Oct. 29, 2020
Do heroes exist in a modern society? --2
Some people could oppose this point by arguing that the private life is a scope that one should judge distinctively from the leader’s worthiness. However, while this assertion may be true, many fail to separate a person’s private life from his public persona. Thus, I argue that in order for someone to be indeed deemed “a hero” it would necessary for one to maintain an almost “perfect” image, both in private and public sphere, which is very difficult. Furthermore, if one considers the fact that scandals or bad images usually leave more enduring impression than good deeds, it is reasonable to think the public would likely no more deem one as a hero once his fault is exposed. This would thus be applicable even for someone who made a few mistakes and had achieved a myriad of things in the past.
Some could also argue that there exist people who were free of scandal, such as Obama. But Obama is regarded as almost the only US president who was free of scandal throughout history, a fact that speaks for itself how rare it is for a public figure to maintain a flawless image and thus remain highly admirable. Moreover, even if a person has not suffered a notable scandal in his private life, the media is likely to uncover at least a few of his other fallibilities. That is, for instance, since media today has so many sources available, it can be discovered that among the many words he said, a politician was inconsistent in his stance or was mendacious. Inconsistency, especially for a politician, could cause people to highly cast doubt on the causes he supports. Let us take a hypothetical example of a senator who has always been unswervingly opposed to granting women an automatic right to an abortion, a stance that gained him popular support. His supporters could even regard him as a “hero” since he works for a righteous cause. However, among numerous old recordings of him, let us assume his supporters discovered an instance where he spoke about the issue in a somewhat condoning manner. This will likely cause his supporters to doubt his credibility, even for causes other than abortion.
Some people could oppose this point by arguing that the private life is a scopeof someone is a subject that one should judge distinctively from the leader’s worthiness.
However, while this assertion may be true, many fail to separate a person’s private life from his public persona.
Thus, I argue that in order for someone to be indeed deemed “a hero” it would necessary for one to maintain an almost “perfect” image, both in private and public sphere, which is very difficult.
Furthermore, if one considers the fact that scandals or bad images usually leave a more enduring impression than good deeds, it is reasonable to think the public would likely no more deem one as a hero once his fault is exposed.
Some could also argue that there exist people who were free of scandal, such as Obama.
But Obama is regarded as almost the only US president who was free of scandal throughout history, a fact that speaks for itself how rare it is for a public figure to maintain a flawless image and thus remain highly admirable.
Moreover, even if a person has not suffered a notable scandal in his private life, the media is likely to uncover at least a few of his other fallibilities.
That is, for instance, since media today has so many sources available, it can be discovered that among the many words he said, a politician was inconsistent in his stance or was mendacious.
Inconsistency, especially for a politician, could cause people to highly cast doubt on the causes he supports.
Let us take a hypothetical example of a senator who has always been unswervingly opposed to granting women an automatic right to an abortion, a stance that gained him popular support.
His supporters could even regard him as a “hero” since he works for a righteous cause.
However, among numerous old recordings of him, let us assume his supporters discovered an instance where he spoke about the issue in a somewhat condoning manner.
This will likely cause his supporters to doubt his credibility, even for causes other than abortion.
Feedback
An excellent follow-up, very thought provoking!
|
Do heroes exist in a modern society? --2 |
|
Some people could oppose this point by arguing that the private life is a scope that one should judge distinctively from the leader’s worthiness. Some people could oppose this point by arguing that the private life |
|
However, while this assertion may be true, many fail to separate a person’s private life from his public persona. This sentence has been marked as perfect! |
|
Thus, I argue that in order for someone to be indeed deemed “a hero” it would necessary for one to maintain an almost “perfect” image, both in private and public sphere, which is very difficult. This sentence has been marked as perfect! |
|
Furthermore, if one considers the fact that scandals or bad images usually leave more enduring impression than good deeds, it is reasonable to think the public would likely no more deem one as a hero once his fault is exposed. Furthermore, if one considers the fact that scandals or bad images usually leave a more enduring impression than good deeds, it is reasonable to think the public would likely no more deem one as a hero once his fault is exposed. |
|
This would thus be applicable even for someone who made a few mistakes and had achieved a myriad of things in the past. |
|
Some could also argue that there exist people who were free of scandal, such as Obama. This sentence has been marked as perfect! |
|
But Obama is regarded as almost the only US president who was free of scandal throughout history, a fact that speaks for itself how rare it is for a public figure to maintain a flawless image and thus remain highly admirable. This sentence has been marked as perfect! |
|
Moreover, even if a person has not suffered a notable scandal in his private life, the media is likely to uncover at least a few of his other fallibilities. This sentence has been marked as perfect! |
|
That is, for instance, since media today has so many sources available, it can be discovered that among the many words he said, a politician was inconsistent in his stance or was mendacious. This sentence has been marked as perfect! |
|
Inconsistency, especially for a politician, could cause people to highly cast doubt on the causes he supports. This sentence has been marked as perfect! |
|
Let us take a hypothetical example of a senator who has always been unswervingly opposed to granting women an automatic right to an abortion, a stance that gained him popular support. This sentence has been marked as perfect! |
|
His supporters could even regard him as a “hero” since he works for a righteous cause. This sentence has been marked as perfect! |
|
However, among numerous old recordings of him, let us assume his supporters discovered an instance where he spoke about the issue in a somewhat condoning manner. This sentence has been marked as perfect! |
|
This will likely cause his supporters to doubt his credibility, even for causes other than abortion. This sentence has been marked as perfect! |
|
My second point is that the media today, with its informative nature, lets people view societal issues in a more objective manner via news, documentaries, or the Internet. |
|
That is, through the media, the public can realize that almost all policies or issues, even those well-intended, can have negative consequences. |
|
Admiration could easily come from seeing only positive aspect of an issue. |
|
Thus, when the public is unbiased, a blind respect or admiration for someone becomes unlikely. |
|
For example, while initially praised for being egalitarian, Obamacare now receives mixed opinions(?) with some pointing to its drawbacks such as increased insurance premiums and medical costs. |
|
This can cause someone who initially regarded Obama as a hero to realize that even he has his limitations. |
|
As is the case with Obamacare, many issues attributed to the leaders who are deemed heroes today are highly complex, and thus intense media coverage is likely to reveal their two-sided natures. |
|
Thus, the public will find themselves in much less instances where they uncritically praise or admire someone for his actions or policies. |
|
In light of these discussions, I agree with the prompt as, when put under scrutiny, it is highly unlikely for any individual to maintain a faultless image so that the public could keep regarding him as a hero. |
|
Also, the media lets the public become aware of the multifaceted nature of many societal issues. |
|
These two factors of the media lead the public to view their initial “heroes” in a more objective light and lead them to be disenchanted. |
You need LangCorrect Premium to access this feature.
Go Premium