Week 8 Journal

Thursday: October 8, 2020

Today, as always, we kicked off class with the completion of a quiz. This week our quiz was on the play, “The Normal Heart,” by Larry Kramer. The main character, Ned Weeks, seemed to have quite a few limitations. There a list added to Chapter 7 of Kallion, including these following limitations: (1) Ned doesn’t always seem to care about the feelings of others, especially when he feels that he is right, (2) Ned thinks less of others who don’t fight for causes as strongly as he does, (3) He expects too much of himself, (4) He is afraid of being/seeming weak and he does not feel comfortable with his status as an outsider/gay man, (5) Ned cannot work with those he does not respect, and (6) He does not seem to be aware of how he comes across to other people. I would like to expand on these limitations, share my views on them based on Ned’s character portrayal in the play: (1) This limitation is similar, if not the same, as the love of design motivation. Ned has a vision for how he wants something done, and that vision will be completed to any extent, even if that includes putting aside the feelings of others. (2) This limitation can be dangerous because it inadvertently narrows Ned’s support team. Just because someone doesn’t fight for a cause publicly, or at least to the same extent as Ned, does not mean that they don’t care about it. If Ned decides to only work with or acknowledge/respect others that fight to the same extent as him, he may lose out on the opportunity to work with and to meet many other good candidates. (3) I do think that this can be harmful. Ned puts extra pressure on himself because he expects a certain outcome and will not stop until he gets it. Even if this outcome will harm him, especially mentally, he will fight for it. He adds this extra pressure, often only frustrating himself further. For some, putting pressure on themselves is effective, causing them to get more done, but even if this is the case, there are still other outcomes that are not beneficial to one’s health (ex: mental distress). (4) I agree that Ned does not enjoy coming across as weak which can often cause someone to do things they aren’t proud of, compromising the feelings of others for their personal gain; but I think the second part of this limitation can go 2 ways. I do believe that Ned may be uncomfortable with his status as a gay man, but definitely not with the actual fact that he is a gay man. To elaborate, Ned is not the most popular or admired, or simply even liked, and I definitely don’t think that he prefers that or prefers others to fear him. On the other hand, Ned is very confident with the fact that he is a gay man and he would not let anyone make him feel different about that. So my response to this limitation is dependent on the intention of it (hence my response to both intentions). (5) This limitation caught my interest. On the one hand, Ned should be able to look past some of his personal feelings when it comes to working with others; he should not decide not to work with others for mere personal reasons that don’t pertain to work. On the other hand, Ned’s work is personal, he’s standing up for what he believes in and he falls into the category of what he is standing up for (gay men). If you don’t respect someone, maybe it’s best not to work with them. That could merely make things worse, and if Ned is not willing to hold back on those he does not respect, then maybe it’s for the better to work separately. I guess what I’m getting at is, Is Ned’s inability to work with those he doesn’t respect truly a limitation, or is it beneficial not to work with those you don’t respect? Lastly, (6) This limitation causes Ned to be blindsided. Not that he necessarily cares about the opinions of others, but if he doesn’t know how he is portrayed in the public and to others, he won’t know how he can better his approach. The effect of his work can be pointless if others aren’t listening to him. If Ned wants his work to be cared about by the majority, he might want to do a better job at caring for the needs of others, as well as how they view him.

The last thing we did in class today was get into break out rooms where we spoke about names and what a leadership name sounds like. For me, it was difficult to think of what a leadership name sounds like. After a few minutes of thought, I realized that names that sound like leadership names can be the ones that have a definition of dominance- names that literally mean things of higher position. The example I thought of that brought me to this realization was none other than president Trump. As terrible as a leader he is (if you can even call him that), his name, Trump, literally means to do better than someone, to beat someone. It is names like his, those that have definitions implying leadership, that sound like leadership names to me.

Saturday: October 10, 2020 & Monday: October 12, 2020

I had some extra time on Saturday, so I decided to begin reading Chapter 8 of Kallion, “The Education of Cyrus.” I then finished on Monday what I had not completed Saturday. Before getting into the story, I would like to include the key terms that I will refer to: (1) kallos meaning beauty or sexual attractiveness, (2) philanthrōpia meaning love of humanity, (3) philomatheia meaning love of learning, (4) philotīmia meaning love of being honored, recognized, or praised, (5) paideia meaning education both in the sense of learning various skills but also building character, and (6) phthonos meaning a feeling of hostility or envy. Cyrus is said to be a great leader and these meanings, along with a few others, are the reasons why. Cyrus had a love of 3 things: his love of humanity, his love of learning, and his love of being honored (as mentioned above). There was a question as to whether these 3 things are essentially what are needed to be a great leader, and based on this story I would say yes. Now, a question I would pose is that if a leader has a love of honor and recognition, could they truly be a good leader without the desire for personal gain, in this case being honor and recognition? My initial answer to this question would be no, you cannot be a successful leader if all you strive for is recognition, but you must consider the other things for a different answer. Once you implement the love of humanity, your answer to this question is likely bound to change. Yes, one might love recognition, but when you consider that they actually care about those they receive recognition from, the idea changes. Cyrus didn’t simply want recognition, he wanted to see others thrive. Along with this, he had a love for education; he was a curious boy who wanted to learn. His eagerness to learn, help others, and receive honor are what made him such a great leader. The Persian education that Cyrus received was based on the development of character, including 4 specific topics: good judgement, gratitude, emotional restraint, and physical self mastery. These 4 topics were an attempt to keep the Persians from committing crimes, as opposed to what would not be considered an average education. Being that Cyrus was able to receive this education, along with that of the Medes, he became very well rounded, as well as was able to satisfy his desire of education. Because of the way Cyrus went about his interactions with others, they naturally wanted to listen to him. Along with this, he was said to be quite attractive (kallos), inclining others to have a liking for Cyrus. Lastly, Cyrus was able to praise others without envy (phthonos). These traits are what allowed him to be such a great leader, others naturally wanting to follow his rule.

Tuesday: October 13, 2020

Today we picked out some key passages in the story where Cyrus’ leadership is shown. As I was reading the story, there was one passage in particular that I favored. This passage, to set the scene, was when Astyages watched as the boys, including Cyrus, hunted and threw spears; each boy enjoyed the hunt, laughing and cheering with one another. “And the king was delighted to see him laugh at one and praise another without the least bit of jealousy… Cyrus passed most of his time, contriving some pleasure and good for all, but responsible for nothing unpleasant to anyone” (Cyropaedia C.4, S.15). In this passage we see Cyrus’ lack of phthonos, he didn’t envy his friends; he was able to laugh with them, as well as praise them without feeling any envy or jealousy. In my opinion, Cyrus is a great leader in terms of envy, readily willing and happy to lift others up. As the passage says, he was “responsible for nothing unpleasant to anyone.” He was lighthearted and fun to be around, all his friends enjoyed their time in his presence. At another point in the story, in regards to horseback riding, we see more of this behavior from Cyrus. He had claimed that he would not ride against those he knew were no competition; he didn’t want to race against those he knew he would beat because he had no interest in gloating. He wanted to ride against only those he knew would be competition, and he took any losses with ease. He simply laughed when he lost, having no hard feelings or anger towards his companions. Along with this, he continued to laugh with and praise others as they succeeded. Cyrus wanted the best for everyone, even if that meant that he wasn’t on top.

We ended class by joining breakout rooms to discuss the character of judgement, phronēsis. My group, group 5, chose the physician and we were asked to answer 3 questions: (1) How does someone become a physician?, (2) What are the common leadership behaviors of a physician?, and (3) Is it ever possible for a good physician to become a bad physician? If so, how would that happen? My group came up with the following responses: (1) Go to medical school, study, read, show interest in the human body, have a mentor, and practice. (2) Physicians are often decisive, clear communicators, problem solvers, confident, helpful to others (giving patients what they need), calling out bad behavior (in terms of health, suggestions), and regulating their emotions. (3) Yes, a good physician can become a bad one if they begin to lack motivation or care, take advantage of patients, begin not to keep up with current information, use resources intended for patients and work for themselves, neglect to help their patients, begin to prioritize some patients over others, and if they begin to take shortcuts. Based on our responses we were asked if we see ourselves as the described roles. I would say that I help others and sometimes call out bad behavior (not necessarily in regards to health), but I am definitely not decisive, I can problem solve only depending on the scenario, and I’m not always a clear communicator. Overall, I wouldn’t say I see myself in this role, but maybe as I continue in this course, some of these answers will change.