Showing posts with label Leaders. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Leaders. Show all posts

23.10.15

Ressentiment in the Present Age, by Søren Kierkegaard


Excerpt from - Søren Kierkegaard, The Present Age, translated by Alexander Dru with Foreword by Walter Kaufmann, 1962, pp. 49–52.



It is a fundamental truth of human nature that man is incapable of remaining permanently on the heights, of continuing to admire anything. Human nature needs variety. Even in the most enthusiastic ages people have always liked to joke enviously about their superiors. That is perfectly in order and is entirely justifiable so long as after having laughed at the great they can once more look upon them with admiration; otherwise the game is not worth the candle. In that way ressentiment finds an outlet even in an enthusiastic age. And as long as an age, even though less enthusiastic, has the strength to give ressentiment its proper character and has made up its mind what its expression signifies, ressentiment has its own, though dangerous importance. […]

The more reflection gets the upper hand and thus makes people indolent, the more dangerous ressentiment becomes, because it no longer has sufficient character to make it conscious of its significance. Bereft of that character reflection is a cowardly and vacillating, and according to circumstances interprets the same thing in a variety of ways. It tries to treat it as a joke, and if that fails, to regard it as an insult, and when that fails, to dismiss it as nothing at all; or else it will treat the thing as a witticism, and if that fails, then say that it was meant as a moral satire deserving attention, and if that does not succeed, add that it was not worth bothering about. [...]

Ressentiment becomes the constituent principle of want of character, which from utter wretchedness tries to sneak itself a position, all the time safeguarding itself by conceding that it is less than nothing. The ressentiment which results from want of character can never understand that eminent distinction really is distinction. Neither does it understand itself by recognizing distinction negatively (as in the case of ostracism) but wants to drag it down, wants to belittle it so that it really ceases to be distinguished. And ressentiment not only defends itself against all existing forms of distinction but against that which is still to come.

The ressentiment which is establishing itself is the process of leveling, and while a passionate age storms ahead setting up new things and tearing down old, raising and demolishing as it goes, a reflective and passionless age does exactly the contrary; it hinders and stifles all action; it levels. Leveling is a silent, mathematical, and abstract occupation which shuns upheavals. In a burst of momentary enthusiasm people might, in their despondency, even long for a misfortune in order to feel the powers of life, but the apathy which follows is no more helped by a disturbance than an engineer leveling a piece of land. At its most violent a rebellion is like a volcanic eruption and drowns every other sound. At its maximum the leveling process is a deathly silence in which one can hear one’s own heart beat, a silence which nothing can pierce, in which everything is engulfed, powerless to resist.

One man can be at the head a rebellion, but no one can be at the head of the leveling process alone, for in that case he would be leader and would thus escape being leveled. Each individual within his own little circle can co-operate in the leveling, but it is an abstract power, and the leveling process is the victory of abstraction over the individual. The leveling process in modern times, corresponds, in reflection, to fate in antiquity. The dialectic of ancient times tended towards leadership (the great man over the masses and the free man over the slave); the dialectic of Christianity tends, at least until now, towards representation (the majority views itself in the representative, and is liberated in the knowledge that it is represented in that representative, in a kind of self-knowledge); the dialectic of the present age tends towards equality, and its most consequent but false result is leveling, as the negative unity of the negative relationship between individuals.

It must be obvious to everyone that the profound significance of the leveling process lies in the fact that it means the predominance of the category ‘generation’ over the category ‘individuality’.

---------
If you enjoyed this post, you may also like:


28.3.15

Courage and Fear



Courage and Fear: Neurogenesis in the hippocampus generated by fear response in the amygdala
Fear, like all strong emotions, foments neurogenesis
and the integration of new neurons because emotionally charged
experiences are more salient, thus creating stronger memories.
Click the image to read the news article from the University of California
at Berkeley.  Peer-reviewed journal paper from Molecular Psychiatry
may be found here, by lies behind a pay firewall.




Courage is strength of anima—both mental and moral—to venture and persevere, to act in the face of fear, danger, and overwhelming difficulty. Confucius said that «it does not matter how slow you go so long as you do not stop.» This idea entails extraordinary determination; however, its lack of a time-constraint renders it more accurate for private life than for profit-seeking. Swift action is often required for business success. Frequently, timing is everything.


Fear paralyzes. As a flurry of recent neuropsychological experiments has corroborated, fear reduces the velocity of cognitive decision-making, and persistent fear over time decreases functional cerebral mass as millions of neurons shrink or die, widening the brain’s unproductive, anatomic cortical folds. In The Prince, Machiavelli noted the vast advantages of inspiring love instead of terror. A fleeting feeling of love is—inversely considered—an absence of fear, a state of vulnerability that compels action and foments a productive, happy society that precludes the appearance of conspirators. Despite acknowledging this, Machiavelli reluctantly recommended governing through terror-instigating measures solely because fear paralyzes individual and collective actions, thus thwarting rebellious uprisings.


Decelerated mental activity yields mediocre execution, professional conformity, and consequently, when widespread, the propagation of broken promises that pave the way for the materialization of a culture of rotten compromises. Because uprisings aren’t as great a concern to a CEO, COO, CFO or CIO as they are to a prince, managing by inspiring admiration, respect and love is pivotal to securing the long-term success and survival of any corporation. To deserve and receive respect, leaders must inspire courage in others. Empathy is necessary to earn the love of a subordinate or peer.


Mediocre leaders confuse fear with respect and compliments with love and admiration. Empathy demands that courage be rewarded. Combating conformity, on the other hand, requires imposing excellence as the nonnegotiable standard for all labor, as the maximum value of our work-ethic. Excellent execution necessitates a healthy dose of courage, which therefore merits reward and distinction whenever encountered. As a result, when a person defines his own hierarchy of values—his ethic—if he also places growth and excellence as categorically above his preferred value system, then the question of how and when to reward courage becomes moot. To that self-realized leader, any culture of rotten compromises is unacceptable and unlivable.



----------
Originally published by the St. Gallen Symposium.

Also available at ResearchGate.



---------
You may also enjoy reading:




Featured Original:

How You Know What You Know

In a now classic paper, Blakemore and Cooper (1970) showed that if a newborn cat is deprived of experiences with horizontal lines (i.e., ...