New Releases

Recent Publications by Topic

Recent Book Reviews

Book Reviews by Topic

Submission Guidelines

Book Review

‘Rebellion’ is a term that is not commonly written about in the philosophical literature because of its negative connotations. Groarke dispels this negative view of rebellion by arguing that the ‘good (moral) rebel’ is characterized as an individual who transcends an oppressive, stifling system or society for the sake of a higher good. This idea is an important contribution to the literature since usually rebels are known as individuals who act immorally in order to make some outrageous point. Groarke changes the paradigm of rebellion by arguing that only ‘good rebellion’ is genuine rebellion. To rebel is to critically reflect on the current practices within society and to evaluate them. As Groarke writes, “good rebels supply us with a paradigmatic example of heroic human achievement”. (p.13) Thus, good rebellion is a moral achievement, perhaps one of the highest human achievements to which human beings can aspire.

There are three parts to Groarke’s argument for good rebellion. First, Groarke argues that the good rebel must be a rational agent. Groarke advocates a pragmatic model of rationality which may be characterized as a consistency that satisfies an objective criterion. According to the pragmatist model, the ultimate criterion for reality involves the everyday lives of individuals. Ideally, moral beliefs should guide an agent’s actions since moral truths are objective and true regardless of what we think of them. They judge the rationality of an agent’s actions and provide objective standards of behavior. Thus, morality should be experienced as an objective constraint on reality, making our relationship to the world moral in nature.

Thus, for Groarke, rationality, autonomy, and morality are necessarily connected. In order to be a good rebel, an agent must act rationally and do the right thing. In other words, it is imperative that rational agents act morally and rebel against immoral acts that stifle human flourishing. To act rationally is to act rightly and dutifully as a self-fulfilling, flourishing individual. Thus, rationality is a necessary requirement for an agent to act autonomously. Good rebels must be ruled by the dictates of reason. When an agent denies the rational element of actions, (s)he fails to be a good rebel. Rational agents should imagine a world beyond the one they presently inhabit for the world as we know it is not paradigmatically moral. The good rebel must expose the myths and clichés that society accepts as true.

Second, Groarke argues that human beings are evaluators and that, therefore, they cannot adopt a neutral stance towards morality. Morality begins as a personal conversion, such as some interior change of heart, and an active commitment to others. In fact, Groarke directly asserts that human beings are naturally moral creatures because they are evaluators and can critically reflect on their actions. This is quite a contentious claim to make given our current malaise of modernity which celebrates a lack of morality and authenticity. If individuals are really naturally moral, why do so many individuals fail at what is so natural? Also, why is it so hard for many individuals to act morally? Perhaps the culprit of the problem is that the modern social climate shuns moral individuals and actions. Therefore, most individuals unnaturally conform to an amoral stance towards the way they live and conduct themselves. Or, perhaps the culprit of the problem is that we are not naturally predisposed to act morally at all, but must work hard to become moral. I think that the second scenario is the most likely, although the former scenario is uplifting and encouraging.

For Groarke, morality is not merely about doing certain kinds of actions; rather it is about being a particular kind of person. Morality means living up to the objective ideals of rationality and character formation. The objective standard of morality presupposes that there are rules, habits or other activities that transform an individual into the type of person (s)he aspires to be. Morality then becomes the rationale that underlies all human striving since it is a tool that can be used to evaluate ourselves and others. Moral agents act out of a sense of duty, while amoral individuals are not aware of any duty to reason. Amoral individuals simply act as they desire without any objective standard that restricts their behavior.

Third, Groarke argues that good rebels strive to act virtuously in a society that harasses, oppresses, and punishes moral behavior. Good rebels choose a moral course of action not out of self-interest but because it is the right thing to do. For Groarke, rebellion begins as the motivating force behind all human achievement. Rebellion cannot occur without a decisive commitment to the good in the hope of opposing mindless conventions that stifle intelligence and autonomy. Groarke distinguishes between the good and bad rebel. Good rebellion takes a significant amount of effort, self-control, and willpower. The bad rebel knowingly rebels against some important good and does what (s)he desires and is inclined to being a slave to his/her irrational and unreflective nature. Therefore, bad rebels do not rebel in the proper sense of the term. Bad rebels either see the cultivation of conscience as immoral or they publicly pretend that the cultivation of conscience is important while privately regarding conscience as a weakness of human nature. The good rebel is true enough to him/herself to not live under such false pretenses.

We all dwell in a narcissistic society that has been broken, divided, and fragmented by an overwhelming preoccupation with the self. A narcissistic individual is constantly preoccupied with his/her own desires, feelings, and aspirations. The solution to a narcissistic society, for Groarke, is for an individual to get beyond his/her subjective preoccupations with the self to more objective standards of assessment. This takes place most notably when an individual strives to live authentically and morally in a world that does not necessarily appreciate authenticity and morality. Groarke’s solution to our society’s lack of authenticity does not rest with completely separating from our nonauthentic, narcissistic society; rather, individuals must criticize certain oppressive societal structures and yet continue to live in the world. The good rebel ensures that his/her convictions and aspirations are his/her own through reflection and evaluation.

Overall, I found Groarke’s book a joy to read because it argues in favour of a special faith in the human mind to ‘rebel’ against oppressive stereotypes and clichés which is necessary for human flourishing. Groarke also has an absolute faith in the moral nature of mankind to live a virtuous life which is uplifting. Further, Groarke’s book is an important contribution to the literature since his ideas acquiesce with many contemporary theorists who argue that an agent must act authentically and morally in order to become self-actualized, self-fulfilled, and flourish in this modern time. Some of these theorists include: Mill, Taylor, Nietzsche, Ross, Kant, Moore, Rorty, Wolf, Murdoch, Nussbaum, and Swanton, just to name a few. Groarke believes that authenticity is an instance of good rebellion since when one strives to be authentic, one strives to be moral, and in the process upholds the highest standards of objective evaluation. However, it is ultimately up to each one of us to pick up the moral torch and live the life of a good rebel.

Irene Sonia Switankowsky, Wilfrid Laurier University

TO ORDER BOOKS:
2010 Eastpark Boulevard
Cranbury, New Jersey 08512
Phone (609) 655-4770
Fax (609) 655-8366

TO REQUEST A CATALOGUE:
M-GH2-01
285 Madison Avenue
Madison, New Jersey 07940
Phone (973) 443-8564
Fax (973) 443-8364
fdupress@fdu.edu

TO RECEIVE UPDATES ON NEWLY RELEASED TITLES BY EMAIL:
fdupress@fdu.edu

Photograph courtesy of Louise Dell-Bene Stahl © 2001