Followership vs. Leadership
I was used to see the management and self-improvement bookshelves in bookstores and libraries flooded by titles with the word “leadership” in them but now the omnipresent catchword has slopped over to inundate other areas as well.
I have taken a few books home from the local library on adolescent psychology and character education and was surprised to see that the obsession with the concept of “leadership” has already reached the shores of parenting, too. The author - otherwise a knowledgeable expert – just could not get out of the mythical circle of the label “leadership”. Looking into the details of how we should educate our teens to “become leaders of valued community activities” it turned out that behind the catchword “leadership” the author hid such useful notions as the skills of organization and time management, responsibility and considerateness.
Now, if everybody is a “leader”, who will be the followers?
The infatuation with “leadership” has blessed humanity with an endless row of Alexanders (greater or smaller), Napoleons, Hitlers, Mussolinis, Stalins who all founded huge empires that lasted from 3 to 30 years.
The cultivation of the “skills”, “virtues”, “attitudes” of sheer practice of followership has produced, on the contrary, billions of “average” (a negative catchword for the arithmetically uneducated) decent, reasonable and rational individuals over thousands of years across different cultures. The cult of inconspicuous happiness had few preachers (Lao-Tze, Buddha, Epicurus) and its “success” has never become overly visible. And justifiably so: fame is seldom an ingredient of happiness – if ever.
The silently smiling masses simply “followed” their normal and “average” instincts in the pursuit of happiness, contained in the teachings of the above mentioned preachers. Billions of them. Thousands of years.
The “summum bonum” fallacy
March 20, 2010 · Filed Under Epicurean solutions · Comment
The New Epicurean
http://newepicurean.com/
started washing off some of the thick crusts of lies and slanders put on Epicurus’s face by Platonists, Stoics and Christians by quoting DeWitt’s clarification regarding the summum bonum .Kudos, Cassius!
The New Epicurean started washing off some of the thick crusts of lies and slanders put on Epicurus’s face by Platonists, Stoics and Christians by quoting DeWitt’s clarification regarding the “summum bonum”. Kudos, Cassius!
see more here: http://newepicurean.com/
Commenting Epicurus”s First Principal Doctrine
March 12, 2010 · Filed Under Epicurean solutions, roadmap to happiness through stress-FREEDOM · Comment
The Epicurus page of Facebook started publishing Epicurus’s Principal Doctrines again with new comments.
“A blessed and indestructible being has no trouble himself and brings no trouble upon any other being; so he is free from anger and partiality, for all such things imply weakness.” – The First Epicurean Principal Doctrine
http://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/?ref=home
My comment was this:
I agree with DeWitt in that Epicurus taught that the gods were not immortal but “only” indestructible” and that their “blessedness” was -at least partly – due to the fact that they were “free from anger and partiality”. So the message of the 1st Principal Doctrine is: Do NOT fear the gods! At the same time I agree with Jaakko in that the gods through their “blessedness” or perfect ataraxia served as role models for Epicurean practitioners, who believed and proved that through daily practice the can “live like gods”.
FREE Report about stress
Download instantly your copy!