Analysis Of Emerson's De L Constolence By Monttaigne
What does the individual constitute for nature, and how does society reflect him? Articulation and human sociability is a constructive force, a replicating force, but above all it is a destructive force, one of separation. Rather than destroy the human reality or society, this destruction is necessary for Montaigne, it is the surest way to cultivate through discipline and yet it can still become redundant, futile, useless. However, Emerson sees a danger in institutions and their distraction of a man from his own pure abandon within the confines of nature. Man in society is faced by many struggles, all to reconstruct himself as an individual in the face of the collective relativity of social connection. Both authors wrote essays on experience and it is through a comparison of both that one can see the similarities and nuances of nature in both eyes. What is
…show more content…
Despite this, what is first apparent within Montaigne’s essay "De L'expérience” is the world’s submission to human variability and a lack thereof of discipline within the large diversity of man. Montaigne elaborates on something naturally fragmentary within each man, a sense of construction, of articulation, that yearns to reconstruct, to imitate, to foster a universal repetition in its arts and flourishes. However this construction is faulty for in its attempt to habituate a universality out of replication for it can never strike away the ineffable quality of difference in all nature. Montaigne writes that “La dissimiltude s’ingère d’elle meme en nos ouvrages: nul art peut arriver à la similitude…Nature s’est oblige à ne rien faire autre, qui ne [fût] dissemblable” (403), and it is from within that this failure to replicate is born. Diversity and human difference is apparent from the beginning, conflicted and opposing just as Montaigne saw in the chaotic rumble of morality in
Despite this, what is first apparent within Montaigne’s essay "De L'expérience” is the world’s submission to human variability and a lack thereof of discipline within the large diversity of man. Montaigne elaborates on something naturally fragmentary within each man, a sense of construction, of articulation, that yearns to reconstruct, to imitate, to foster a universal repetition in its arts and flourishes. However this construction is faulty for in its attempt to habituate a universality out of replication for it can never strike away the ineffable quality of difference in all nature. Montaigne writes that “La dissimiltude s’ingère d’elle meme en nos ouvrages: nul art peut arriver à la similitude…Nature s’est oblige à ne rien faire autre, qui ne [fût] dissemblable” (403), and it is from within that this failure to replicate is born. Diversity and human difference is apparent from the beginning, conflicted and opposing just as Montaigne saw in the chaotic rumble of morality in