Notices
Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: Why are most leader types "brutes"?

  1. #1 Why are most leader types "brutes"? 
    Forum Ph.D. Raziell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    927
    There are so many smart and wise people in the world. People that would have the perfect personality to do the right things and make the best choises for society and humanity on a whole.

    However it seems that most leaders in the world have very flawed personalities compared to the responsibility they are given.

    Why does it appear that "Alpha males" ... mere brutes that only wants personal gain and power - manages to take leader positions in the world. Some that are straight out stupid, selfish, corrupt and ignorant. While smart, wise and intellectual people with compassion and knowledge doesent?

    I know im generalizing abit here and that there are alot of exeptions, but world leaders and the like seem to lack the bigger picture to lead nations in the best way. And most seem to care alot more for personal gain and status than actually doing something good with the power given.

    Im glad the United States got obama as president now. What classification he has doesent bother me, im just glad a down-to-earth guy that seems to actually want to do some good in the world get to power for a change.

    Thoughts to why it seems to always be like this?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,328
    In many democracies the head of state does not actually wield a lot of power. The system does. And a system may be wiser than any one person... or more stupid sometimes.

    Anyway I think governments especially politicians often claim more credit and receive more blame than they really deserve. For the most part they only react and go along, pretending to lead and command.

    This much they can do and always will: every single president of the USA will "turn a new leaf" and ask the world to forgive America for past wrongs. With the fresh face it'll be different. Try that with a long-term dictatorship!


    A pong by any other name is still a pong. -williampinn
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    266
    i think saying most are brutes is incorrect both historically and current and i think this view is a hold over from H.G Wells's "old man" theory
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Junior newnothing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    226
    For one thing, smart and wise people pursue a path of knowledge. Those hungry for power and status are the ones that end up being leaders. How they end up becoming leaders? Maybe because they market themselves well. They maybe the best breed of marketers in the world :P
    ~ One’s ultimate perfection depends on the development of all the members of society ~ Kabbalah
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5 Re: Why are most leader types "brutes"? 
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    172
    Quote Originally Posted by Raziell
    There are so many smart and wise people in the world. People that would have the perfect personality to do the right things and make the best choises for society and humanity on a whole.

    However it seems that most leaders in the world have very flawed personalities compared to the responsibility they are given.

    Why does it appear that "Alpha males" ... mere brutes that only wants personal gain and power - manages to take leader positions in the world. Some that are straight out stupid, selfish, corrupt and ignorant. While smart, wise and intellectual people with compassion and knowledge doesent?

    I know im generalizing abit here and that there are alot of exeptions, but world leaders and the like seem to lack the bigger picture to lead nations in the best way. And most seem to care alot more for personal gain and status than actually doing something good with the power given.

    Im glad the United States got obama as president now. What classification he has doesn't bother me, Im just glad a down-to-earth guy that seems to actually want to do some good in the world get into power for a change.

    Thoughts to why it seems to always be like this?
    Your definition, Razill, of "alpha male" is flawed.
    Bless your heart, your Obama is, in fact, the antithesis of a functioning "alpha male".

    Obama doesn't want power. Obama only wants-and badly needs-aldoration.

    Obama Hussaina, is not an alpha male. He is not even an omega.
    Obama is, sadly, a sad aspect of our times. Obama is only our social mimic of a man.

    May God please excuse the emptyness of his soul.


    May God please excuse the emptyness of his soul.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6 Re: Why are most leader types "brutes"? 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by Raziell
    There are so many smart and wise people in the world. People that would have the perfect personality to do the right things and make the best choises for society and humanity on a whole.

    However it seems that most leaders in the world have very flawed personalities compared to the responsibility they are given.

    Why does it appear that "Alpha males" ... mere brutes that only wants personal gain and power - manages to take leader positions in the world.
    Their Brutishness allows them to hurt and kill others to gain power.

    A sensitive, intellectual, thoughtful, educated, empathetic person cannot hurt other people. An empathetic person feels every injury they inflict on another human being.

    An educated sensitive person makes a poor leader because they cannot inflict the pain necessary to run a society.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Professor sunshinewarrior's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,525
    I'd go with Karlson's response, for the most part - the focus on ambition that is required to make it to the top almost invariably entails a lack of empathy and the ability to treat others as tools, as means rather than ends.

    I'm guessing Obama will be a good-ish president, but don't believe he's not ruthless, or incapable of great ruthlessness.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere
    Posts
    807
    Quote Originally Posted by Pong
    In many democracies the head of state does not actually wield a lot of power. The system does. And a system may be wiser than any one person... or more stupid sometimes.
    Yes that’s the trouble with any form of organisation, is it becomes a system, and a system very easily begins to take on a faceless inhuman form, from behind which the powerful hide and where nobody can be blamed.

    When a system involving people playing small parts that make up the whole and it becomes a power in itself then you have got problems, because the removal of people doesn’t make it collapse once it has gained its foothold.

    Quote Originally Posted by sunshinewarrior
    I'd go with Karlson's response, for the most part - the focus on ambition that is required to make it to the top almost invariably entails a lack of empathy and the ability to treat others as tools, as means rather than ends.

    I'm guessing Obama will be a good-ish president, but don't believe he's not ruthless, or incapable of great ruthlessness.
    All this fuss about Obama. I don’t mean to be negative, but the American Presidency belongs to such a system and it has for a very long time and always will and everyone is amazed that Obama finally made it in.
    Could there have been a reason behind that considering the loss of face and respect and confidence the American Government was facing from the American people?
    Put Obama in and immediately the American Government gains back its respect, support, confidence and hope in the American dream
    Don’t be surprised if Obama turns out to be just another pawn.

    Behind Obama there is still the system of Government that has always been there. Presidents are just the latest facade to give the impression the system wants the people to believe in.
    This impression is not a true impression of the reality behind the facade. Its showmanship and corporate PR.
    Absum! has never been bored in her life, but is becoming increasingly bored of the Science Forum! :?


    (.·.¸❀¸.·´¯`·.¸☼¸.¤...-♥»゜・*.:。✿*゚‘゚・✿.。.:* *.:。·.¸❀¸.·´¯`·.¸☼¸.¤...-♥»゜・*.:。✿*゚‘゚・✿.。.:* *.:。·.¸❀¸.·´¯`·.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,328
    Quote Originally Posted by Absum!
    Quote Originally Posted by Pong
    In many democracies the head of state does not actually wield a lot of power. The system does. And a system may be wiser than any one person... or more stupid sometimes.
    Yes that’s the trouble... it becomes a power in itself then you have got problems, because the removal of people doesn’t make it collapse once it has gained its foothold.
    I'm sure we share some revolutionary sentiment, but I didn't mean "system" in a negative sense. I meant law, democratic process, bureaucracy, and the ...establishment... of common people all doing our various things. A day-care or an anarchist art gallery operates under a system and fits into the larger system. Like it or not, you're part of "the system".

    As individuals of course we'll rarely agree 100% with the system. And yet in a way - in that way - it is smarter than any one of us.
    A pong by any other name is still a pong. -williampinn
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere
    Posts
    807
    Quote Originally Posted by Pong
    Quote Originally Posted by Absum!
    Quote Originally Posted by Pong
    In many democracies the head of state does not actually wield a lot of power. The system does. And a system may be wiser than any one person... or more stupid sometimes.
    Yes that’s the trouble... it becomes a power in itself then you have got problems, because the removal of people doesn’t make it collapse once it has gained its foothold.
    I'm sure we share some revolutionary sentiment, but I didn't mean "system" in a negative sense. I meant law, democratic process, bureaucracy, and the ...establishment... of common people all doing our various things. A day-care or an anarchist art gallery operates under a system and fits into the larger system. Like it or not, you're part of "the system".

    As individuals of course we'll rarely agree 100% with the system. And yet in a way - in that way - it is smarter than any one of us.
    I didn't mean system in a negative sense either.

    A system is a system, whatever form in society it takes, for good or ill.

    The people of a system are its cogs and it's the principles, regulations and laws of a system which move them.

    When a system becomes empowered by it's principles, regulations and laws, control is removed from the people. Cogs can always be replaced.
    It's the laws given to a system which are it's true powers, for good or ill.

    This is why systems have a tendency to become faceless, impersonal and appears to run on it's own energy becoming immovable and unstoppable.

    This is why a system appears 'smarter than any of us'

    Collectivity is far more powerful than the individual.

    The trouble with system is it promotes mechanization in people and leads them not to think about what they are doing. 'Just doing my job Guv'!' - Following the rules. 'Common people all doing our various things'? But do the common people really think about what it is they are actually doing?

    It's through this that a system gains its power

    The only way to break such a system up is destroy it in it's entirety and begin again.

    Of course if we live in society, we can never escape such systems, but we certainly can attempt to stick a spoke here and there in it's wheels and try to wake the cog pushers up!

    Yes we need Revolutions. But Revolutions just bring different systems with the same old problems.

    What we need more of in the world is Revelations, and people to wake up from somnambulism!
    Absum! has never been bored in her life, but is becoming increasingly bored of the Science Forum! :?


    (.·.¸❀¸.·´¯`·.¸☼¸.¤...-♥»゜・*.:。✿*゚‘゚・✿.。.:* *.:。·.¸❀¸.·´¯`·.¸☼¸.¤...-♥»゜・*.:。✿*゚‘゚・✿.。.:* *.:。·.¸❀¸.·´¯`·.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,328
    What's wrong with being a dumb cog? You need to see above it all? To consent?

    Afraid duplicitous cogs will get the better of you? In politics that would be a reasonable fear!
    A pong by any other name is still a pong. -williampinn
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Professor marcusclayman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,702
    Leadership is culturaly relative. Empathy is the universal respect for life. Life is no more comfort than pain is death. Pain is not contrary to life, it is the fear of pain not going away which makes us fear life and actually LOOSE empathy. You possess more empathy the less you are stimulated. Apathy is a direct effect of over stimulation and quite litteraly, confusion of the nerves(just as knotted muscles from over using them is "confused" muscle fiber)

    Being a leader implies that you are the manifestation of current ideals shared by the group that you lead.

    A group of savage warrior nomads will be lead by the most savage and feared warrior of the group.

    A group of stoic monks will be lead by the most enduring and probably oldest, amongst them.

    This is a joke of a discussion. Brutality has nothing to do with leadership unless you are leading a group of brutes, or scaring people into following you. In which case you have no group and you are not a leader, you are a despot, they are slaves, not followers.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Professor sunshinewarrior's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,525
    Quote Originally Posted by marcusclayman
    Leadership is culturaly relative. Empathy is the universal respect for life. Life is no more comfort than pain is death. Pain is not contrary to life, it is the fear of pain not going away which makes us fear life and actually LOOSE empathy. You possess more empathy the less you are stimulated. Apathy is a direct effect of over stimulation and quite litteraly, confusion of the nerves(just as knotted muscles from over using them is "confused" muscle fiber)

    Being a leader implies that you are the manifestation of current ideals shared by the group that you lead.

    A group of savage warrior nomads will be lead by the most savage and feared warrior of the group.

    A group of stoic monks will be lead by the most enduring and probably oldest, amongst them.

    This is a joke of a discussion. Brutality has nothing to do with leadership unless you are leading a group of brutes, or scaring people into following you. In which case you have no group and you are not a leader, you are a despot, they are slaves, not followers.
    Emphasis added by me.

    If you're not enamoured of the discussion why not add to it in the standard way of philosophy discussions, by argument, logic and evidence?

    Some of your assertions are interesting, but they're non-standard, so will need justifying before we are completely swayed to your point of view!

    cheer

    shanks
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,231
    An educated sensitive person makes a poor leader because they cannot inflict the pain necessary to run a society.
    "Oderint Dum Metuant" hey? It does not have to be like that.
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    625
    Why does it appear that "Alpha males" ... mere brutes that only wants personal gain and power - manages to take leader positions in the world. Some that are straight out stupid, selfish, corrupt and ignorant. While smart, wise and intellectual people with compassion and knowledge doesent?
    If you understand the way a tribe of humans would have behaved in the wild, you'd understand why this is so. A large, aggressive human is more likely to be accepted as the leader, while a more timid one is definitely not going to be able to take charge.

    In a democracy, your point is moot: here, you have a group of people, some of whom may be kinder and more interested in problems than other, less interested compatriots.

    In a dictatorship, well, it depends on the person.
    In control lies inordinate freedom; in freedom lies inordinate control.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Professor marcusclayman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,702
    A savage tribe has a chief, but the chief has no power. They are as close to living in the wild as it comes these days. The chief is responsible for settling disputes between people, that is all. The chief doesn't do this by enforcing his own law, or even one that the people agree on, he represents the law of his ancestors. They have simple laws that everyone can understand and never need to be written down because they are not open to interpretation.

    The chief becomes chief because he is the best person to do the job. If ever he tried to tell people what to do and gain power, he wouldn't be chief much longer.

    Even in times of war, the chief has no power. The most respected warrior is still the most respected warrior in times of war, but the wisest elder is also still the wisest elder. People are known for what they are when you get rid of titles and hierarchy of control where the best warrior leads lesser skilled warriors. This is backwards because the best warrior is not necissarily the best strategist, he might not be the best teacher of martial skills, so why should he have those responsibilities when he could otherwise spend his energy doing what he does best? Let those who are good at teaching war teach war.

    To mistaken the leader of a savage raid as the one who charges in first, makes the most noise or wears the most ornements is wrong. The one wearing the most ornements might be a medicine man and relatively unskilled in the art of war.

    To mistaken the leader of a country as the man who appears on television is an equal mistake. He is a politician, he has a title, he has surtain powers granted to him by written law but what it comes to leadership, no one person will ever lead everyone. We are too complicated for one person to lead so many people, or even for one person to lead ONE person all the time.

    There may be moments that you subject your will to someone elses because you have faith in their ability to decide for you, but you are still deciding to do so, even if you ignore that detail of the transaction. It is to empower their identity as a leader, and your desire to be more like them. People follow people that emulate what they want to be, or stand up for principles that they share, which is the same thing just a different level of consciousness. Ego-consciousness(me and you, who I am, what I want to be) or socially conscious(us and the world, where we are and where we are going)

    But it is the lack of consciosness that forces us to follow leaders in the first place. It is because we want something and it is offered to us at the cost of our submission. Although the submission and the force come in different forms, they are the same at the root.

    A despot can rule with a word much easier than a rod.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •