issue48

civilppUID: 2999177

48

“The study of history places too much emphasizes on individuals. The most significanct events and trends were made possible not by the famous few, but groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten.”

I agree with the speaker that the masses play a considerable role in supporting significant events and following the trends. A contrary view would be utterly absurd to prefer well-intentioned heroes who lead the entire revolutions rather than groups of ordinary people. Nonetheless, we cannot ignore the vital role in history acted by the few leaders who contributed themselves to call on and organize groups of people only for the benefit of human beings; otherwise, historians risk lacking enough materials for study of historic events and society risks being in lack of excellent individual any more.

It is truly owing to the efforts made by the groups of people unknown that some significant events and trends were made. One reason to exemplify it is that should a event have a ambitious intention to shake the society as a whole, people in general should definitely be involved in. After all, the more people participate in the trend, the more possible the trend can be made. As the head physics at my university said (and I paraphrase):"one man can be crucial ingredient on a team, but one man can not make a team, which might contribute to the success of a research." Similarly, while he emphasizes the significance in team work, his words also can illustrate the non-substitutable power of a group that is indispensable in the process of revolution.

While we must consider the irreplaceable power performed by the public, meanwhile, we also must realize the fact that it is unrealistic to ignore the contribution made from distinguished few individuals. A nation is in need of efforts made by individuals to establish virtue in social work. As is often the case, an official commendation for bravery exemplifies the approbation for individuals. And in historic field, the best way to assess certain event is to figure out what the king or the leader or any other famous individuals related to it thank and acted; otherwise, exhausting the materials of every possible figure related to the event in that time is surely out of the question as historians see it.

Instead of recognize the tribute offered by the fundamental masses, it is also worthwhile to think about the role in events played by famous few. Since not everyone is qualified for the leadership in a group, more commonly, people prefer electing one to responsible for the whole group work, such as assigning tasks to his subordinates, sometimes rationally placating one of the bellicose members, or perhaps resolving an internal disputes, or more often than not, making a long-term scheme and guide with his wisdom and experience in order to ensure the final success. Thus, only emphasize the significance in groups is unfair to evaluate the individual leaders.

On the whole, individuals devoted, if not more, at least as much as the groups did to the success of important events and trends. If society underestimates the famous few's value, historians will have to dig in endless materials, and nations will find no direction to establish a good social morality. Thus, I prefer focusing more on the famous few who lead the entire activities in the process of revolution in many fields of human endeavor.