It is true that great nations are formed only under great leaders. These leaders provide evidence in favor of the pursuit of power, as one man who is enlightened and capable determines to gain power over others, only to use it for their betterment. With this intention of acting to the fullest of your ability in order to ensure the betterment of others by exercising the power you hold, it can be stated that the pursuit of power should not be condemned. However, it is worthwhile to consider that history has seldom demonstrated the pursuit of power being entirely morally good. Soon after the initial intention to serve through power, people are bound to start viewing power as a personal interest. It is not uncommon for this personal interest to then take the form of an unquenchable thirst. At this point then, the pursuit of power should definitely be condemned.
Monday, February 2, 2015
Section 3: Can the pursuit of power actually be morally good?
In the context of questioning the pursuit of power as being morally good, 'moral' can be defined as something concerned with the principles of right and wrong behavior. In this regard then, it can be stated that there lies a defect in the view of critics who claim that the pursuit of power at any rate should not be condemned.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I agree with your ending statement that pursuit of power should definitely be condemned. But if you take into consideration the historical or the political dimension when it comes to the pursuit of power, its always been about men using their strength and influence to achieve power within their boundaries which literally translates the discipline of history as "his-story" rather than "her-story", marginalizing and undermining the role of women. To support this argument, take the example of the Athenian democracy which concentrated power in the hands of a few men. Under democracy, communism and other ideologies, the pursuit of power generally and collectively promotes a very majoritarian phenomenon, therefore it can be said that the pursuit of power is not morally good and paradoxically acts as a public bad.
Why can't great nations arise without great leaders? Why is leadership so crucial?
I agree that power can be abused but saying that the pursuit of power should be condemned is going a bit too far. If there are instances in history where power has been abused there are also instances where power has truly been used for the betterment of people; Mahatma Gandhi for example never abused his power even though he had millions of followers. Throughout his struggle for freedom he promoted non-violent strategies to get what he wanted. Therefore, I believe power is not directly correlated to immorality rather it depends on the person who possesses power. Conclusively, pursuit of power should not be criticized since it can lead to something good.
Sonia - While I agree that the person who possesses power has the ability to wield power in a variety of ways, I think your example of Gandhi is perhaps a bit too bit simplistic. Don't get me wrong, I do think that his nonviolent tactics and many activities he worked hard on were done in order to help the Indian people. However, he was a shrewd politician who maximized his own power to the detriment of underrepresented communities in the Subcontinent, including the Muslims, Dalits, Communists, and others. The reification of past leaders without a comprehensive look at both their strengths and failings oversimplifies the issue of how power is wielded, and whether it is wielded for good or ill.
Post a Comment