Emerson's View On Self Reliance

According to Ralph Waldo Emerson and the transcendentalist movement, self-reliance is the greatest virtue of all and is the natural aversion of mankind. Self-reliance requires nonconformity and listening to one’s own voice rather than the authoritative voice of society. From the reader, Emerson asks for a self-sufficient lifestyle, in which no one depends on anyone or anything else physically, mentally, or emotionally. To us, a lifestyle in which we may act however and do whatever we please is enticing, especially since our current world is one of duty and responsibility. However, Emerson’s proposed way of life—in which we relinquish all commitments and ideas which hinder us—is unrealistic and, considering the examples which Emerson presents
to us, unachievable. Emerson accuses family and articles of faith of interfering with one’s development of self-reliance.
Instead of saying whatever it takes to satisfy friends and family, one should be bluntly honest with them, because “truth is handsomer than the affectation of love” (Emerson, 22). In doing so, we could lose relationships that we had once cherished, growing all the more lonelier as we retreat into the solitude of self-sufficiency. Another recurring element of Emerson’s argument is to trust in our own voice and our own ideas rather than depending on the ideas of others. “A man,” says Emerson, “should learn to detect and watch that gleam of light which flashes across his mind from within, more than the luster of the firmament of bards and sages” (ibid. 19). It is here that Emerson contradicts himself. Is Emerson not also regarded a sage? If he is, should we not ignore his advice and rely on what we already know? He began the philosophical movement of transcendentalism, and whether or not he knew that he would be at the forefront head of such a movement, he fails to recognize that he is being the exact man that he advises readers to avoid. Emerson also advises us to develop our own personal cultures rather than
abiding by the teachings of the church, asking, “What have I to do with the sacredness of traditions, if I live wholly from within?” (ibid. 21). Much of life has developed by following the doctrines of other historical figures and living by their example. Though he might not mean it, Emerson is asking us to ignore what we’ve learned from others, depending solely on our own instincts. We are supposed to look exclusively to ourselves for help, not our friends, not our doctors, not our inspirations—even if they hold the answers to our problems. Emerson also instructs us to focus on our own problems rather than the ones of others, specifically addressing philanthropists. “Are they my poor?” he asks, and goes on to call the philanthropists “foolish” and “wicked” (ibid. 22). While it may be easy to ignore prevalent issues that don’t affect us, it is unethical to disregard the poor or the oppressed individuals in one’s community or anywhere else in the world when they require outside help. Here, the idea of Emerson’s self-reliance reads as selfish and ignorant. In many cases, conformity is necessary in order to muddle through life in today’s society, such as practicing the traditional lifestyle of working for pay.
While Emerson may believe in doing whatever one wishes, living in such a way would prove disastrous. He condemns society for stripping us of our individuality. “Society,” says Emerson, “is in conspiracy against the manhood of every one of its members. [It] is a joint-stock company, in which the members agree… to surrender the liberty and culture of the eater” (ibid, 21). Society requires one to assume a predetermined, laborious lifestyle no matter what one chooses, and therefore society interferes with one’s ability to develop complete self-sufficiency. The ability to do and say whatever one wishes would be appealing if there were no consequences for such actions. Emerson explains that “society never advances. It recedes as fast on one side as it gains on the other” (ibid. 36). He proposes that today’s society will never evolve due to the constant ebb and flow of decline and innovation, yet Emerson believes a society with no established goal could function better. A society of people living in such an unproductive manner would not function and would never advance. Emerson may have it out for society, but society itself isn’t crumbling any time soon, and as members of it, we must conform as much as necessary in order to get
by. Emerson promotes a life of individualism, indulgence, and self-confidence, claiming that “nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind” (ibid. 21). By being self-reliant, we may do whatever we please without concern of what others think of our choices. Such a lifestyle seems desirable on a personal level, but it would be destructive on a societal and global scale. It is nearly impossible to abandon work, family, and societal responsibilities without facing immediate or later repercussions. One who is entirely self-reliant goes to no one for help, whether it be a friend or relative or doctor, and instead isolates oneself in a free, self-centered lifestyle. Perhaps Emerson has more ideas for why self-reliance would prove to be a realistic way of living, but in today’s society of business and labor, such a life would be vilified and punished severely. It would be better for one to incorporate elements of self-reliance into our own lives rather than live by Emerson’s words alone.