This week in class we explored the qualifications of a good leader. We looked at an obvious example of a leader, Martin Luther King, and we looked at Goodwins "Secrets of Great Presidents", which outlined the top ten qualifications of a good president and leader. After gaining all this information on leaders, I thought, so now is there a sole definition of the word leader? The answer is no. I think peoples backgrounds, views of life and morals help them decide what constitutes a leader. For instance, one who is highly religious might view a person different than a person who gains most of their views from the mass media or school.
In our big discussion groups in class this week, we talked about this topic of morals constituting a leader and several different points came up. Some people thought that a leader should lead based on his own personal morals, yet some believed personal morals should not get in the way of leadership. This question regarding morality and leaders is difficult to address. I feel that the only way one can get an accurate answer is to use examples from history and literature. I believe Creon did not really incorporate his own personal morals in Antigone because he had a strong desire for power and strength and left behind his morals instilled by friendship and family to achieve that. However, I believe in some parts of Oedipus the King Oedipus used some of his morals to guide his leadership. For instance, at the end he thought about the fate of himself and impact on his family, and thought the best way to go about this was to gauge his eyes out, so he can bring about a better life for the future for his family.
No comments:
Post a Comment