IN FRANKLIN’S civic pride and his projects for the improvement of Philadelphia, we see another aspect of the philosophy of doing good. At the same time we may recognize the zeal for reform that has long been a characteristic of American life. In his attention to the details of daily living, Franklin shows himself as the observant empiricist. As the successful engineer of ways to make the city he loved cleaner, safer and more attractive he continually sponsored new institutions that were proof that the applications of reason to experience were fruitful in the real world. ‘Human felicity,’ he wrote, ‘is produced not so much by great pieces of good fortune that seldom happen, as by little advantages that occur every day.’ Franklin typifies that aspect of the American character that is attentive to small details as well as over-all great plans.
The practical idealism of America lies in our capacity to work for our ideals step by step, to recognize that the perfect world is never achieved but that we may approach it gradually by a creative attentiveness to each aspect of life around us. BENJAMIN FRANKLIN’S religious creed held that the best service to God is to be good to man. He leaned to the views of the ‘Dissenters’ of his day, notably Joseph Priestley and Richard Price, who preached a doctrine somewhat like present Unitarianism. A moralist, he taught that man’s soul is immortal and that man’s conduct in this world will determine his condition in the next; so he made a creed of virtue, based on integrity and good deeds-man must help himself and others.
The Essay on Ben Franklin Man Lawrence One
Benjamin Franklin Who was he In reading the Benjamin Franklin's Autobiography one can see the true character of a great man. But some may argue that this man, deep down inside, was not so great. Through out his book he touches on many aspects of his life. He lets the readers have a glimpse at what he was thinking and why he did things the way he did. Some critics do not agree that Franklin was ...
In the American tradition Franklin stands as a man who preached thrift, frugality, industry and enterprise as the ‘way to wealth.’ He grew to maturity in an American tradition that was older than he was, according to which such virtues as thrift and industry were not enough to bring a man success; he had also to practice charity and help his neighbor. Wealth was a token of esteem of the Divine Providence that governs men’s affairs, and thus the accumulation of riches was not sought for its own sake alone. Furthermore, wealth and position, being marks of the divine favor, conferred an obligation; a successful man was a ‘steward,’ holding the world’s goods in trust for the less fortunate. This ‘Protestant ethic’ was a common denominator of Calvinistic Boston where Franklin spent his boyhood and of Quaker Philadelphia where he grew to young manhood. BEING AN AMERICAN meant for Franklin a passionate love of country and a devotion to a democratic point of view in which the rights and liberties of his fellow men were guaranteed and protected. As her foremost citizen in the eyes of the world, he was the champion of her cause in Britain for more than a decade before the Revolution and her representative in France during the years of conflict.
America was fortunate in having a man of his stature and ability to serve her during those years; the skills he had acquired in mastery of life and the world’s affairs were brought to bear on the issues of state in patriotic service. An old hand at presenting ’causes’ in the public press, he presented the case for America in British newspapers and magazines-under various pseudonyms, just as he had done at home in his Pennsylvania Gazette. His knowledge of America was extraordinary and he answered statements made against his country by a display of statistics on population, agriculture, manufacturing and trade that was overwhelming. He knew that false claims and allegations could often be best answered by satire and that at other times a reasoned argument would be more effective.
As colonial agent in England, he was at once lobbyist, propagandist, witness and the voice of America. In France, too, he used the press to the advantage of his country and he understood how the self-interest of France could be harnessed to aid America. He knew that the French government would never help America for purely altruistic reasons, and he… End of free preview. Perceptions of leadership appear to be changing. Research has shown a shift in emphasis in regard to the factors influencing leadership effectiveness in a group.
The Essay on Leadership Successful Leader
... will severely limit your effectiveness as a leader. These laws are the foundation of leadership, yet you will ... t be mandated; it must be earned. Leadership is about influencing people to follow, while management focuses ... first buy into you as a leader. Leaders succeed only when their group has a unified vision, no ... how amazed he was to learn that men would gladly risk their lives in pursuit ...
Whereas early scholars focused on leaders personality characteristics as key to leadership effectiveness in group situations, today, there has been a turning toward a concern for group members’ characteristics and a parallel concern for the ensuing influence on leadership behavior. The old belief that only the leader has the inherent ability to make things happen has been found wanting. Emphasis is fast shifting away from the idea that leadership effectiveness is unilaterally influenced by the leader’s personality characteristics toward the notion that leadership effectiveness is bilaterally influenced by the dynamics of both the leader and the group members’ personality characteristics. This paper presents some findings of research on leadership to support the critical influence of group members’ characteristics on leadership effectiveness. Implications are noted for leaders, trainers, and researchers. Leadership is no longer regarded a one-person affair.
In any group, the influence of the personality characteristics of group members on leadership effectiveness cannot be overemphasized. It would be difficult to imagine a world of leadership without follower ship. Leadership obviously implies follower ship. Leaders cannot do it alone. As claimed in the literature, it takes both the leader and the group members to get things done (Kouzes & Posner, 1987; Rost, 1991; Clark & Clark, 1994).
Leaders have been unsuccessful because of their failure to harness the strengths of their group.
