艾蜜莉‧狄菫蓀──以蘇格拉底批判精神探究愛默生先驗論的哲學詩人

Emily Dickinson, an American Socrates in and out of Emersonian Transcendentalism

艾蜜莉‧狄菫蓀經常掙扎在確知與不知之間，她肯定「內心懷疑態度論」，因為此論點能夠幫助她檢視觀點和原理。如同她在詩作1438 中所示，為了避免「確定性耗竭」（“Certainty be sere”），她追求卻又「拒絕認定真理」（“then retards the truth”）。無論是她的生活或者作品都對權威式的觀點抱持懷疑的態度。她不輕率否認或接受任何既定的知識和意見，不允許任何思想理論限制她的思考。她不斷地實驗、從不同的角度檢視內在心靈與自然世界，並與之對話，因此，在著作中呈現永無止境的知識探究與自我探索的過程。特別喜愛能激發思維和想像力，或顛覆知識書籍的她，為拉爾夫‧沃爾多‧愛默生（Ralph Waldo Emerson）的先驗哲學所激勵，她研究愛默生的哲學，卻不為其論點所限。在先驗論的自由主義鼓舞下，狄菫蓀儘管有類似愛默生先驗論的觀察與體驗，卻不讓她的思考探索局限在先驗哲學框架中，而是保持自己個體性、獨立性、懷疑態度和實驗性的特質，充分發揮蘇格拉底（Socrates）和愛默生所提倡不墨守成規之「美國學者」（“American Scholar”）精神。她揭示了先驗論中值得商榷的論點，並跳脫先驗認知的思維，透過多方面探索與實驗程序，表達多樣化或是前後矛盾、衝突的想法，並保留不確定與互相對立的思辨。於是，她的詩作呈現了如同弗朗索瓦‧李歐塔（Jean-François Lyotard）所歸納的一種能創造出「後現代超凡」的特質。讀者若是依照傑德‧戴普曼（Jed Deppman）的建議，與狄堇蓀一同思索探討愛默生先驗論的精髓與本質，即使沒有得到肯定的真理認知，將有機會與愛默生的思想對話，進而衍生出自己獨到的見解與智慧。

Emily Dickinson, who “knows – and does not know,” deems “skepticism of the Heart” sweet for it inspiringly examines views and axioms, leading to constant inquiry and self-exploration in her writings. As suggested in poem 1438, she exerts a heart as well as mind which invites but “then retards the truth” lest “Certainty be sere.” Both her life and writings demonstrate an inclination to quesion dominant perspectives, constantly experiment, search, and enter into dialogue with her own self and the world, disallowing “an Axiom” the “Opportunity” to confine her thinking and composition. Accordingly, even though manifesting the potentiality of books to inspire her thinking and imagination, Dickinson, with the spirit of Socrates as well as Ralph Waldo Emerson in his “American Scholar,” intends to be “Man thinking” and write her own books in poetry. With stimulation from Transcendentalist liberalism and a Socratic spirit urging critical thinking, Dickinson explores in various directions and observes experience from diverse perspectives and through various lenses. Despite her observations similar to those of Transcendentalists, Dickinson is not “subdued” by her “instruments” of inspiration. Maintaining her individuality, extreme independence, “Sweet skepticism of the Heart,” and the essence of “Experiment” and “Wonder” in thinking, she brings the spirit of Socrates and the nonconformist American scholar into full play so as not to be limited to the thinking orbit of Emersonian Transcendentalism. Instead, she reveals its controversial aspects—what is questionable or not ab- solutely true—encouraging a reinvestigation into Emerson’s philosophy. Dickinson presents the multifarious aspects of the inner as well as natural world, revealing her disinheritance from transcendental knowledge, which David Porter regards as the Dickinson “mark of modernism” while Jed Deppman views such disinheritance along with her constant questioning of authority as postmodern in Trying to Think with Emily Dickinson. Writings created by Dickinson as a skeptical philosopher poet who constantly interrogates without easily accepting or rejecting learned philosophies indeed can be understood as postmodern especially as she often leaves indeterminacy indeterminate, the irreconcilable irreconcilable, and composes not within pre-established rules but through a program of constant exploration/experimentation similar to that which Jean-François Lyotard attributes to the creation of a postmodern sublime. If readers try to think with Dickinson as Deppman suggests and explore the essence of Emersonian Transcendentalism with her, they will have the chance to awaken to the difference between the conceptual but superficial understanding and the visceral/profound realization of Emerson’s philosophy as well as the inner and natural worlds. They may thereby develop their personal comprehension of the philosophy and wisdom.