In Emerson's short book, Nature, the idea of being a "transparent eyeball" is first introduced. I agree, if we are made from dust and made from the earth, we are in fact part of nature. Emerson goes so far to say that we must not just see nature, but must be able to feel nature. That is when we are fully aware of God and ourselves. The only way we are different from nature is because the existence of our Spirit. Then on the other hand, in "Self-Reliance," Emerson seems to be saying that each person much think for himself. So it seems that he is stating the opposite of what Wordsworth and "Nature" are stating... That one can not understand everything through nature.
I believe there must be a balance between the two. We must think for ourselves and we must also learn through and from nature.
I commented on Jeremy's.
In "Nature" Emerson mentions how child-like wonder sees nature differently and appreciates it more. I feel like that is the part of nature that is vital for us. Yes, we should think for ourselves, but we should not get so caught up in philosophy that we lose sight of the simple beauty and of faith. Personally, I feel as if philosophy breeds skepticism, and too much skepticism can lead to destruction. We should grow intellectually; however, we should allow ourselves time to appreciate the simplicity of nature and the beauty of God's creation and His presence within that.
ReplyDeleteI agree that to fully experience and be fully aware of God through nature, we must come to a deeper understanding than simply seeing nature. I agree with the idea of finding a balance between thinking and understanding for ourselves, and learning through nature - they must work cohesively.
ReplyDelete