What do you think?
Rate this book
Equality by Default: An Essay on Modernity As Confinement
For most of our contemporaries, to speak of modernity is to think immediately of liberty, equality, and democracy—and to assume that all is well. But things are not so simple. For while the culture of modernity has spread gradually throughout the West for roughly two hundred years, it accelerated in the 1960s in such a way as to undergo a subtle transformation. Hence the paradox of the world we live by all appearances the "rights of man" have emerged triumphant, yet at the same time they have been emptied of substance because of their radicalization. Modern man thus finds himself isolated and ensnared. By right, his autonomy should strengthen him; but in fact, he has been dispossessed of himself. The great artifice of our time is to give conformism the mask of liberty. Philippe Bénéton, a prominent French religious conservative, has long meditated on Tocqueville, and Equality by Default is Tocquevillian in that it does not offer a partisan polemic, but rather paint
217 pages, Hardcover
First published March 1, 1997
6 people are currently reading
107 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews
September 27, 2019
This is an astoundingly good book which runs straight to the heart of the issues. The author clearly distinguishes the modern notion of “absolute freedom” (I can do as I like, and thus I’m free), With the more ancient notion of freedom rooted in our humanity and our connections with and obligations to one another.
The really heartening point was to see how he also carried this forward into his discussions of wider society, the economy and our relatedness to one another in very perceptive ways.
The really heartening point was to see how he also carried this forward into his discussions of wider society, the economy and our relatedness to one another in very perceptive ways.
January 11, 2013
Anyone wanting to get a better understanding of society's ailments needs to read this book. The title itself is enticing for a philosophy book, but it does not entirely reveal the scope of the topic covered. Having read the book, I can say that the best thing that anyone who wants to read this book can do before reading is simply ask, "What is wrong with Western society?" and then to ask what the source of those problems really is.
Phillipe Beneton has done something remarkable with this book; he as taken a step back from the (Western) World and has subjected it to scrutiny. Because of that he can make some very insightful remarks into our world, and in doing so makes a case that while all people start off in this life as politically and morally equal, it will be their actions that determine if they stay so. For example, can one say that a doctor is no better than a drug dealer in the eyes of society? Or can we say that a nun is no better than porn stars? An overarching theme of this book is this: that no two actions really are equal, and because of that some people are considered equal to all others while being a drain to society.
This book is an eye opener for just about whoever reads it; and, personally, everyone should read it. It will be a bit difficult to grasp at first because the approach taken in this book is so rarely used in this day and age, but with enough thoughtful pondering while reading the message will become clear to anyone who reads.
Phillipe Beneton has done something remarkable with this book; he as taken a step back from the (Western) World and has subjected it to scrutiny. Because of that he can make some very insightful remarks into our world, and in doing so makes a case that while all people start off in this life as politically and morally equal, it will be their actions that determine if they stay so. For example, can one say that a doctor is no better than a drug dealer in the eyes of society? Or can we say that a nun is no better than porn stars? An overarching theme of this book is this: that no two actions really are equal, and because of that some people are considered equal to all others while being a drain to society.
This book is an eye opener for just about whoever reads it; and, personally, everyone should read it. It will be a bit difficult to grasp at first because the approach taken in this book is so rarely used in this day and age, but with enough thoughtful pondering while reading the message will become clear to anyone who reads.
April 10, 2015
A scintillating, eye-opening read. Highly recommended for anyone living in the 21st century.
http://goodgazette.blogspot.com/2015/...
http://goodgazette.blogspot.com/2015/...
June 2, 2019
Very interesting critique of modernity which is influenced by a philosophy which rejects human nature and the good of man as contained in both liberal progressivism and extreme libertarianism. The author discusses the contradictory consequences of rejecting the good of man and of the philosophy he refers to as equality by default.
March 12, 2022
This book is more enlightening than I imagined a book could be, chock full of beautiful, thought-provoking passages and presenting a cohesive worldview that the honest, thoughtful lector will recognize as true and significant. It's the only book I've ever read other than scripture that I feel strongly everyone should read--especially modern young adults. And it's good the whole way through, never redundant, ending with three or four powerful concluding chapters.
July 23, 2019
Fantastic read. Discusses why there must be an existent, structural code of conduct for a society to function. Describes why an expert in a subject must also practice what they preach. Also refutes the whateverism fallacy. For anyone concerned with the post structural mess society is in and how to fix it.
June 7, 2022
Interesting thoughts on democracy. I read it for my political science class at byu
December 2, 2015
Enlightenment ideals perverted
Sounding much like Alan Bloom, Bénéton opens with the pleasant but passionless nature of his law students. We find in Bénéton’s argument the success of Enlightenment social philosophy so complete that we no longer debate the fundamental basis of its products. Nor, he claims, do we see just how perverse they have become over time. The vital questions at stake since Aristotle, wrestled with by the Middle Ages, contested by Hobbes, Locke and Jefferson, are now blasé matters of mere opinion and taken for granted - “whatever.”
Like Louis Dumont’s Essay on Individualism, Bénéton’s book is really an essay on the spin-offs of Enlightenment’s central idea of individualism, in this case, equality. Bénéton argues the evolving radicalization of this notion has not unified and elevated us, but separated and isolated us. Equality is no longer due to an essential human essence – what the Stoics called a “divine spark.” Instead, equality means that no one is better than anyone else, with a celebration of petty differences, none of which could be so vital as to raise one over another. Our ideals, claims Bénéton, have become hollow, without substance. His best work is in showing the toxicity of modern relativity and the void it has created in all those once-high-minded ideals, now paid lip service.
Bénéton shows us one reason for our confusion is that those who set the trajectory for modernity severed from the ancients, did not and could not build a solid foundation for moral action based on reasoned arguments. (This very much depresses me.) Every attempt from David Hume to John Rawls has been a patch, striving to fix what they broke. As we now see, and Bénéton laments, none have worked, hence, the slow motion decline of Western philosophical terrain. At least if we define that terrain in terms of an agreed morality, proper and worthy human values, and any hope for belonging. If, on the other hand, morality is antiquated, there is no such thing as a proper definition of the human, much less proper values, and belonging is just another word for oppressive responsibilities, then we’re doing very well.
What did work was morality grounded in human nature or religion. And worked so well that the ancients adhered to their foundation for moral action and behavior with as much challenge of that foundation as whether or not to take another breath. How they were able to cherry pick between the moral and abject immoral, especially that of their religions, while still maintaining that foundation, remains a puzzle to this reader. Bénéton doesn't say. This puzzle makes one wonder if, despite our obvious and frequently pathetic ills, modernity isn’t so bad after all. Or, maybe it is. Bénéton certainly make a strong case for that.
Sounding much like Alan Bloom, Bénéton opens with the pleasant but passionless nature of his law students. We find in Bénéton’s argument the success of Enlightenment social philosophy so complete that we no longer debate the fundamental basis of its products. Nor, he claims, do we see just how perverse they have become over time. The vital questions at stake since Aristotle, wrestled with by the Middle Ages, contested by Hobbes, Locke and Jefferson, are now blasé matters of mere opinion and taken for granted - “whatever.”
Like Louis Dumont’s Essay on Individualism, Bénéton’s book is really an essay on the spin-offs of Enlightenment’s central idea of individualism, in this case, equality. Bénéton argues the evolving radicalization of this notion has not unified and elevated us, but separated and isolated us. Equality is no longer due to an essential human essence – what the Stoics called a “divine spark.” Instead, equality means that no one is better than anyone else, with a celebration of petty differences, none of which could be so vital as to raise one over another. Our ideals, claims Bénéton, have become hollow, without substance. His best work is in showing the toxicity of modern relativity and the void it has created in all those once-high-minded ideals, now paid lip service.
Bénéton shows us one reason for our confusion is that those who set the trajectory for modernity severed from the ancients, did not and could not build a solid foundation for moral action based on reasoned arguments. (This very much depresses me.) Every attempt from David Hume to John Rawls has been a patch, striving to fix what they broke. As we now see, and Bénéton laments, none have worked, hence, the slow motion decline of Western philosophical terrain. At least if we define that terrain in terms of an agreed morality, proper and worthy human values, and any hope for belonging. If, on the other hand, morality is antiquated, there is no such thing as a proper definition of the human, much less proper values, and belonging is just another word for oppressive responsibilities, then we’re doing very well.
What did work was morality grounded in human nature or religion. And worked so well that the ancients adhered to their foundation for moral action and behavior with as much challenge of that foundation as whether or not to take another breath. How they were able to cherry pick between the moral and abject immoral, especially that of their religions, while still maintaining that foundation, remains a puzzle to this reader. Bénéton doesn't say. This puzzle makes one wonder if, despite our obvious and frequently pathetic ills, modernity isn’t so bad after all. Or, maybe it is. Bénéton certainly make a strong case for that.
Read
November 21, 2009None
Want to read
April 18, 2018Recommended by Stephen Bahr
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews