Claim: The best way to understand the character of a society is to examine the character of the men and women that the society chooses as its heroes or its role models.Reason: Heroes and role models reveal a society's highest ideals.Write a response in wh

The statement claims that by examining the heroes or role models of a society, people can understand the important characters of this society, and the reason is that these figures always represent a society's highest ideals. Though I agree that this is true in many cases, it is not necessarily the best way to understand the culture of a society.

First of all, heroes and role models become famous in a society because they possess some traits that are highly valued by the members of this society. For example, in the U.S., Bill Gates is regarded as an unprecedentedly successful and innovative businessman. People's admiration of his courage to drop out from the top university and start his own company reflects that Americans always appreciate thinking out of box and pursueing one's own belief, which is also the essential to the American culture.

If we look at the claim the reason together, the statement tries to bridge a society's highest ideals and the character of a society. Can we always learn the character of a society through its heroes, who represent its highest ideals?

I admit that heroes and role models are good study materials to understand a society since they not only possess some highly valued personal traits, but also provide a greater cultural background. Gandhi, the leader of the non-violence non-coorperation protest has always been regarded as a legendary figure in Indian history. The story of Gandhi does feature his toughness, persistence, and strategic thinking, but more importantly, we can learn how India has suffered from the colonial era and fought for their freedom. Therefore, the great figures can serve as mirrors of the time they live in.

However, are the heroes and role models always the best entrance to understand a society? How about the ordinary people, who account for the majority of the population? Heroes and role models become so because they have some characters that the ordinary people don't always possess. For example, Aung San Suu Kyi, who is spending her own life fighting for the democracy in Burmese, is a role model in the Burmese, at least for people who support democracy in Burmese. Can she represent the majority of the society? Is everyone in Burmese has the awareness and the courage to promote a democratic society? Given that she is still living under the threat of the government, I doubt the ordinary people in Burmese are dare to express themselves the same as Aung San Suu Kyi does. Thus, the highest ideals reflected from the role models cannot always be generalized to the common people in the society.

In conclusion, though I agree that the heroes and role models can reveal the highest regarded traits in a society, it is not always the best way to understand the society. Actually, reading through the history, paying a visit to the society, and talking with the people on the street might be better ways to get a sense of the society.