Reaction to Self Reliance

I think that George Kateb is right in his analysis of Emerson's essay "Self Reliance". I agree with Kateb's essay "Self Reliance and the Life of the Mind" in that Emerson stands behinds his ideas with great conviction and that antagonism is essential in society and life.

One issue that I concur on with Kateb and his essay "Self Reliance and the Life of the Mind" is that Emerson stands behind his ideas strongly, and presents them with conviction to his readers. In "Self Reliance and the Life of the Mind" Kateb says, "It is well to emphasize at the start Emerson's difficulty and elusiveness. He is full of assertive sentences that may seem unconditional. Every sentence seems a declaration of faith. He seems to stand behind every utterance with his whole being, and risks his being by the completeness of his candor. His variety of declarations tempts us to say that he contradicts himself, but even if we resist the temptation, we are still not sure where he finally stands."(Kateb 2). This quote means that Emerson says what he wants to say and does so with utter conviction. He is able to write with such conviction because he believes wholly in what he is saying and is being true to himself. He doesn't censor himself and I think this is what makes Emerson's writing so fantastic.By not censoring what he believes in, his writing is very authentic and individual to him.

Another topic that I agree on with Kateb and his essay "Self Reliance and the Life of the Mind" is that antagonism is a very important part of life. Kateb says in his essay "Self Reliance and the Life of the Mind",That antagonists need each other for the sake of their own sanity is shown, Emerson thinks, in the political sphere where parties goad, check, and define each other. But antagonism—not just in politics—is the health of the whole world: its value is perpetual and to be preferred over synthesis or diluted compromise. No position is arbitrary or accidental. The self-reliant thinker will try to disclose, in every case, why a partisan must say what he says and what "insurmountable fact binds him to that side" ("The Conservative," p. 176)." (Kateb 8). This quote essentially means that by someone taking an oppossing stance, someone else can stand behind their issue more firmly because they are being challenged. Once challenged many people become even more attached to their ideas. This system of life gives the full advantage of many different ideas and directions to choose from. This can be seen in the American two party system. The Republicans may come up with a plan and the Democrats may come with a completely different plan. A compromise can be then reached between the two plans to achive the best of both worlds for the country. Antagonism also challenges the intellecual mentally, and that is why Emerson thinks that  antagonism is good for keeping away insanity.

In conclusion, I agree on many points with Kateb and his horrifically long essay entitled "Self Reliance and the Life of the Mind." Emerson is able to stand behind his convictions, and is correct in that antagonism is a good thing for the world as a whole.


Bibliography:
Emerson, Ralph Waldo. "Self-Reliance and the Life of the Mind." In Emerson's Transcendental Etudes. Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University. 2003. Quoted as "Self-Reliance and the Life of the Mind" in Bloom, Harold, ed. Ralph Waldo Emerson, Updated Edition, Bloom's Modern Critical Views. New York: Chelsea House Publishing, 2006. Bloom's Literary Reference Online. Facts On File, Inc. http://www.fofweb.com/activelink2.asp?ItemID=WE54&SID=5&iPin= MCVRWE011&SingleRecord=True (accessed December 10, 2012).