I'll give it to Emerson, within "The Divinity School Address", he does preach some beautiful ideas: "Through the transparent darkness pour the stars their almost spiritual rays. Man under them seems a young child, and his huge globe a toy" (257).
I can understand, in a moment like that, how he could think that the world is "of one will, of one mind; and that one mind is everywhere, in each ray of the star, in each wavelet of the pool" (258) but overall, it's too farfetched for my taste.
I find Emerson frustrating as he preaches on about all of our souls being good, and if we were to just do as Jesus did, and let God and goodness fully into our souls, we will be divine. Not only does he speak as though he has achieved this level of purity, but feels as though he knows the true definition of "goodliness".
His ideas hold this singularity. There is one type of good. And we are all of one mind in this.
He believes we have this natural instinct towards goodness that we're all born with. This means he defines human nature as inherently good. As if everyone has the same moral code and same values, which is something I don't believe.
When reading through Emerson, this grew to be a constant frustration for me because though I enjoyed his emphasis on the "soul", I didn't understand why he made it out to be so singular.
No comments:
Post a Comment