|
|
 |
|
|
||||
| Home business lead | |||||
Should the efficient operation of a community or corporation outweigh the principle of inclusiveness At what point does leadership give way to dictatorship The answer is neither simple nor free from home business lead ambiguity. Let us assess leadership by examining these representative texts: the Plato's republic, the Rule of Saint Benedict, and Machiavelli's the Prince. The Platos republic is an examination of the "Good Life", the harmony obtained by applying pure reason and justice. The ideas and arguments of Plato revolve on the social settings of an ideal republicthose that lead each person to the most perfect possible life for him. Socrates was Platos early mentor in real life. Plato uses Socrates in several of his works and dialogues. Socrates moderates the discussion throughout, as Plato's mouthpiece. Through Socrates' powerful and brilliant questions and explanations on a series of topics, the reader comes to understand what Plato's model society would look like. The basic plan of the Republic is to draw an analogy between the operation of society as a whole and the life of any individual human being (Kochin, 1999). In Platos republic, with regards to politics and education, the relationship of humans and the society were being described in details. Plato had imagined a Utopia, an ideal city in which a philosopher is a king, ruling over the people who were being classified by their personal attributes, symbolized by gold, silver, and bronze, into strictly arranged classes of rulers, guardians, and artisans, respectively (Rice, 1999). Having developed a general description of the structure of an ideal society, Plato believed that each class in the society has to perform certain functions. Each class must work together for the common good in order for the city to thrive and succeed. All this showed the need for a society to develop significant social qualities, or virtues. Since the rulers or guardians are responsible for making decisions, they must have the virtue of wisdom. The virtue of wisdom is the ability to comprehend reality and to make the best judgments about it. The soldiers, who defend of the city against enemies, need the virtue of courage; they must have skill to carry out their orders in the face of danger without thinking about personal risk. The rest of the people in the city must follow its leaders and not pursue their selfish and private interests; they must obey the laws in a peaceful, orderly, and civil manner in order to keep the local communities together. This means that they must exhibit the virtue of moderation. The common people have to resist many of their personal desires, to benefit the whole city. Plato believes that when each of these classes performs its own role and does not try to take over any other class, the entire city as a whole will operate smoothly, showing the harmony that is genuine justice. Through examining what brings true justice and harmony to the world, the republic makes such an important and interesting piece of literature. Furthermore, the virtues are comprehended by considering how each are placed within the organization of an ideal city (Rice, 1998). At first glance, this is an elitist dream come true: a society being differentiated according to a persons needs and abilities. On the other hand, there have been so many implications of a closed society without mobilitycritics generally interpreted this as authoritarian or totalitarian. The disadvantage of this society is that if power fall into the wrong hands, those who have the power could execute their numerous privileges and corruption will be uncontrollable; this may be an event of bad philosophy leading to bad politics. However, it should be emphasized that if Plato was not a supporter for democracy, he was never an ideological leader; he merely held that the ideal society home business lead should have a place for everyone and that no one should ever be out of place in a society. The pain of not knowing oneself and ones role in a society would never occur in Platos republic (Rice, 1998). Niccolo Machiavelli was also known about his advices in The Prince. Niccolo Machiavelli was able study in detail the writings of Cicero, Aristotle, and Livy as well as the political and military achievements of Ancient Rome and Greece. Machiavellis advice in The Prince was ideal for the rulers in the 16th century in Italy because he understood the motivation of most political men. He based his theories on perfect examples throughout history (Chabod, 1958). Machiavelli states in a model world, it is virtuous for a prince to be good. However, in reality, those princes who rules best are those who distance themselves form ethical concerns and do whatever it takes for the good of their states. With this, it could be concluded that it is better to be frugal than giving, harsh than loving, and crafty than honest. Machiavellis general philosophy is to be good as circumstances allow but be willing to resort to any means for the betterment of the state. A prince should be willing to do evil if it is what is required to overcome the change in fate. There are two types of cruelty: the proper and the improper. Proper cruelty is done at one instance and it serves a specific purpose while the improper property is repetitive and threatening to the citizens. A wise prince should be prepared to impose proper cruelty to maintain power but he should also avoid improper cruelty so that his subjects will not feel hatred for him. He stressed out the need for the prince to win the trust and support of his people; he must be wise in controlling home business lead the noble and keeping the people content; and he must not postpone confrontations for another day (Machiavelli, 1998). Niccolo Machiavelli emphasized that hypocrisy and deceit are legal in politics. The prince only needs to appear to have good qualities but he does not need to have them. The prince must have the characteristics of both a lion and a fox; a fox could identify the snares but could not drive away the foes while a lion could drive away the foes but could not identify the snares. Thus, the prince should be courageous as well as crafty. The wellbeing of the state has no ethical or moral implications. Anything that benefits the state is considered higher. One of the most powerful qualities, as considered by Machiavelli, is the appearance of being religious; only an ecclesiastical prince is able to rule without having to defend his power due to the reason that his power is rooted in the early traditions of religion. Machiavelli also said that it is better for a leader to be feared than to be loved. The fear is always unchanging; the love of the people is changing. A prince should acquire a course of action that he can control. In addition, he believes that in most time, it is better to be spontaneous than to be cautious. The advice given by Machiavelli still impacts the world around us today. In the past and at present, people realized they should watch out for their own interest in order to survive in society. Consciously, humans in our lengthy history have usually always become extremely greedy, self-centered, and insecure. Most people have conscientiously surrendered to the lesser meanings of life. Before 1513, conventional thought defined a ruler as a man who used generosity, truth and justice to govern his kingdom. Machiavelli saw this conventional thought of the time as a flight of the imagination and only applicable in a utopian society. The Prince destroys all previous political thought by saying that a ruler must not only use the traditionally established means of maintaining power but he also must be able to use brute force, deceit, and even cruelty as the situation requires. His theories were proven valid repeatedly in the chaotic political climate of renaissance Europe (Chabod, 1958). St. Benedict is most renowned for founding the Rule for Monks. The Rule of St. Benedict defines the manner of life for monks; it is a foundational document in the history of Western Christianity. It serves as a bridge linking the patristic Eastern tradition and the emerging European tradition of the 6th century. One of his precepts is that the Abbey should always be open for pilgrims to find shelter and fooda difficult task when the Abbey itself has been the focus of many political and military struggles. One of the reasons that the rule was created was to get away from the modern world of his time; thus it will allow the monks to dedicate their lives to God through prayer and purity of mind and body. Thus, instead of restricting the monk to one particular form of work makes it possible for him to do almost any kind of work and that in a manner spiritualized and elevated above the labor of merely secular craftsman. There has been so many proof of the fulfillment of the Rule of St. Benedict. In the manual labor, they have been able to create so many architectural triumphs which are the glory of the Christian world; cathedrals, abbeys, and churches that are found in the countries of Western Europe were built by the Benedictine architects and builders. In the cultivation of the soil, the followers of St. Benedict gave themselves without any reservation resulting to obvious success of agricultural prosperity. In the daily devotion to systematic reading and study, it has yielded to the Benedictine erudition which refers to the evident learning and laborious research adopted in the Benedictine cloister (Del Mastro, 1975). Unfortunately, there are also concerns with regards to St. Benedicts rule. As communities became rich and less dependent upon their own labors, the primitive enthusiasm for the Rule diminished; corruption and departure from monastic ideals have been made against the Benedictine congregation. The Rule of St. Benedict is not socialistic; it could not function if all the properties are not community property. St Benedict's Rules are appropriate for a monastery in his day and probably still are but they are not for the general public; the rule are only applicable for carrying out fervent mission but are not intended for the society as a whole (Del Mastro, 1975). Leadership is timeless and can be found woven into the fabric of writing throughout the ages. As could be noticed, all the three texts: Platos Republic, Machiavellis the Prince, and the Rule of St. Benedict have shown different implementations of how an organization, a society, or a corporation is to be managed. These texts have been considered influential in constructing philosophies especially about leadership. At some point, a certain philosophy tends to be applicable and at one time, it is not. Moreover, the philosophies have bad sides as well as good sides. In Platos Republic, there is this segregation of the human beings in to groups: it might improve the certain groups potential but there is no equal division of power. In Machiavellis the Prince, there is the imposing of proper cruelty to the people and that only one person has the authority; it only focuses on the Prince and not on the feeling of his citizens. In the Rule of St. Benedict, at some point it might prove to be beneficial but it also triggers corruption and procrastination. There are so many aspects that need to be taken into consideration. Leadership and management go beyond thinking within a box.
References: Rice, D. H. (1998). A Guide to Platos Republic. New York: Oxford University Press. Kochin, M. S. (1999). War, Class, Justice in Platos Republic. The Review of Metaphysics, Vol. 53, No. 2, 403. Machiavelli, N. (1998). In Peter Bondanella (ed.), The Prince. Oxford: Oxford University. Chabod, F. (1958). Machiavelli and the Renaissance. London: Bowes and Bowes. Del Mastro, M. L. (1975). The Rule of St. Benedict. Garden City, New York: Image Books.
|
|||||
|