Self Reliance - Emerson

Please help me guys:

1. Aside from conformity, what are the other obstacles to self-reliance?

2. Do most of us really gauge our esteem for each other by what we have and not by what we are?

3. What are Emerson's arguments against consistency? What does he mean to say about the truth today may not be true tomorrow?

4. Mention other people, beside those given by Emerson, who were misunderstood before their ideas were accepted. Why were they misunderstood at first?

5. Point out the relevance of Emerson's condemnation of a materialism to a country such as ours which is striving to attain economic stability.


Lots of thanks guys! :thumbs_up

I've asked myself a few of these questions too, as I've read this essay.

1. Another obstacle to self-reliance that Emerson mentions is regret and discontent. He says, "Another sort of false prayers are out regrets. Discontent is the want of self-reliance: it is infirmity of will. Regret calamities, if you can thereby help the sufferer; if not, attend your own work, and already the evil begins to be repaired." Thus, whatever impedes our will to work or be happy with who we are and what we have, such as regret and discontent, is an obstacle to self-reliance. There are probably others too, but you should recegnize those.
2. I've wondered whether most people are that petty. Really, I think of a bit of Kant's philosophy, that we need to treat people as being valuable in and of themselves and not as a means for something else. Generally, that is a given, you'd think. But that means your love for people should not be dependent on what they can give you, such as: respect, affection, praise, so on and so forth. Then, you would be valuing affection itself more than the person. Does that make sense? I think the major thing to remember here is that the word "have" refers to more than objects, or qualities...it can even be so great a concept as love. However, what people "are" is greater even than a concept so wonderful as love. So, we are not petty...we just underestimate the value of the individual, I guess.
3. He doesn't fully attack consistency, as much as "foolish consistency." After all, there are some good consistencies out there. I take it that this attack is based on his belief that we should explore our thoughts, feelings, and opinions often. Life changes, we grow, we change...and a foolish consistency can rob us of acknowledging the changes...and not knowing who we really are. When he mentions that something that is true for us one day may not be true for us the next, he is speaking about our perceptions, and the personal truths we know. Again, he wants people to acknowledge that their thoughts and feelings change, and that they should not be ashamed of that.
4. Well, this fits so many people. I guess the best example I can think of is Jesus Christ. Those who misunderstood him were too proud to accept the truth. Pride, I believe, is a "foolish consistency" itself.
5. I think of course that economic stability is rooted in being wise and prudent with purchases. At least...personal economic stability. The nation's screwed! Just kidding...

Emerson rocks :-]