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.
1 comment:
Thats a nice explanation. People like mad are very often not understood in their time.
Post a Comment