A Portion of Thyself: Thoreau, Emerson, and Derrida on Giving (original) (raw)
Related papers
" Subtle distinctions " : Emerson's " Gifts " and Sentimental Rhetoric of Gift-Giving
In my paper, I reread Emerson’s “Gifts” (1844), an essay usually placed in the background of the twentieth-century gift theory canon (Schrift 1997, Ostin 2002).The essay contains a dazzling yet controversial vision of the gift. Emerson presents us with a list of appropriate gifts for different occasions and yet questions the very legitimacy of gift-giving. He sees the donation of gifts as an individual act of self-sacrifice (“thou must bleed for me”) and, at the same time, transcends it by attributing true gifts to the impersonal power of love giving “kingdoms and flower leaves indifferently”. Seeing Emerson as an “edifying” rather than “systematic” philosopher in the terms of Richard Rorty, I attempt to understand his controversial thinking by closely reading the essay and analyzing its rhetorical strategies, largely relying on Emerson’s own statement that “[t]he very language we speak, thinks for us, by the subtle distinctions which are already marked for us by its words”. As the analysis reveals, Emerson draws on the rhetoric of contemporary sentimental discourse about gifts reflected in behavior manuals and sentimental fiction and, thereby, develops his own original theory of gift exchange, anticipating the asymmetrical ethics of gift-giving in modern philosophy.
Thoreau, Parrhesia, and the Socratic Tradition of Philosophy
Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review , 2023
Most objections against Henry Thoreau aim at his "unfriendly" provocations. In this article, I argue that we need to situate his exhortative style in the context of practicing parrhesia or the bold expression of truth in the Socratic tradition of philosophy. Philosophical parrhesia can be defined as the practice of speaking the truth with an eye to bringing home the realization that one must change one's life. The transformation Thoreau has in mind is hinged upon acquiring the practical knowledge of cultivating the senses through what he calls "excursion." This, I argue, is his key contribution to the said tradition. Résumé En général, la plupart des objections aux écrits d'Henry Thoreau se penchent sur ses provocations « inamicales ». Dans cet article, je propose que nous examinions son style par rapport à la pratique de la parrhésie, c'est-à-dire l'expression de la vérité d'après la tradition socratique de la philosophie. La parrhésie est la pratique consistant à dire la vérité dans le but de prendre conscience de l'importance de changer sa propre vie. La transformation envisagée par Thoreau dépend de l'acquisition d'un savoir-faire à l'égard de la culture des sens, et ce, à travers ce qu'il appelle « l'excursion ». Voilà ce qui constitue sa contribution fondamentale à ladite tradition. Keywords: Socrates; Henry Thoreau; parrhesia; philosophy as spiritual exercises; 19 th century American philosophy Socrates: [T]hey do say that I am a very odd sort of person, always causing people to get into difficulties. You must have heard that, surely? Theaetetus: Yes, I have. Socrates: And shall I tell you what is the explanation of that? Theaetetus: Yes, please do.
I read Henry David Thoreau as an environmental virtue theorist. In this paper, I use Thoreau’s work as a tool to explore the relation between the virtue of greatness of soul and environmental virtues. Reflecting on connections between Thoreau’s texts and historical discussions of greatness of soul, or magnanimity, I offer a novel conception of magnanimity. I argue that (1) to become magnanimous, most individuals need to acquire the environmental virtue of simplicity; and (2) magnanimous individuals must possess the environmental virtue of benevolence in order to achieve their goals.
Thoreau and the Politics of Ordinary Actions
Political Theory, 2016
Many regard Henry David Thoreau as an apolitical or even antipolitical thinker, concerned above all with his personal moral purity, and thus unresponsive and irresponsible towards the society in which he lived. Contrary to this received interpretation, I argue that Thoreau's life and work articulates a robust and complex doctrine of intersubjective responsibility and political agency. Although he denies individual responsibility to institutions and other persons, he soberly embraces individual responsibility for one's role in shaping and maintaining the arrangements of society, including those that compromise the self and lend support to vicious practices and institutions. In respect of his understanding of responsibility, both his strident critique of modern society and his committed individualism appear as political postures especially apt for late modern times.