Emma Rixhon - Philosophy
To what extent are acts of individual rebellion necessary for social progress?
indirectly, as Mill suggests, people are viewed as a collective unit with worth only
being
attributed
to
what
they
produce
as
a
whole.
When
people’s
achievements
are
measured
by
their
success
as
a
collective
group
and
not
by
each
individual’s
success,
people’s
self-worth decreases. Some people may work more than others,
and rather than receiving more rewards, they receive the same amount as a
person who may work much less than them. This leads to motivation decreasing
over time and therefore society degrading as a whole. On the other hand, if
everybody continually works at the same level and for the same gain, the society
may be efficient economically, but there is no possibility of pride or flourishing.
The whole community ends up being made up of herd-men who simply follow
their duty but have no individual motivation. This may result in a successful
society when it comes to productivity and equal rights for all, though in no way
can it be said to be one where humans are actually valued. In this case, not only
does a communitarian or communist approach to individual acts of rebellion not
lead to social progress, it also completely disregards the possibility of any
development inspired by an individual mind.
Conclusion
In determining to what extent acts of individual rebellion are
necessary for social progress, it is important to note that there have been acts
of individual rebellion at the forefront of each civil rights and independence
movement.
Rosa
Parks’
refusal
to
stand up for a white man in a bus is an example
of
this,
just
as
Gandhi’s
hunger
strikes
and
Emmeline
Pankhurst’s
suffragette
speeches are. However, these individual acts did not directly result in any
progress, rather they provided a foundation to inspire more aware members of
the masses to act. Mill valued geniuses as those who would provide the ideas for
social improvement, not necessarily as those who would undertake it. Following
with this, the individual acts of rebellion were incitements to lead others into
action. Parks, Gandhi, Pankhurst, and other figureheads of civil rights
movements are the geniuses who inspired the further action and progress that
were available to society through its gradual acceptance of their ideas. For this
reason, it is undeniable that revolutionary individuals are limited by the society
215
12