"Everything is in continual flux on earth. Nothing on it retains a constant and static form, and our affections, which are attached to external things, necessarily pass away and change as they do...And how can we call happiness a fleeting state which leaves our heart still worried and empty, which makes us long for something beforehand or desire something else afterward" (Roussea, p.68).
We learned from reading Roussea's First Discourse that he believes that the increased accumulation of luxury and wealth has distracted us from ourselves. What should be of most importance is one's soul and virtue rather than wealth because wealth, according to Roussea, leads to idle boredom which leads to a further displacement from nature and morality. Roussea believed that there is goodness in nature and that freedom and perfectablility rests in nature but can only be accessed through discovery and experience.
Roussea's revery on St. Peter's Island details his own experience in nature apart from the outside world. Through his discoveries Roussea saw a perpetual movement in nature, much like Aristotle, where our personal experiences and actions in nature are molded by the way we perceive our own happiness and morality. Roussea argued that happiness is not brought forth by a recollection of the past or the fortelling of the future. Rather, happiness is found when "the soul finds a solid enough base to rest itself on entirely and to gather its whole being into, without needing to recall the past or encroach upon the future" (p.68). In nature, apart from the deceitful surroundings of luxury and wealth true happiness is found by a certain state of being. Roussea found this state of being and noticed a difference between the false pleasures he felt back home and the happiness he felt on St. Peter's Island. He labeled the joys that we are most accustomed to as transitory pleasures due to our corrupted perception of happiness. In order to harmonize us with the movement of nature that can bring us to this state of being is by "a uniform and moderated movement having neither jolts or lapses." (p.69). I believe that it would be really hard if not impossible to have a uniform movement amongst all humans. There are so many differing perspectives and values that would make any agreement between men in regards to nature difficult.
I have experienced something similar to Roussea's experience on St. Peter's Island. I spend about ten days on the Canadian and American border canoeing and portaging from one small lake to the next. In my experience out there, apart from my cell phone and life back home, I was able to have a better appreciation for nature. Looking back on my trip brings happy memories but i can see what Roussea was talking about because the happiness I feel from my memories does not compare to the happiness i felt at that given time. Maybe our transitory pleasures from our brief experience of being in that state within nature is all we can hope for now on. Have any of you shared a similar experience like that of Roussea's on St. Peter's Island? If so, can you draw a difference between the transitoy pleasures you feel now through recollection and the happiness you felt during that specific experience?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hm3JodBR-vs
I remember as a kid I would go out after it rained and search for snails, slugs and earthworms. I loved the way the landscape looked calmed by the cool rain and how a light fog would accumulate and as I looked into the distance. Of course, it was only a matter of time before my view of green was disrupted by the sound of the train or the neighbor’s house. I just pretended they did not exist; I fixated my eyes on the lawn and bushy areas and imagined I was like Steve Irwin. In those days, I didn’t mind digging through mud and holding rolly pollies or worms. It all felt “natural.” Why be afraid of that stuff if other people are surrounded by it all the time?
ReplyDeleteI do feel like the pleasures felt by being surrounded by nature are very different from having pleasant experiences at home. Being in a fresh, organic environment evokes a unique and long-lasting state of euphoria; it’s ever changing, especially with the weather. However, as you stated, humans have so many differing perspectives and values that experiencing a uniform feeling of happiness would be difficult. Finding a constant state of happiness in nature would be further complicated as we age – my older sister didn’t feel the same way about mud as I did back then. As a matter of fact, if I were to dig around in the dirt these days I would feel more embarrassed than anything but I can recall the sense of adventure I experienced at the time.
I can definitely identify with Rousseau's idea of happiness as being completely free from the luxuries and distractions of modern life. The summer before my senior year of high school, myself and a few friends went on a camping trip in southern Ohio. We would help weed, plow, and plant crops for a local farm all day, share completely natural and organic meals with the farmers, then have long talks under the stars before going back to our tents to sleep. It was tough for the first couple of days, but after awhile we got used to the work and the isolation from our lives, and began to enjoy being so close to nature. I feel like I really began to realize who I was and where I wanted to go with my life that summer, so completely removed from modernity. I still recall that time as one of the best of my life, and I believe it has definitely shaped my interests and pursuits thus far.
ReplyDelete