Theory of Immaterialism. Both Emerson and Berkeley believe that to be able to arrive to the truth, one must begin with something tangible. Having the tangibles will be the best starting point in ones pursuit of the Truth. What Emerson specifically espoused is that we should begin with Nature the foundation and continuation of our existence. However, Berkeley was more particular with where not to begin, never pinpointing a particular point where man can begin in his pursuit of the Ideal and the Truth. He never mentioned that one must begin with nature. Emersons proposal is much better because he identifies a definite starting point for this quest. For Emerson, the Ideal can be attained by beginning with Nature and by continually communing and finding meaning in it.
Categories:
0 comments:
Post a Comment