tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33932587.post463978328905784781..comments2022-03-24T10:03:23.760-07:00Comments on Advanced American Literature: Emerson's "Spiritual Laws"heisquitemadhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16477199984584789385noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33932587.post-27630267172626961412007-02-05T09:22:00.000-08:002007-02-05T09:22:00.000-08:00SPIRITUAL LAWS
In Emerson's "Spiritual Laws" e...SPIRITUAL LAWS<br /><br /><br /><br /> In Emerson's "Spiritual Laws" essay, he communicates what he thinks of society's standards on supposed spiritual laws. He believes that every man should live only by his own nature. He needs not abide to what someone else wants him to do, wants him to want, and wants him to think. Every person has their own personality, of which is defined by what they desire. What they desire is what makes them who they are.<br /> Many religions and the like try and impose their own moral being upon others around the world, telling them what is right and what is wrong. But how is this wrong or right defined? The laws of the Bible are supposedly spiritual, but what is nature is spirit. If we are a part of nature, how can any one of us be wrong? The Bible is merely written by individuals who shared similar core principles and decided that the world would be a better place if everyone abided to them. This is impossible, however, because one cannot force another to want what they clearly don't.<br /> An experience is that of a man and a man is that of nature. We were all born of nature, therefore live according to it. However, if we can all just apply our own values to society without attempting to convert others, we can all live a happier life. A man's experience is different than that of another. You cannot read the same book as another and tell him that it's better than he thinks it to be (considering that you both read it thoroughly). His experience in reading this book is different than yours, no matter how you tell him of your experience. He gets out of it what he wants to. He sees what he likes and that is the core of his experience.<br /> A proficiency in a certain talent is an opening to a source of pleasure. Each person has their own unique variables of proficiencies, and therefore have different (although possibly similar) experiences in each and every activity that they participate in. One can tell another that something is great, but what the other thinks usually sticks. You can tell someone that a food is better than their favorite, but you cannot make them think that. Our preferences in everything are our nature. We are defined by what we prefer, and what we prefer has been determined by the course of nature. And if so-called "spiritual laws" that are written are really right, then everyone should automatically feel compelled to follow them. However, everyone does not. Everyone disagrees, debates, fights, and quarrels over what is really "right". The truth is that there IS no right, there IS no wrong, there is only us. We are what we are and it cannot be changed. The course of time may change it, but nothing outside our own mind can stop our instinctual preferences.<br /> What Emerson is trying to get across is that spiritual saws are not static throughout society. Many may agree on a certain thing, but still have their own variation of what they really think about it. These laws are but opinions forged by individuals, and brought together to form something that a larger group of people find at least semi-compatible with their real opinion on the subject. However, just because a lot of people agree on the same thing does not make it "right". Most people think killing is wrong. But is it? No, killing is not wrong. Not universally. Although it conflicts with Emerson's point about not interfering with other's wants or needs, it's still a preference that can be debated by many. Killing may be wrong in the minds of most, but there are still those few that feel differently.<br /> The only spiritual law that Emerson thinks actually exists is just to do what you want, how you want to, that a man is to abide by his own nature and nothing else. There is no need to spend your life attempting to convert other individual's moral needs to your own, because it isn't possible and does not actually accomplish much at all. You can't change people, no matter hard you try. They may eventually develop different feelings on subjects naturally over time, or because they realize that a certain aspect of their personality makes it hard to achieve happiness. Therefore they may look for ways to forcefully change their personality in some way, but usually it's exceptionally hard or quite simply impossible. You cannot will yourself to not like a food, unless of course you attach a shocking device to it so that you may eventually learn not to touch it. However, even then it's the taste that compels you, not the need to get near it. <br /> When an individual looks for compatibility in a person, they are looking for one with traits similar to their own. They experience things in their own way and want someone to share similar experiences with.<br /> Every person has his own “God”, his own way of life. They have their own way to worship, their own heaven and hell. What we have is our instinctual nature, and our nature defines who we are. We would all be happier if we stopped trying to convince others of our own virtues and just live out our lives the best we can.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com