Emma Rixhon - Philosophy
To what extent are acts of individual rebellion necessary for social progress?
Introduction
Societies and their ideals change radically over time, usually in a
primarily positive manner. These changes however cannot arise out of nowhere,
therefore there must be fundamental reasons for social progress. Social progress
is a loose term that can range from any improvement in society whether it be
economic, educational, health, or regarding civil rights. For the sake of this essay,
I will focus on how far individual acts of rebellion are necessary for social
progress directly attributed to civil rights and the acceptance of all people.
Comparing
Mill’s
adamant
attribution
to
individuals’
importance
in
society,
Camus’ somewhat contrasting attitudes to rebels’
need
for
self-importance, and
Marx’s
rejection of the importance of the individual leads to the conclusion that
individual acts of rebellion are neither necessary nor sufficient for social
progress, though they are historically present in every civil rights movement and
the individual rebels involved are undeniably the catalysts of progress.
In order to be able to use the term rebellion with clarity, it must be
defined. For the purpose of this argument, rebelling will be considered as
conscientiously acting or speaking out against the norm in order to generate a
change
in
one’s
society’s
actions
or
attitude
which
one
is
dissatisfied
with.
This
means that solely breaking the rules for the sake of it or any act of mundane
teenage rebellion are not considered as rebellions in the same sense of the term.
It
is
simple
to
break
a
rule
because
one
doesn’t
agree
with
it,
or
because
one
simply
doesn’t
care
to
follow
it,
but
this
cannot
be
regarded
as
the
same
action as
those who earnestly refuse to conform because they want to see a change in their
society. In
Camus’
text, the
term
rebel
is
assigned
to
a
man
who
“think[s]
for
himself” 1 as opposed to a person who is a slave to their society. Mill refers to
these non-conformist
beings
as
“exceptional
individuals” 2 throughout his text.
However,
he
also
uses
the
term
“individuals”
to
describe
each
person
who
makes
up society, whether they are followers of the norm or those who break it.
1
2
Camus, A. 1971 p19
Mill, JS. 2006 p76
206
3