And if we can't measure their merit, is there a point in looking at them at all?
-Colin
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
The Value of Transcendentalism
Today we were talking about whether or not Emerson would have considered his work and transcendentalism a "success." Is success measured in terms of practical application of an idea or in terms popularity? I think we agree that transcendentalism, while not necessarily a commonly followed idea, is certainly more popular than it is practical. However, if success is something concrete, then the most accurate way to gauge success is by looking at application, the only tangible aspect of philosophy. No one in class today seemed to think that idealist movements like transcendentalism could be applied to the real world, so how can one can one begin to measure their merit?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I feel like transcendentalism is too abstract ever to be applicable. So, applicability doesn't qualify as measuring success here. You are right in saying we can't measure their merit.But that doesn't mean we don't have a reason to study them. I think the only real point is to learn stuff and talk about for philosophy for the sake of it. Basically, knowledge for knowledges sake.
ReplyDelete~Becca
Personally, I would agree with you that practical application is more important than popularity. However, I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss Emerson's ideas and other examples of "idealism" as useless simply because they are not concrete. While Emerson never cured cancer or designed a combustion engine, he did manage to inspire future generations to think in different ways. While this may not be so tangible, it is still, in many ways, a merit.
ReplyDelete-Bryce C.