Park 1

How Livable is Your Philosophy?

Park 2 Outline I. Introduction II. Research Methods A. Quality B. Quantity III. Conclusion

Park 3 Table of Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................................3 Positive sides and Negative sides ........................................................................................................4 Importance ...................................................................................................................................................5 Conclusion.....................................................................................................................................................6

Park 4 David An Mr. Dixon American Literature December 5, 2010 How Livable is Your Philosophy? Introduction From the first opening statement to the story, Where I lived, and What I lived for, I had felt that there was something about Thoreaus philosophy that I would resonate with. Are not question such as these ultimately the most important questions that one may ask oneself? What is the purpose of my life? Why do I exist? In Walden, Henry David Thoreau attempts to answer them; arguing that there is more to existence than simply living in the biological sense. In a sense, the book is a declaration of ones individuality, the celebration of freedom, and critical observations on how some elements of life may bar individuals from taking part in the abovementioned independence and freedom. To be certain, a desire to unrestrained is not a negative thing. However, there are positives and negatives in everything. An excess of freedom can have the opposite effect, inhibiting an individual. As the clich goes, nothing is perfect. Positive and Negative Sides The positive aspects of Thoreaus philosophy do have their appeals. He strongly emphasizes on individuality; what value and purpose, after all, would ones existence have if one were to be exactly same as every other individuals life? Thoreau argues that a crucial element of anyones existence is the search to be an individual, to be unique. That it is natural for a person to be different, or marches to a different drummer. (412) When one

Park 5 becomes caught in the ruts of tradition and conformity, it takes away his/her possibility and potential. (412) If all one has to do in life is to repeat what others have already done, there is nothing new that the individual can accomplish or wrought for oneself. And herein lies the crux of the problem, and the dangers that Thoreau see within society; it demands customs and rules, traditions and conformity. In exchange for the promise of safety, it requires that a person limit oneself to societys beaten path. A delicate egg that has been deposited in a wooden table can only fly freely as a beautiful insect when it leaves its prison. Similarly, following Thoreaus philosophy allows a person to escape the dead dry life of society will ones potential bloom and flourish. (415) Thoreaus second contention lies in the idea of cutting out the unnecessary details of life that burden us so, or as he would put it, Simplicity, simplicity, simplicity! (410) By becoming caught in every small detail and eddy of life, one will fail to catch sight of what is truly important. Many discover, to their despair, that the large sum of money, or the prestigious title that they have pursued so desperately do not equal happiness. Instead, Thoreau encourages find pleasure in the simple things; placing the importance in release, rather than avarice. In the transcendentalists view, there had to be something more to life than the endless cycle of extortion and getting extorted. What he sought was to live, untethered by such details, in its purest and unadulterated form; refined with no impurities, its pure essence so to speak. By relying on the excessive comforts of society, it makes one subservient towards it, or as it is written, We do not ride on the railroads; it rides upon us (411) Although luxuries make the outward aspects of ones life comfortable, Thoreau is critical of the negative influence that it exerts on a person and living life truly. In short, it

Park 6 excises the unnecessary and thus, liberates. But as stated earlier, nothing is perfect. The philosophy is not without its faults and shortcomings. Importance It is undisputable that individuality and freedom is important. However, one problem of the philosophy is the way that it goes about achieving this goal. According to Thoreau, the only way that one can become an individual is to be never be caught in precedents and alienate oneself from society. Likening society to an ancient furniture and an individual to an egg of a beautiful and winged life that had been laid into the table many years ago. (415) Following Thoreaus logic procession, one will have to leave society if he/she wishes to enjoy [ones] perfect summer life, or be free. (415) The problem with this, however, lies the two reasons. Firstly, such extreme and utter isolation does not have to be the only way for one to attain independence. Secondly, although such isolation will undoubtedly allow one live a reasonably free life, one will also have to pay something crucial in exchange. Namely, companions and acquaintances, lovers and friends. Exile is not the only way and nor is it necessarily the best way. The final problem of Thoreaus point is its limiting nature. As a part of simplifying life, Thoreau advises to, cultivate poverty like a garden herb. (413) However, this is rather navely stated, as Thoreau himself did not live a needy life. Excessive luxuries may be hindering, but so can poverty. Being poor or overt isolated can limit one from pursuing what he or she wishes to do. Conclusion Thoreaus thoughts into individuality can provide insight in many different occasions, but it also has their share of flaws. The main flaw is that the philosophy is simply unrealistic. The most important question to pose for any philosophy is whether it is

Park 7 possible. For what use is an immaculate and perfect philosophy, if its purely idealistic and unrealistic? Although Thoreaus points remain valid on many issues, frankly, all individuals living such isolated, different lives are simply not practical or possible. As much as Thoreaus points have appealed to me, it is nonsensical that I suddenly leave all and live a life in the forest. (Which, in Seoul, would be extra difficult) The fact remains even Thoreau himself was not completely dedicated to his philosophy. Thoreaus ideas and intentions are admirable, but I would still ask Mr. Thoreau, Just how livable is your philosophy?

Park 8 Reference Thoreau, Henry David, and J. Lyndon Shanley. Walden. Princeton, NJ: Princeton UP, 1971. Print.