For one thing Emerson's style is built on personal conjecture that sometimes turns out to be sheer nonsense. He states an opinion as if it was rock solid truth but many of his statements make more sense if you just rephrase them so they proclaim the exact opposite. For example, Emerson says "To believe your own thought, to believe that what is true for you in your private heart is true for all men-- that is genius." What if someone said instead "that's not genius, that's lunacy"? What you truly believe in your own heart may, in fact, be true for all men. But it wouldn't be true if your heart harbored the beliefs of, say, a sociopath. Emerson says "In every work of genius we recognize our own rejected thoughts...But wouldn't it be more truthful if we said that in most works of genius we recognize things we'd never have dreamed of in a million years? Emerson says "Society everywhere is in conspiracy against the manhood of every one of its members." Perhaps. But it might be the case that society everywhere is more of a cooperative effort to promote the well-being of its citizens. Otherwise, what's the point of living in a civilized social order? These are prime examples of Emersonian wisdom which on closer inspection aren't exactly pearls of wisdom. And one can point to other examples that show why the essay might be dangerous in the wrong hands. Emerson believes that
"The nonchalance of boys who…would disdain as much as a lord to do or say aught to conciliate one, is the healthy attitude of human nature."This is healthy? And how would most people react if a loved one came home one evening and announced "O father, O mother, O wife, O brother, O friend, I have lived with you after appearance hitherto. Henceforward I am the truth's... must be myself... This is actually fairly common among college sophomores studying Philosophy 101 but it's a less desirable trait in a grown man. According to Emerson, "Whoso would be a man, must be a nonconformist." According to others, whoso would be a man must get a job and support himself and his family. Would Emerson consider it too conformist to hold down full-time employment?
Having said all that, Emerson does make some pretty good points in this essay. I heartily endorse his love of home: "let us not rove; let us sit at home...the soul is not a traveler; the wise man stays at home...traveling is a fool's paradise...our minds travel when our bodies are forced to stay at home." These are pearls of wisdom. So is this one: "Thy lot or portion of life," said the Caliph Ali, "is seeking after thee; therefore be at rest from seeking after it." Unfortunately, the pearls are few and far between. And the few that we do find are hidden among numerous rocks and shoals of bad advice and foolish principles. Most college students and all immature readers should steer clear.