Essay on Emersons and Thoreaus Present Thoughts About Individuality

Emerson shows that the functions of an individual are to know his worth and strive to be self-reliant. Emerson states that man should not be made inferior by material things. He goes ahead to aver that human beings are the ones that determine the worth of materials and therefore, they should never allow material things to determine their worth. According to Emerson, virtues that individuals exhibit include intuition and self-reliance. Emerson states that intuition and self-knowledge are the sources of all types of wisdom and inspiration. He goes ahead to state that a person can only gain firsthand knowledge from intuition. The individual seems to have a negative role in society; this is because he is passive and has allowed his worth to be pegged on material things. Emerson goes ahead to suggest that self-reliance is disregarded by society. According to Emerson, Individuality is also disregarded by society.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

There is a continuation of Emersons ideas in Walden. Thoreau uses Emersons ideas of self-reliance in his experiment. Thoreaus experiment involves putting into practice the idea of self-reliance in personal relationships as well as financial matters. Thoreaus experiments suggest that independence has more value in personal relationships as well as financial matters. As a result, Thoreau is content with his solitude, but he does not refrain from human companionship, albeit under his terms and conditions. Thoreau finds happiness in interacting with nature rather than in conversing with his fellow human beings in places that are frequented by human beings for gossip and idle talk. Thoreau's idea is that he could be economic independent by producing his goods for consumptions as well as producing extra goods from which he can gain a profit. Thoreau is also strict with his expenses. Both Emerson and Thoreau ideas encourage human beings to be independent and self-reliant. The difference between Emerson and Thoreau is that the former did not put into practice his ideas whereas the latter lived his ideas.

Emerson is of the opinion that a good government is one that protected rights of individuals as well as advocated for the growth of individuals. Emerson is also of the opinion that a democratic type of government can only work when individuals are self-reliant and independent. Thoreau is of the opinion that governments are rarely useful; they are mostly ineffective and perverted. Emerson is of the opinion that there is a God within an individual and therefore, human beings should strive to be righteous and to do good to their fellow human beings. Thoreau was a naturalist; he believed that a man could only get true peace when he is at peace with nature. Emerson is of the opinion that money makes individuals compromise their principles and as a result, they become immoral. Thoreau is of the opinion that not only do wealthy require a lot of toiling to be acquired; it also brings a lot of worry and anxiety to a person who has it. According to Thoreau, material wealth is corrupting. Emerson states that men are motivated by a desire to have power. Emerson says that powerful people in society are those who are self-reliant. Thoreau states that human beings have the power to bring about reforms. The attitude fits with the theme of lack of harmony between man and nature in the Light versus Dark Romanticism handout. There is a lack of harmony between man and nature because society disregards self-reliance and individualism.

Emerson and Thoreau present a logical progression of thoughts about individuality from the age of enlightenment because they are emphatic that it is courtesy of individualism that mankind can make social progress. Emerson and Thoreau seem to contradict the age of enlightenment because their central focus is own self-reliance and independence yet the age of Enlightenment was characterized by different people bringing their ideas together for the betterment of society.