If you had to choose a handful of men to represent the best of humanity, who would they be and why?
This is the question Emerson undertakes in his collection titled, “Representative Men”. I’ve previously covered selections from Ralph Waldo Emerson’s First and Second Series of Essays. Today, we look at a later essay, “Montaigne; Or ‘the Skeptic,’” which was published as part of a collection of lectures entitled “Representative Men” in 1850. This collection highlights six men whom Emerson considered to be great, and who shaped his work. These men are Plato, Emanuel Swedenborg, Michel de Montaigne, William Shakespeare, Napoleon Bonaparte, and Johann Wolfgang von Goethe. Each embodies one value Emerson considers essential to living a successful life. This collection, along with “The American Scholar,” and his first two series of essays, forms the crux of Emerson’s thought and solidified his prominence as an American thinker at the time of its release and continues to do so today.
This particular essay, “the Skeptic,” forms the cornerstone of the “Representative Men” collection, as well as Emerson’s philosophy encouraging contemplation and individual perspectives and motives instead of blindly following the customs of society. Montaigne’s essays, which profoundly affected Emerson, encouraged his readers as well to examine themselves and their culture, as part of the French Renaissance. Three hundred years later, these same ideas would shape the American Renaissance, with Emerson at the forefront.
Here Emerson is illustrating his argument that everyday individuals need to develop the habit and mindset of questioning ideas, tradition, custom, and habit, by raising remarkable men as examples. He is simply prompting people to be more mindful of the reasons they do what they do, and changing those decisions if they don’t line up with their principles. Emerson joins a long line of thinkers and writers who urge their audience to thoughtfully consider what they want to accomplish – in themselves and in life – as well as think through their reasoning and motivation.
Sensation v Morals
Emerson begins by stating every fact has two sides; sensation and morality, the apparent and the real. He states every man is born predisposed toward one side or the other when it comes to these facts; some people tend toward the observable and others seek to know the source of the observable. These two schools of thought are where most people are happy to live their lives. However, there exists a third option; the skeptic, who takes the best qualities from each and combines them. Over their lifetimes, many may occupy the space of a skeptic, though most will not remain there. It is all too often easier to retreat back to our safer predispositions than to maintain a posture of critically thinking and reasoning through why we do the things we do, especially when it comes to very personal decisions like values, beliefs on existence, etc.
Emerson outlines the problem with thinking in purely practical terms – to the exclusion of any free will or metaphysical possibility – is that it leads to “indifference and results in disgust.” It is this line of thinking in empiricism which he initially rejected and which led him to explore his own philosophy. The ‘studious class’ is steeped in academic knowledge, but this rigor doesn’t extend to the practical world. This renders this perspective too small to function as a practical way of living. The problem with both methods of thinking, according to Emerson, is that they lie on the extremes.
Enter, the Skeptic
“I know that human strength is not in extremes, but in avoiding extremes.”
Emerson then introduces the third, more prudent position of the skeptic. A skeptic blends the best from the other two perspectives, which are each extremes. Instead of being ruled by feelings or empirical reasoning entirely, the skeptic considers the best approach as regards their individual understanding, resources, and perspective. The idea of following a dogma or “toeing the party line” is antithetical to the skeptic.
The term “skepticism” or “skeptic” can have a pessimistic slant to it, which is not what Emerson is implying here. He is introducing it as a positive, even ideal, perspective to adopt. The skeptic’s stance is one of measured contemplation and thoughtful undertaking .The skeptic doesn’t accept declarations as true or false simply based on who is making the declaration. Emerson rejected the strict system of rationalism, as well as the elevated philosophizing of the day, in favor of a balanced approach, as modeled in Montaigne’s writings.
Montaigne bio
Emerson then gives a brief bio of Montaigne, the experience of reading his essays, and his legacy. Emerson clearly has a great respect and esteem for Montaigne, which he acknowledges in this essay, calling him the most frank and honest of all writers. He especially appreciates the vividness and lively quality of Montaigne’s writing,
“Cut these words and they would bleed; they are vascular and alive.”
Michel de Montaigne (1533 – 1592) was an influential French philosopher most revered for his Essays, which are considered a foundation of modern thought. He struck a balance between reducing the material and spiritual world to math and over the top philosophizing which served little practical use. He also legitimized the essay as a literary form. An important distinction of Montaigne’s work is his humble acknowledgment of doubt, which would come to be embraced by thinkers like Friedrich Nietzsche. In addition to Emerson, his writing has also inspired Francis Bacon, William Shakespeare, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and others.
Montaigne accurately observed that it requires more than “book learning” to live a satisfied life, a position which would become a key tenet of Emerson’s philosophy and anchor his “The American Scholar” address. On his deathbed, Montaigne comments, “Most of my actions are guided by example, not by choice.” It is precisely this convention that he, as later did Emerson, warned against in his writing.
The nature of the skeptic.
At some point in their lives, most people will assume the posture of the skeptic – they may not remain there, though. Emerson assigns this quality to students “in relation to the particulars which society adores, but which he sees to be reverend only in their tendency and spirit.”
However, the easier, less controversial decision is to honor the things which society honors, and to acquire them for ourselves. Social conventions, in any age, remain in vogue because most people go along with them. He speaks to the difficulty of maintaining the skeptic’s posture,
“Society does not like to have any breath of question blown on the existing order.”
Undeterred, Emerson maintains that the skeptic is superior due to their willingness to examine and question customs and societal norms with the aim of finding what is true or worthy in them. He declares that those who possess wisdom are skeptics,
“The superior mind will find itself equally at odds with the evils of society and with the projects that are offered to relieve them.”
The reasoned, skeptical approach is to take the best elements from the sensory and empirical stances and use them to create a practical set of principles to act on.
Emerson illustrates his theory of the skeptic with this vivid description,
“The philosophy we want is one of fluxions and mobility. The Spartan and the Stoic schemes are too stark and stiff for our occasion. A theory of Saint John, and of non-resistance, seems, on the other hand, too thin and aerial. We want some coat woven of elastic steel, stout as the first and limber as the second. We want a ship in these billows we inhabit. An angular, dogmatic house would be rent to chips and splinters in this storm of many elements. No, it must be tight, and fit to the form of man, to live at all; as a shell must dictate the architecture of a house founded on the sea.”
He goes on to underscore the importance of intellect and practical living. Emerson, it seems, was seeking to both live and document an answer to Montaigne’s call for contemplation and balance.
Final Thoughts
Emerson’s exploration of thought and subsequent spurring on his readers to do the same acts surely as a model; we see Emerson looking within himself and his experiences in nature in order to Transcend the world and society, and in turn, he recommends the same. Interestingly though, he leaves the request open-ended. He doesn’t say, “If you look within yourself you’ll agree with me,” but simply, “If you consider what you really want in life, and act on that, you’ll lead a much happier life.”
It’s been through Emerson’s work that I discovered Montaigne’s Essays, and I am so excited to explore more of Montaigne’s ideas around life, learning, and contemplation.
“Montaigne; Or, the Skeptic” is a foundational essay outlining the French philosopher’s influence on Emerson and Transcendentalism and reminding us to look at habits, situations, ideas, and conflict with humility and a measured approach. If you find yourself on the extreme side of an argument, perhaps you are overlooking an important consideration.
