This statement in which Ralph Waldo Emerson declares that those who are great are misunderstood is a valid statement. Emerson establishes that being misunderstood is not always bad. The comparisons made in this statement validate it further. Pythagoras, Socrates, Galileo, and Newton were all at the forefront of their field and made incredible contributions to modern science. They most definitely were misunderstood at the time of their discovery. People of the time had great reason to not understand them because what the great minds of Pythagoras, Socrates, Galileo, and Newton were trying to communicate to people was unheard of and undoubtedly many people thought they were crazy. In a similar way, Jesus and Luther were misunderstood in their
…show more content…
In his call for a better government, he desires for a government that gets progressively centered towards the people rather than a government with a small group of men who make the large decisions. This type of government can be prone to issues. When the government is focused on the people, each person will make decisions according to their self interests. A wide range of people in different social and economic situations makes it very difficult to effectively make any progress in running the country. By human nature, the average person does not consider the good of the country as a whole, but rather the interests of oneself. The benefits of a government with fewer people involved in making decisions is that there is less control given to the people. In theory, the people will elect the person who they think is best for their region, and that person will go and make decisions for them. This person they elect must be well educated and aware of the situation of the country. In 1849, a time when widespread education was not in place, and education was not required by law in the United States, placing the government in the hands of uneducated people would have been a risk. Electing an educated official to represent a region was a much safer alternative at the time. In his essay, Thoreau is asking for a kind of government that will promote his self interests, but not necessarily the wellbeing of the
In his call for a better government, he desires for a government that gets progressively centered towards the people rather than a government with a small group of men who make the large decisions. This type of government can be prone to issues. When the government is focused on the people, each person will make decisions according to their self interests. A wide range of people in different social and economic situations makes it very difficult to effectively make any progress in running the country. By human nature, the average person does not consider the good of the country as a whole, but rather the interests of oneself. The benefits of a government with fewer people involved in making decisions is that there is less control given to the people. In theory, the people will elect the person who they think is best for their region, and that person will go and make decisions for them. This person they elect must be well educated and aware of the situation of the country. In 1849, a time when widespread education was not in place, and education was not required by law in the United States, placing the government in the hands of uneducated people would have been a risk. Electing an educated official to represent a region was a much safer alternative at the time. In his essay, Thoreau is asking for a kind of government that will promote his self interests, but not necessarily the wellbeing of the