Like many other authors, Michel de Montaigne (1533-1592) regarded writing as a process of self-discovery; he talked about self-discovery through self-expression. He meant that we get to know ourselves better when we outline our ideas in writing, or when we convey our sincere thoughts to other people.
However, Montaigne knew that introspection is difficult and that most meditation techniques will fail to deliver the desired results. People seldom become more philosophical or effective by pushing themselves.
That’s why personal development (the pursuit of happiness) should be practised as “letting go,” not “pushing.” Experience shows that we will thrive and attain our goals faster when we practise self-expression and self-discovery.
Montaigne often repeats this idea is his essays. It constitutes one of the pillars of his personal philosophy. For example, his essay “Of the Education of Children” favours the development of a child’s natural talents, instead of imposing constraints.
Similarly, in his essay “Of Friendship,” Montaigne remarks that, on the one hand, we need self-expression to find friends; and on the other hand, those friends enable our self-discovery because their words and actions are going to mirror our values.
Montaigne’s method for self-discovery and self-expression
Writing constitutes Montaigne’s pre-eminent method of self-expression and self-discovery, but he also used other methods. In his essay “Of the Useful and the Honourable,” Montaigne is also recommending travelling and reading books as valid ways of self-discovery.
The same proposal is made by Montaigne in his essay titled “Of Solitude,” where he argues that it’s difficult to acquire self-awareness without regular periods of solitude. Gregariousness, in the sense of random socializing, can impede self-expression rather than promote it.
We need friends that match our ethical values and personal interests, but socialising in large groups may prove ineffective as a method for finding friends. Why? Because it’s far easier to figure out people by talking to them in small groups.
Montaigne was aware of the desire to find kindred souls as best friends, but despite using relevant examples, he drew the wrong conclusion.
I regret that Montaigne only gave a weak recommendation for self-expression and self-discovery. Instead, he placed too much emphasis on randomness. He viewed his close friendship with Etienne de la Boetie (1530-1563) as a lucky break instead of attributing it to their shared philosophy and artistic interests.
Montaigne compared to Ralph Waldo Emerson
Three centuries later, the American essayist Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882) expanded Montaigne’s arguments about self-expression and self-discovery.
Unfortunately, Emerson emphasised quasi-magical elements that increase the confusion created by Montaigne. Emerson’s key work “Self-Reliance” calls for trusting our own ideas at the expense of social constraints, but what if our ideas are wrong?
Furthermore, in his essay “Nature,” Emerson is praising the semi-mystical elements in human ideas. He categorizes ideas as good provided that they are transcendentally connected to nature, but how are we supposed to ascertain such connection?
Like Montaigne, Emerson was a passionate advocate for all self-expression and self-discovery, but he got lost in delusions about “transcendental connections with nature.”
Emerson repeated a hundred times that we should trust “our inner voice,” but did not explain how to tell apart inner voices that speak wisdom from those that speak madness.
Why do I say that Emerson’s transcendentalism only added confusion to Montaigne’s emphasis on lucky breaks? Because neither Emerson nor Montaigne is providing a valid method to enhance self-expression and self-discovery.
Montaigne compared to Henry David Thoreau
Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862) came up with far better answers in his work “Walden,” that reflects on his experience of living in a solitary cabin near Walden Pond. Thoreau repeats the main themes from Montaigne and Emerson, but adds a key aspect: practical knowledge and practical skills.
It’s fine to praise solitude, meditation and a deep connection to nature, but those are worthless without practical knowledge and practical skills.
Thoreau’s advice applies to self-expression, self-discovery, and personal development in general. We can speak long about kindred souls that meet by chance (Montaigne), transcendental connections to nature (Emerson), and other esoteric elements, but success requires practical knowledge and practical skills.
Curiously enough, Montaigne and Emerson failed to see the path that they had themselves walked. Both had achieved self-expression and self-discovery by acquiring vast knowledge and devoting vast efforts to their writing.
It wasn’t a lucky break that turned Montaigne into a literary engine, nor a transcendental connection what turned Emerson into a cultural force.
Montaigne’s and Emerson’s self-expression, self-discovery, and success are the result of practical skills put into practice. I do recommend reading their works, but with a critical eye that separates the wheat from the chuff.
As for Henry David Thoreau, I view him as the archetype of self-expression and self-discovery. I don’t think that his readers need to repeat the Walden Pond experience to draw important lessons from his writings.
If you are interested in putting rational ideas into practice in today’s circumstances, I recommend you my book titled “The 10 principles of rational living.”