OJBs Web Site: Blog Page

Note: You are currently viewing my old web site. There is a new version with most of this content at OJB.NZ.
The new site is being updated, uses modern techniques, has higher quality media, and has a mobile-friendly version.
This old site will stay on-line for a while, but maybe not indefinitely. Please update your bookmarks. Thanks.

Add a Comment (Go Up to OJB's Blog Page)

Abe vs George

Entry 636, on 2007-11-07 at 22:42:11 (Rating 4, Politics)

Why is Abraham Lincoln considered such a great leader and George Bush considered (by most) as such a poor one? (OK, I'm being very generous here - I didn't use the word idiot, retard, moron, etc) I think part of the answer is in the search for truth. Bush seems to be only interested in making decisions which follow a certain path: usually supporting big corporations or the religious right; but Abe made decisions using a much wider range of supporting evidence.

At this point I'd better admit I don't really know a lot about Lincoln. Outside of the US his name is known but he's not a major part of most history teaching. I'm basing my assumptions on some (usually reliable) podcasts I've listened too recently which said Lincoln deliberately had people with contradictory views around him so that he could minimise self-deception.

Most modern leaders (including Bush) only hire people who say what they think their boss wants to hear. Its a common human tendency, but one which often leads to bad decision making. Would the war in Iraq have proceeded if there had been a fair balance of opinion in the US leadership? I don't think so. Would government funding of stem cell research in the US be blocked if alternative views could be considered? Probably not.

This all happens at lower levels of leadership too. I see this happening all the time in the bureaucracy of the university I work at. Admittedly there is a consultation process open to everyone, but when only certain views are permissible at the top levels of management there's a clear bias towards making certain types of decisions.

Science is a good example of an alternative model. No one there is so senior that their views can't be challenged, for example Einstein was an almost unknown beginner at science when he challenged the physics of one of the greatest scientist of all time, Newton. No view in science is above criticism, but does this apply to commonly held religious and political beliefs? Obviously not.

I often rant about the self deception of religious believers, but the same problem applies (to a lesser extent) to politicians and managers. More democratic and less hierarchical models exist but I don't know if they will ever be dominant. But until we can change the decision making process at all levels of our society we are doomed to making the same mistakes and accepting the same lack of imagination we have now.

There are no comments for this entry.

You can leave comments about this entry using this form.

To add a comment: enter a name and email (both optional), type the number shown above, enter a comment, then click Add.
Note that you can leave the name blank if you want to remain anonymous.
Enter your email address to receive notifications of replies and updates to this entry.
The comment should appear immediately because the authorisation system is currently inactive.