Guest guest Posted January 24, 2006 Report Share Posted January 24, 2006 " Success is not the result of spontaneous combustion, you must set yourself on fire first. " - Reggie Leach And keep yourself on fire! Keep moving those muscles! Even if you look silly doing push ups at a bus bench waiting for the bus. When you use your muscles your burning fat...so light yourself and keep burning! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 25, 2007 Report Share Posted July 25, 2007 " Issac Asimov wrote, 'The saddest aspect of life right now is that science gathers knowledge faster than society gathers wisdom.' " And he was right. We attach a reverence to science that ought not to always be there. New discoveries and new inventions are treated as delightful toys, but how many REAL toys have been recalled over the years due to the danger they pose to those who play with them? Tom Administrator Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 25, 2007 Report Share Posted July 25, 2007 In a message dated 7/25/2007 12:23:10 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, no_reply writes: And he was right.We attach a reverence to science that ought not to always be there. New discoveries and new inventions are treated as delightful toys, but how many REAL toys have been recalled over the years due to the danger they pose to those who play with them?TomAdministrator What people fail to realize is that science explains the physical world, not the spiritual. While it may discover the mechanics of the universe and how everything works, it won't get any closer to understanding humanity itself. Time and again people have put their faith in science and technology to save them. However, more often than not, the gimmick that was meant to save only creates a new round of problems. Take all this surveillance stuff that is all the rage, especially in England. Sure, the cameras might catch the odd criminal doing a bad thing, but it also invades the lives of the 99% of people are muddling on. If, on the other hand, we used wisdom rather than science in handling the bad guys, well, there wouldn't be so many of them in the first place and we wouldn't need the cameras. It is amusing, in a bad way, that we have rules for living, but they are so often ignored because they are "ancient" and "out of touch with modern life." Is that so? Technology may have changed a great deal since, say, the time of Hammurabi and the first recorded penal code, but look at the crimes: they are the same as today. Theft, murder, rape, etc. Its all there. Look at the different religions. Most of them address the same human conditions. Nothing has changed there either. Simply put, humans are the same as they have been for a very long time. Sure, we have more learning and some more understanding, but do we apply it? Not really. The world is ruled by technology, cunning, deceit and ambition. Those who lust for power use these things as a substitute for wisdom and most people don't even care. Most people use these things use these things because wisdom takes effort and introspection. Since most people won't like what they see, and know they won't, they avoid it, so they turn to science which is supposed to be neutral. Besides, their iPod isn't going to tell them they are being naughty. Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL.com. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 25, 2007 Report Share Posted July 25, 2007 In a message dated 7/25/2007 12:23:10 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, no_reply writes: And he was right.We attach a reverence to science that ought not to always be there. New discoveries and new inventions are treated as delightful toys, but how many REAL toys have been recalled over the years due to the danger they pose to those who play with them?TomAdministrator What people fail to realize is that science explains the physical world, not the spiritual. While it may discover the mechanics of the universe and how everything works, it won't get any closer to understanding humanity itself. Time and again people have put their faith in science and technology to save them. However, more often than not, the gimmick that was meant to save only creates a new round of problems. Take all this surveillance stuff that is all the rage, especially in England. Sure, the cameras might catch the odd criminal doing a bad thing, but it also invades the lives of the 99% of people are muddling on. If, on the other hand, we used wisdom rather than science in handling the bad guys, well, there wouldn't be so many of them in the first place and we wouldn't need the cameras. It is amusing, in a bad way, that we have rules for living, but they are so often ignored because they are "ancient" and "out of touch with modern life." Is that so? Technology may have changed a great deal since, say, the time of Hammurabi and the first recorded penal code, but look at the crimes: they are the same as today. Theft, murder, rape, etc. Its all there. Look at the different religions. Most of them address the same human conditions. Nothing has changed there either. Simply put, humans are the same as they have been for a very long time. Sure, we have more learning and some more understanding, but do we apply it? Not really. The world is ruled by technology, cunning, deceit and ambition. Those who lust for power use these things as a substitute for wisdom and most people don't even care. Most people use these things use these things because wisdom takes effort and introspection. Since most people won't like what they see, and know they won't, they avoid it, so they turn to science which is supposed to be neutral. Besides, their iPod isn't going to tell them they are being naughty. Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL.com. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 25, 2007 Report Share Posted July 25, 2007 In a message dated 7/25/2007 1:32:02 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, enderwiggin52@... writes: Sorry, that's just the little kid in me trying to hold on to the idea of "Fairness." Why do we teach little kids the idea "play fair", when most adults live by the idea "win at any price"???Ender That's a good question. It probably has to do with most kids games having clear rules and the best way to keep the peace is to make sure the kids follow the rules. That probably has a lot to do with it: keeping the kids quiet, since most adults have a limited tolerance for screaming, fighting kids. Adults have rules too. The problem is that they ignore them whenever they are an inconvenience. Then there are those like the Hollywood stars and most of the other "elites" who so often thing the rules don't apply to them in the first place. I'm not really in favor of the word "fair" anyway, at least not as it usually is taken. I consider fairness to mean that each person is rewarded according to their due. If someone works hard it is fair that they be equally well compensated for it. Today, "fairness" would generally take the view that the person who works hard is stealing from others, so in spite of their greater effort, they should receive the same compensation as everyone else. Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL.com. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 25, 2007 Report Share Posted July 25, 2007 In a message dated 7/25/2007 3:35:26 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, enderwiggin52@... writes: I agree with you in principle. If someone works hard they deserve to be rewarded... But that assumes that the "hard work" doesn't include harming others in the process... If you don't include that caveat, you place someone that works hard to create something beneficial to the world in the same category as someone that works hard to find ways to cause injury to people for their own gain.... That is an important distinction that far too many over look, taking the view that if you can legally do something that you will gain from then it's okay the do it... When you include the "do no harm" test many things that are "legal" are morally wrong... Working hard to do things that are morally wrong should not be rewarded because to do so harms everyone... I can agree with that. Mafiosi may work very hard, but will hurt a lot of people along the way. Companies like Enron can work very hard, but be fraudulent and hurt a lot of people. Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL.com. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 25, 2007 Report Share Posted July 25, 2007 The saddest thing about the human race is that most of it is that most of it chooses to use knowledge and technology to take what they want from their brothers for their personal gain with little if any thought of the good of their brothers or human race as a whole... At the core of the Hippocratic oath, is the concept... " DO NO HARM... " like the golden rule... " Do onto others as you would want them to do onto you... " If everyone followed it the world would be a much nicer place for everyone to live in... Sorry, that's just the little kid in me trying to hold on to the idea of " Fairness. " Why do we teach little kids the idea " play fair " , when most adults live by the idea " win at any price " ??? Ender At 12:19 AM 7/25/2007, you wrote: " Issac Asimov wrote, 'The saddest aspect of life right now is that science gathers knowledge faster than society gathers wisdom.' " And he was right. We attach a reverence to science that ought not to always be there. New discoveries and new inventions are treated as delightful toys, but how many REAL toys have been recalled over the years due to the danger they pose to those who play with them? Tom Administrator Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 25, 2007 Report Share Posted July 25, 2007 The saddest thing about the human race is that most of it is that most of it chooses to use knowledge and technology to take what they want from their brothers for their personal gain with little if any thought of the good of their brothers or human race as a whole... At the core of the Hippocratic oath, is the concept... " DO NO HARM... " like the golden rule... " Do onto others as you would want them to do onto you... " If everyone followed it the world would be a much nicer place for everyone to live in... Sorry, that's just the little kid in me trying to hold on to the idea of " Fairness. " Why do we teach little kids the idea " play fair " , when most adults live by the idea " win at any price " ??? Ender At 12:19 AM 7/25/2007, you wrote: " Issac Asimov wrote, 'The saddest aspect of life right now is that science gathers knowledge faster than society gathers wisdom.' " And he was right. We attach a reverence to science that ought not to always be there. New discoveries and new inventions are treated as delightful toys, but how many REAL toys have been recalled over the years due to the danger they pose to those who play with them? Tom Administrator Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 25, 2007 Report Share Posted July 25, 2007 " Sorry, that's just the little kid in me trying to hold on to the idea of " Fairness. " Why do we teach little kids the idea " play fair " , when most adults live by the idea " win at any price " ??? " I understand how you feel. What I wonder now is what to teach kids. We do tell them to play fair, but then when they get into the real world, we see adults screwing other adults for a percentage and it comes as quite a shock to them. I don't know. My instinct is to continue to teach kids to be honest, fair, truthful, and polite. Maybe one of these kids will develop charisma enough that they can lead a lot of society to make positive changes that benefit others and not just themselves. A sort of " pay it forward " philosophy. Tom Administrator Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 25, 2007 Report Share Posted July 25, 2007 " Sorry, that's just the little kid in me trying to hold on to the idea of " Fairness. " Why do we teach little kids the idea " play fair " , when most adults live by the idea " win at any price " ??? " I understand how you feel. What I wonder now is what to teach kids. We do tell them to play fair, but then when they get into the real world, we see adults screwing other adults for a percentage and it comes as quite a shock to them. I don't know. My instinct is to continue to teach kids to be honest, fair, truthful, and polite. Maybe one of these kids will develop charisma enough that they can lead a lot of society to make positive changes that benefit others and not just themselves. A sort of " pay it forward " philosophy. Tom Administrator Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 25, 2007 Report Share Posted July 25, 2007 At 02:10 PM 7/25/2007, you wrote: >I'm not really in favor of the word " fair " anyway, at least not as >it usually is taken. I consider fairness to mean that each person is >rewarded according to their due. If someone works hard it is fair >that they be equally well compensated for it. Today, " fairness " >would generally take the view that the person who works hard is >stealing from others, so in spite of their greater effort, they >should receive the same compensation as everyone else. > I agree with you in principle. If someone works hard they deserve to be rewarded... But that assumes that the " hard work " doesn't include harming others in the process... If you don't include that caveat, you place someone that works hard to create something beneficial to the world in the same category as someone that works hard to find ways to cause injury to people for their own gain.... That is an important distinction that far too many over look, taking the view that if you can legally do something that you will gain from then it's okay the do it... When you include the " do no harm " test many things that are " legal " are morally wrong... Working hard to do things that are morally wrong should not be rewarded because to do so harms everyone... Fair in the way I think of it is to not act in an immoral way, to not do things that you would take issue with if someone else did it to you... Why do people teach kids to " play fair " because it is the morally right thing... In a perfect world everyone would " play fair... " The problem is most people just pay lip service to the moral concept of " do no harm " and do will do anything to get what they want including lying to themselves about how morally right they are... As I said it's the little kid in me talking... the little kid that thinks to hurt someone for your own gain is wrong... that take thing literally and judges people by their actions more than what they say... What's really sad is that somewhere in growing up for most people that little kid falls asleep, gets lost or dies... Maybe that makes me Pan or one of the Lost Boys because if it means losing that part of me I refuse to grow up... Ender Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 25, 2007 Report Share Posted July 25, 2007 At 02:51 PM 7/25/2007, you wrote: >I don't know. My instinct is to continue to teach kids to be honest, >fair, truthful, and polite. Maybe one of these kids will develop >charisma enough that they can lead a lot of society to make positive >changes that benefit others and not just themselves. > >A sort of " pay it forward " philosophy. Become the leaders sounds good but the problem is that the only people that want to be leaders enough to get the job are people that want the power for their own benefit and that of their cronies... There don't seem to be any statesmen anymore just greedy political hacks... Ender Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 26, 2007 Report Share Posted July 26, 2007 " What's really sad is that somewhere in growing up for most people that little kid falls asleep, gets lost or dies... Maybe that makes me Pan or one of the Lost Boys because if it means losing that part of me I refuse to grow up... " I've gotten the idea, from Aspie parents in particular, that many Aspies do not forget their childhoods or what it was like to be children. I think it is this trait that causes Aspies to be more sensitivie to the bad things going on in the world. Tom Administrator Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 26, 2007 Report Share Posted July 26, 2007 " What's really sad is that somewhere in growing up for most people that little kid falls asleep, gets lost or dies... Maybe that makes me Pan or one of the Lost Boys because if it means losing that part of me I refuse to grow up... " I've gotten the idea, from Aspie parents in particular, that many Aspies do not forget their childhoods or what it was like to be children. I think it is this trait that causes Aspies to be more sensitivie to the bad things going on in the world. Tom Administrator Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 26, 2007 Report Share Posted July 26, 2007 " Become the leaders sounds good but the problem is that the only people that want to be leaders enough to get the job are people that want the power for their own benefit and that of their cronies... There don't seem to be any statesmen anymore just greedy political hacks... " Raven and I have gotten on the advocacy band wagon and have actually moved pretty high up the ladder in terms of who we know. I can see us moving further ahead and moving higher up, but the thought of holding any particular power does not appeal to me...and I don;t think it appeals to her either. For us, it is merely getting stuff done that is a motivating factor. I must admit, however, that this view stems from being put in leadership roles at certain times in my life where I was first very excited about it and then fed up with it. As I see it, there are two central faults with leadership 1) If you take the initiative, sooner or later someone sees you as a leader, even if you are not trying to lead anyone or anything. 2) You wind up getting a following whether you want it or not. If you ignore these followers, not only do they turn on you, but they tend to sabotage your efforts. Watch the part of Forest Gump where he decides that he just wants to go off and run. The media somehow gets wind of the fact that he is criss-crossing the country and after a while, a bunch of people follow him. These people are following him in the mistaken belief that he has the answers to whatever it is they are looking for. In the middle of the dessert somewhere, he stops, turns to them, says he is tired, and is going to go home. So he starts walking home. Unless I am mistaken, one of them says " Now what are we supposed to do? " He does not reply. The moral is that Forest was running for his own reasons, and if there was a question he wanted answered (there wasn't) answering his question by running was not going to answer EVERYONE'S questions. They have to ask their own questions and find what they are looking for on their own. The point is, you get unasked for tag-a-longs after a while, who call themselves followers, and then you are placed in the position of leading them or ignoring them and risking them doing you over. I would like to sit here and bang my fists on the desk saying " It's not fair! " but I will spare everyone that. By taking the initiative, somewhere along the line Raven and I became " leaders " and so now we must play the roles when called upon to do so, annoying as it is. I would add that there is a secondary annoyance to being a leader, and that is that you are under such scruitiny that GOOD things you have set in motion risk being hamstringed by people who cannot understand what it is you are doing. Without the follower/observer, this problem isn't even an issue. With people out of the picture, you don't need to explain yourself ad-nauseum just to get them to leave you alone. Okay, and now I will add a THIRD annoyance. Among those who " follow " are avid fanatics. These are people who tend to idolize whatever you do primarily because whatever it is you are doing is something they themsevles cannot do. These people think you can do no wrong, and want to help any way they can, but tend to muddle things up if you do let them get involved. So leadership is not all it is cracked up to be. The easy and immoral way out of this mess is to do what you want and trample down anyone who stands in your way. But if you view people who follow you as societal custodians and be patient with them, it's like having angels looking over your shoulder instead of demons. Tom Administrator Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 26, 2007 Report Share Posted July 26, 2007 " Become the leaders sounds good but the problem is that the only people that want to be leaders enough to get the job are people that want the power for their own benefit and that of their cronies... There don't seem to be any statesmen anymore just greedy political hacks... " Raven and I have gotten on the advocacy band wagon and have actually moved pretty high up the ladder in terms of who we know. I can see us moving further ahead and moving higher up, but the thought of holding any particular power does not appeal to me...and I don;t think it appeals to her either. For us, it is merely getting stuff done that is a motivating factor. I must admit, however, that this view stems from being put in leadership roles at certain times in my life where I was first very excited about it and then fed up with it. As I see it, there are two central faults with leadership 1) If you take the initiative, sooner or later someone sees you as a leader, even if you are not trying to lead anyone or anything. 2) You wind up getting a following whether you want it or not. If you ignore these followers, not only do they turn on you, but they tend to sabotage your efforts. Watch the part of Forest Gump where he decides that he just wants to go off and run. The media somehow gets wind of the fact that he is criss-crossing the country and after a while, a bunch of people follow him. These people are following him in the mistaken belief that he has the answers to whatever it is they are looking for. In the middle of the dessert somewhere, he stops, turns to them, says he is tired, and is going to go home. So he starts walking home. Unless I am mistaken, one of them says " Now what are we supposed to do? " He does not reply. The moral is that Forest was running for his own reasons, and if there was a question he wanted answered (there wasn't) answering his question by running was not going to answer EVERYONE'S questions. They have to ask their own questions and find what they are looking for on their own. The point is, you get unasked for tag-a-longs after a while, who call themselves followers, and then you are placed in the position of leading them or ignoring them and risking them doing you over. I would like to sit here and bang my fists on the desk saying " It's not fair! " but I will spare everyone that. By taking the initiative, somewhere along the line Raven and I became " leaders " and so now we must play the roles when called upon to do so, annoying as it is. I would add that there is a secondary annoyance to being a leader, and that is that you are under such scruitiny that GOOD things you have set in motion risk being hamstringed by people who cannot understand what it is you are doing. Without the follower/observer, this problem isn't even an issue. With people out of the picture, you don't need to explain yourself ad-nauseum just to get them to leave you alone. Okay, and now I will add a THIRD annoyance. Among those who " follow " are avid fanatics. These are people who tend to idolize whatever you do primarily because whatever it is you are doing is something they themsevles cannot do. These people think you can do no wrong, and want to help any way they can, but tend to muddle things up if you do let them get involved. So leadership is not all it is cracked up to be. The easy and immoral way out of this mess is to do what you want and trample down anyone who stands in your way. But if you view people who follow you as societal custodians and be patient with them, it's like having angels looking over your shoulder instead of demons. Tom Administrator Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 26, 2007 Report Share Posted July 26, 2007 > > I understand how you feel. What I wonder now is what to teach kids. > We do tell them to play fair, but then when they get into the real > world, we see adults screwing other adults for a percentage and it > comes as quite a shock to them. Say, play fair but expect many other folks not to ! A totally moral position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 26, 2007 Report Share Posted July 26, 2007 > > I understand how you feel. What I wonder now is what to teach kids. > We do tell them to play fair, but then when they get into the real > world, we see adults screwing other adults for a percentage and it > comes as quite a shock to them. Say, play fair but expect many other folks not to ! A totally moral position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 27, 2007 Report Share Posted July 27, 2007 In a message dated 7/27/2007 6:36:24 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, julie.stevenson16@... writes: I personally do not consider Raven or you leaders and that btw is not an insult or a bad thing. You run this group and I see you guide - I also consider you both good people.Perhaps I am confused as to the meaning of 'leader' someone who leads people I guess? I guess I haven't idolized people in my life and often those that are put up on peda-stools(sp?) fall. The One-Minute Philosopher defines a leader as: One who shows others the right way. A leader sees what ought to be done, organizes the community to get it done and sets a moral standard for the community by practicing what she preaches. A leader is concerned primarily that all her actions be good for the community, not whether they will be popular. Thus, leadership is centered on a concern for others rather than for ourselves. Leadership requires both vision and practical expertise. If I am to be a good leader, I must have a good plan for the community: I must also be intelligent and experienced enough to be able to bring it to fruition. I must be practical enough to know what can reasonably be accomplished, and I must be a good motivator of people in order to get the cooperation necessary for success. The captain of a sports team who demands a lot but also inspires other by working hard himself shows leadership. The older child who helps guide her younger siblings by word and deed shots leadership. The class president who sets an agenda of academic excellence and community service and who is able to communicate the importance of these to her classmates is a good leader. Leadership is exemplified by the government official who thoughtfully proposes and consistently applies fair policies for all. Ask yourself: Is my action aimed at the good of the community? Do I do what I recommend that others do? If so, I am showing leadership. "No ruler, insofar as he is a ruler, seeks what is to his own advantage or orders it, but that which is to the advantage of his subject who is the concern of his craft; this he keeps in view; all his words and actions are directed to this end." Plato, The Republic, Bk 1, 342e. ---- I would add to that: a leader is someone who takes charge in a situation, or establishes order in chaos, with the benefit of the group in mind, though it is possible that the leader will also benefit. For example: a leader might arise to lead a group of people out of a building. The fact that the leader also benefits should not count against them, because they could have just run out and not put themselves at risk by helping the others. This I would contrast with a commander or "boss." Those are people assigned authority in a hierarchical system and may or may not also be leaders. I'm sure we have all known bosses that could lead hungry wolves to fresh meat, let alone lead people. Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL.com. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 28, 2007 Report Share Posted July 28, 2007 I've noticed that - I've heard people say 'you forget what it was like as a child' and I think (or even say) 'no I haven't'. > > " What's really sad is that somewhere in growing up for most people > that little kid falls asleep, gets lost or dies... Maybe that makes me > Pan or one of the Lost Boys because if it means losing that part > of me I refuse to grow up... " > > I've gotten the idea, from Aspie parents in particular, that many > Aspies do not forget their childhoods or what it was like to be > children. I think it is this trait that causes Aspies to be more > sensitivie to the bad things going on in the world. > > Tom > Administrator > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 28, 2007 Report Share Posted July 28, 2007 I've noticed that - I've heard people say 'you forget what it was like as a child' and I think (or even say) 'no I haven't'. > > " What's really sad is that somewhere in growing up for most people > that little kid falls asleep, gets lost or dies... Maybe that makes me > Pan or one of the Lost Boys because if it means losing that part > of me I refuse to grow up... " > > I've gotten the idea, from Aspie parents in particular, that many > Aspies do not forget their childhoods or what it was like to be > children. I think it is this trait that causes Aspies to be more > sensitivie to the bad things going on in the world. > > Tom > Administrator > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 28, 2007 Report Share Posted July 28, 2007 " By taking the initiative, somewhere along the line Raven and I became " leaders " and so now we must play the roles when called upon to do so, annoying as it is. " I personally do not consider Raven or you leaders and that btw is not an insult or a bad thing. You run this group and I see you guide - I also consider you both good people. Perhaps I am confused as to the meaning of 'leader' someone who leads people I guess? I guess I haven't idolized people in my life and often those that are put up on peda-stools(sp?) fall. > > " Become the leaders sounds good but the problem is that the only > people that want to be leaders enough to get the job are people that > want the power for their own benefit and that of their cronies... > There don't seem to be any statesmen anymore just greedy political > hacks... " > > Raven and I have gotten on the advocacy band wagon and have actually > moved pretty high up the ladder in terms of who we know. I can see > us moving further ahead and moving higher up, but the thought of > holding any particular power does not appeal to me...and I don;t > think it appeals to her either. For us, it is merely getting stuff > done that is a motivating factor. > > I must admit, however, that this view stems from being put in > leadership roles at certain times in my life where I was first very > excited about it and then fed up with it. > > As I see it, there are two central faults with leadership > > 1) If you take the initiative, sooner or later someone sees you as a > leader, even if you are not trying to lead anyone or anything. > > 2) You wind up getting a following whether you want it or not. > > If you ignore these followers, not only do they turn on you, but > they tend to sabotage your efforts. > > Watch the part of Forest Gump where he decides that he just wants to > go off and run. The media somehow gets wind of the fact that he is > criss-crossing the country and after a while, a bunch of people > follow him. These people are following him in the mistaken belief > that he has the answers to whatever it is they are looking for. > > In the middle of the dessert somewhere, he stops, turns to them, > says he is tired, and is going to go home. So he starts walking home. > > Unless I am mistaken, one of them says " Now what are we supposed to > do? " > > He does not reply. > > The moral is that Forest was running for his own reasons, and if > there was a question he wanted answered (there wasn't) answering his > question by running was not going to answer EVERYONE'S questions. > They have to ask their own questions and find what they are looking > for on their own. > > The point is, you get unasked for tag-a-longs after a while, who > call themselves followers, and then you are placed in the position > of leading them or ignoring them and risking them doing you over. > > I would like to sit here and bang my fists on the desk saying " It's > not fair! " but I will spare everyone that. By taking the initiative, > somewhere along the line Raven and I became " leaders " and so now we > must play the roles when called upon to do so, annoying as it is. > > I would add that there is a secondary annoyance to being a leader, > and that is that you are under such scruitiny that GOOD things you > have set in motion risk being hamstringed by people who cannot > understand what it is you are doing. Without the follower/observer, > this problem isn't even an issue. With people out of the picture, > you don't need to explain yourself ad-nauseum just to get them to > leave you alone. > > Okay, and now I will add a THIRD annoyance. Among those who " follow " > are avid fanatics. These are people who tend to idolize whatever you > do primarily because whatever it is you are doing is something they > themsevles cannot do. These people think you can do no wrong, and > want to help any way they can, but tend to muddle things up if you > do let them get involved. > > So leadership is not all it is cracked up to be. > > The easy and immoral way out of this mess is to do what you want and > trample down anyone who stands in your way. But if you view people > who follow you as societal custodians and be patient with them, it's > like having angels looking over your shoulder instead of demons. > > Tom > Administrator > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 28, 2007 Report Share Posted July 28, 2007 " By taking the initiative, somewhere along the line Raven and I became " leaders " and so now we must play the roles when called upon to do so, annoying as it is. " I personally do not consider Raven or you leaders and that btw is not an insult or a bad thing. You run this group and I see you guide - I also consider you both good people. Perhaps I am confused as to the meaning of 'leader' someone who leads people I guess? I guess I haven't idolized people in my life and often those that are put up on peda-stools(sp?) fall. > > " Become the leaders sounds good but the problem is that the only > people that want to be leaders enough to get the job are people that > want the power for their own benefit and that of their cronies... > There don't seem to be any statesmen anymore just greedy political > hacks... " > > Raven and I have gotten on the advocacy band wagon and have actually > moved pretty high up the ladder in terms of who we know. I can see > us moving further ahead and moving higher up, but the thought of > holding any particular power does not appeal to me...and I don;t > think it appeals to her either. For us, it is merely getting stuff > done that is a motivating factor. > > I must admit, however, that this view stems from being put in > leadership roles at certain times in my life where I was first very > excited about it and then fed up with it. > > As I see it, there are two central faults with leadership > > 1) If you take the initiative, sooner or later someone sees you as a > leader, even if you are not trying to lead anyone or anything. > > 2) You wind up getting a following whether you want it or not. > > If you ignore these followers, not only do they turn on you, but > they tend to sabotage your efforts. > > Watch the part of Forest Gump where he decides that he just wants to > go off and run. The media somehow gets wind of the fact that he is > criss-crossing the country and after a while, a bunch of people > follow him. These people are following him in the mistaken belief > that he has the answers to whatever it is they are looking for. > > In the middle of the dessert somewhere, he stops, turns to them, > says he is tired, and is going to go home. So he starts walking home. > > Unless I am mistaken, one of them says " Now what are we supposed to > do? " > > He does not reply. > > The moral is that Forest was running for his own reasons, and if > there was a question he wanted answered (there wasn't) answering his > question by running was not going to answer EVERYONE'S questions. > They have to ask their own questions and find what they are looking > for on their own. > > The point is, you get unasked for tag-a-longs after a while, who > call themselves followers, and then you are placed in the position > of leading them or ignoring them and risking them doing you over. > > I would like to sit here and bang my fists on the desk saying " It's > not fair! " but I will spare everyone that. By taking the initiative, > somewhere along the line Raven and I became " leaders " and so now we > must play the roles when called upon to do so, annoying as it is. > > I would add that there is a secondary annoyance to being a leader, > and that is that you are under such scruitiny that GOOD things you > have set in motion risk being hamstringed by people who cannot > understand what it is you are doing. Without the follower/observer, > this problem isn't even an issue. With people out of the picture, > you don't need to explain yourself ad-nauseum just to get them to > leave you alone. > > Okay, and now I will add a THIRD annoyance. Among those who " follow " > are avid fanatics. These are people who tend to idolize whatever you > do primarily because whatever it is you are doing is something they > themsevles cannot do. These people think you can do no wrong, and > want to help any way they can, but tend to muddle things up if you > do let them get involved. > > So leadership is not all it is cracked up to be. > > The easy and immoral way out of this mess is to do what you want and > trample down anyone who stands in your way. But if you view people > who follow you as societal custodians and be patient with them, it's > like having angels looking over your shoulder instead of demons. > > Tom > Administrator > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 28, 2007 Report Share Posted July 28, 2007 Tom wrote: " By taking the initiative, somewhere along the line Raven and I became " leaders " and so now we must play the roles when called upon to do so, annoying as it is. " responded: " I personally do not consider Raven or you leaders and that btw is not an insult or a bad thing ... <snip> ... " No insult taken here, . However, we are leaders whether you perceive as being leaders based on the definition of the word. A leader is someone who leads or guides. Another definition of the word is that a leader is someone who has influence or power. While I do not feel we have power, we certainly do have influence outside of these forums when we educate others by making them aware of various aspects of autism, autism advocacy, current medical and scientific research and its implications on the lives of families and individuals dealing with autism, and more. It is not an ego-boosting sort of leadership but rather a leadership that has evolved from our passion to make others aware of those things that touch upon autism related situations. responded: " ... <snip> ... You run this group and I see you guide ... <snip> ... " The dictionary definition of a leader. wrote: " ... <snip> >... I also consider you both good people ... <snip> ... " Thank you, . ;-) wrote: " ... <snip> ... Perhaps I am confused as to the meaning of 'leader' someone who leads people I guess? I guess I haven't idolized people in my life and often those that are put up on peda- stools(sp?) fall ... <snip> ... " Most people I know who have a leadership role in life do not want to be idolized. They want to raise awareness of certain situations and they want to help change the world for the better but they do not want to be placed on a pedestal and made into something they are not. In fact, and I are both far more comfortable with letting others stand in the limelight while we are busying ourselves with other things that grow our advocacy initiatives. Raven Co-Administrator Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 29, 2007 Report Share Posted July 29, 2007 In a message dated 7/29/2007 4:38:14 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, julie.stevenson16@... writes: I suppose my view of a leader is that such are human and often corrupt, hence being reluctant to consider someone a leader, as many leaders are far from the good kind. You're welcome. The points you make are why I mad the distinction between leaders and commanders. Not all commanders are leaders even if they hold positions of authority. I have seen many of them as well, those who didn't merit the post they had. One thing that is very common but, for its frequency, has never adequately been addressed, is people getting promoted beyond their ability. This is very often seen in the military where a commander will be promoted beyond their ability to command. For example: an officer might make a splendid battalion commander but they get promoted to division command and are terrible. It happens in the business world too. Someone might be great in an office with 20 people, but the next step up and they are totally incompetent. The reverse also happens, someone being a terrible battalion commander but a fine division commander. Then again, if that person were again promoted, they could be beyond their ability. Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL.com. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.