The rebel is the one who experiences 'ennui' when he finds out the limitations of the existing system. What is worse is that the department of philosophy is closed to newer ways of thinking and newer systems of logic. This so called outlier realizes that the existing frameworks have led to a poverty of imagination among the authorities and society in general. They do not even know the essence of what 'everything' or 'nothing' is as a result language has become a useful tool to spread exploitation and confusion. 'Mad' is the rebel who points out the limitations of the three part syllogism. There can never be anybody. There can only be somebody, nobody and mad. Somebody is a respectable individual who follows instructions without asking illegitimate questions.He is more able to tolerate 'nobody' as nobody does not threaten him. This is why he laughs along with nobody after it is claimed that only nobody is perfect. Mad points out the hypocrisy in the argument and suggests that it would not matter if he admonishes nobody as nobody does not exist and he should rightly not retaliate as he has no value in life. Somebody makes it worse by calling the outlier mad as a result of his perception and mad admonishes somebody and not just anybody. Anybody does not exist as a result of the constraints of language. Reality and truth are not relevant. This rebel is the one who is trying to bring about a paradigm shift by contributing to his field. He gets rejected on account of being a path breaker. He is the misunderstood contributor; the terminal outlier.