Solitude And Leadership By William Deresiewicz

511 Words2 Pages

As humans, we are beings of intelligence; therefore we are capable of compiling thoughts into ideas and beliefs. Our intelligence is also truly tested when we are in agreement or in conflict with the beliefs of other people. What about a popular conception that becomes a misconception? What about a thought that is infamous because of the truth that it preaches? If I am the one out of the crowd, who sees this thought as the truth instead of a punishment, does that mean my intelligence is no more comparable to theirs? It feels like yesterday when I read the manuscript of the lecture delivered to the plebe class in WestPoint on October 2009 by William Deresiewicz. The lecture was titled Solitude and Leadership. The first thing Deresiewicz did was to acknowledge the controversy surrounding the relationship between the words “solitude” and “leadership” in the title. And indeed it is a controversy for those who did not understand this lecture. Some people justify their neglect of the idea passed across in this lecture with the conflict between the two head words in the title. I would have been part of the swarm of people who examine this lecture with a shallow mind. On the contrary, it was one of the most in-depth readings I had ever done and I had seen clearly the message …show more content…

If I didn’t I would have barely paid attention to the lecture. Before I read the manuscript, I could never see past the bad leadership. There was never more depth to the problem. The lecture provided depth. Before I was told that a leader was nothing without his followers. That a leader only acts on the decision of his followers. But the lecture helped me understand that you must not always be democratic, the leader must have solitude in his thoughts. He must be able to gather thoughts and make decisions without the influence of others. The leader should be able to guide his fellowship through his own morals not the immorality of

Open Document