Although sound moral judgment is an important characteristic of an effective leader, it is not as important as a leader’s ability to maintain the respect of his or her peers.
Leadership has been a source of collective change in society for many decades. Often times, these leaders have had diverse and often times catastrophic consequences for their fellow man. Scientists have long evaluated the qualities that comprise a leader who will benefit the wider society, respect, tolerance and moral judgement are all considerations in the ambiguity of leadership selection. However, I contest that moral judgement is in most instances, a more beneficial trait that fostering respect from their peers.
Sound moral judgment has been a foundational quality in the more collective advancements of society throughout recent history. Indeed, many of societies largest social advancements - when considering equality- have been spearheaded by leaders with an exceptional moral compass. Mahatma Gandhi, Rosa Parks, Martin Luther King were all leaders with an exceptionally sound moral judgement who raged against the oppressive norms of their respective societies in direct contradiction to the views of their peers. If these educated and insightful individuals had paid close attention to maintaining the respect of their peers, perhaps we would not have seen such steadfast views. Indeed, the very idea of a moral compass is predicated on understanding the contentious realm of prevailing social norms and choosing to take the morally correct path regardless of social consequences from one's peers.
A leader's role is to lead, and therefore, often places him/her in a position of hierarchical advantage. Specifically, leaders must often make the correct choice regardless of their peer relationships. If one overly values the consideration of their peers, one places themselves in an untenable position with those which they lead. Their foundational task has become marred by the formalities of social relationships and reciprocity to maintain peer respect in lieu of potential progression.Take the example of the most archetypal leader in the world, a politician, if they begin value maintaining the respect of their peers more than their moral judgment, they will soon turn to a system whereby the elites views become more valued than the collective good.
However, this is not too say that maintaining respect is not a part of the leadership role. If one can establish and maintain respect, relationships become easier, decisions become more collective, and the group benefits. Nonetheless, as one can see from the seminal studies of Tajfel and Turner, focusing too inwardly on one's own group is instrumental in creating conflict. With this consideration in mind, the ability to foster and maintain respect is valuable in so far that it assists with maintaining relationships if they serve the wider purpose, but should rarely, if ever, supersede one's sound moral judgment.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-03-30 | rahatumar9072 | 50 | view |
| 2024-03-30 | rahatumar9072 | 50 | view |
| 2023-10-30 | qwertyy | 54 | view |
| 2023-09-24 | Adelaida | 50 | view |
| 2023-08-18 | Mayuresh08 | 50 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 144, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[2]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'societies the largest'.
Suggestion: societies the largest
...oughout recent history. Indeed, many of societies largest social advancements - when considering ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 882, Rule ID: ONES[1]
Message: Did you mean 'one's'?
Suggestion: one's
... regardless of social consequences from ones peers. A leaders role is to lead, a...
^^^^
Line 5, column 3, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'leaders'' or 'leader's'?
Suggestion: leaders'; leader's
...ial consequences from ones peers. A leaders role is to lead, and therefore, often p...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 491, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Take
...espect in lieu of potential progression.Take the example of the most archetypal lead...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, nonetheless, so, therefore
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 19.5258426966 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.4196629213 56% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 14.8657303371 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.3162921348 80% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 30.0 33.0505617978 91% => OK
Preposition: 53.0 58.6224719101 90% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 12.9106741573 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2373.0 2235.4752809 106% => OK
No of words: 430.0 442.535393258 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.51860465116 5.05705443957 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.55372829156 4.55969084622 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.07427133028 2.79657885939 110% => OK
Unique words: 226.0 215.323595506 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.525581395349 0.4932671777 107% => OK
syllable_count: 726.3 704.065955056 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.10617977528 193% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.38483146067 23% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 20.2370786517 84% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 25.0 23.0359550562 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 81.7441362192 60.3974514979 135% => OK
Chars per sentence: 139.588235294 118.986275619 117% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.2941176471 23.4991977007 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.58823529412 5.21951772744 50% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.250448089414 0.243740707755 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0806743373292 0.0831039109588 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0472523460314 0.0758088955206 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.150980878848 0.150359130593 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0377419226931 0.0667264976115 57% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.2 14.1392134831 122% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 48.8420337079 77% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.1743820225 117% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.03 12.1639044944 124% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.47 8.38706741573 113% => OK
difficult_words: 125.0 100.480337079 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.8971910112 71% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.2143820225 107% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.