Terrorism Vs. Individualism: Article Analysis
Followers the Leaders
The article written by Ralph R. Reiland titled Terrorism VS Individualism is about different instance where people followed the actions of different leaders. This article also spoke briefly, about how easy it was to persuade people who were unhappy with their employer, to do things that most would not. What this article says about people who are in a leadership role or studying leadership is simple. We as leaders have a responsibility to act morally and ethically in all circumstances. We also have an obligation to make sure that we know the needs and concerns from those in which whom we lead. On example that the article give is when Pakistani reporter, Hamid Mir talked to the number two leader of al-Qaida, Ayaman al-Zawahir. He talked told Mir that he could approach any disgruntled nuclear scientist and have them help create nuclear weapons. This is something that we all should worry about, not just in America, …show more content…
There are too many examples in the world of leaders whose actions is the product of what is most beneficial to them. The article gave several examples to support this. Which leads us not only us not only into the responsibilities as a leader but our responsibilities as followers. In the beginning of our class, there was a definition of what a leader was. A leader cannot exist with out followers. In paragraphs fourteen and fifteen of the article, it mentions and experiment that was held in the years of 1961 and 1962 by psychologist Stanley Milgram. In this experiment, he had several students at Yale University administer electro shock therapy to other students.
These test subjects did so mostly without any questions. They did this even though they had no reason to inflict pain on the people receiving the jolts. Why did they do this? Because they were told to and the test subjects trusted the scientist conducting the
The article written by Ralph R. Reiland titled Terrorism VS Individualism is about different instance where people followed the actions of different leaders. This article also spoke briefly, about how easy it was to persuade people who were unhappy with their employer, to do things that most would not. What this article says about people who are in a leadership role or studying leadership is simple. We as leaders have a responsibility to act morally and ethically in all circumstances. We also have an obligation to make sure that we know the needs and concerns from those in which whom we lead. On example that the article give is when Pakistani reporter, Hamid Mir talked to the number two leader of al-Qaida, Ayaman al-Zawahir. He talked told Mir that he could approach any disgruntled nuclear scientist and have them help create nuclear weapons. This is something that we all should worry about, not just in America, …show more content…
There are too many examples in the world of leaders whose actions is the product of what is most beneficial to them. The article gave several examples to support this. Which leads us not only us not only into the responsibilities as a leader but our responsibilities as followers. In the beginning of our class, there was a definition of what a leader was. A leader cannot exist with out followers. In paragraphs fourteen and fifteen of the article, it mentions and experiment that was held in the years of 1961 and 1962 by psychologist Stanley Milgram. In this experiment, he had several students at Yale University administer electro shock therapy to other students.
These test subjects did so mostly without any questions. They did this even though they had no reason to inflict pain on the people receiving the jolts. Why did they do this? Because they were told to and the test subjects trusted the scientist conducting the