Emerson's Philosophy Of Transcendentalism

Transcendentalism: The Light That We Cannot See

Chesterton once said, “Transcendentalism […] has primarily much the position of the sun […] We are conscious of it as of a kind of splendid confusion […] But the circle of the moon is as clear and unmistakable, as recurrent and inevitable, as the circle of Euclid on a blackboard.” These words encapsulate the driving rationale of the anti-transcendentalist argument – that although individuals seek transcendentalism, it can never be truly reached, or, to compare with the “sun,” seen. Rather, they inevitably place attention towards the “moon,” the perspicuous reflection of transcendentalism – that is, individualism – and forget the responsibilities of society. Emerson introduced the philosophy of transcendentalism in his essay, Nature, teaching that divinity pervades all nature and humanity. However, although Emerson would offer that transcendentalism is beneficial, I believe that transcendentalism is harmful because it isolates the individual, prescribes his rebellion, and assumes his perfection.

Three key teachings comprise the transcendentalist philosophy. The first teaches

Without individualism, the responsibilities of family and the obligations of community restricts one’s ability to uninhibitedly undertake his passions. This is the reason the philosophy has garnered its allure; simply put, transcendentalism appeals to the egocentric within every person by justifying his self-seeking desires. To the transcendentalist, the individual is not selfish; he is simply protecting himself from societal obligations. It is rather the society that is selfish, taking away from the individual’s ability to achieve his greatest