【kaleidoscope】小组第一次作业 ISSUE43 by atticuswang

wdassfmUID: 2542447

声明：因网路问题他本人穿不上去，我代劳了哈~

Issue 43

"To be an effective leader, a public official must maintain the highest ethical and moral standards."

观点：政府官员不应该同时是道德和伦理的模范。我认为政府官员最道德的事情就是做好他自己的职责，即尽量制定出有效的政策使得社会繁荣稳定和平等等。极高的伦理和道德修养既不能保证领导人高效，也不是高效的领导人的必备素质。

提纲:

1.
诚然，一个社会领导者必须要有一定的道德准则和素养作为底线
2.
一味的提升个人的道德水平在某些程度上对于改善社会环境是无能为力的。
3.
但是，社会领导者应该在这样的道德素养的底限下，自己最大的能力去发展和培养其领导才能，促进社会的稳定和谐发展。


The speaker's asserts that a public official must require the highest ethical and moral standards to be an effective leader, which I take leave to doubt. Ethical and moral standards are indispensable for an effective leader while the speaker unnecessarily extends them to the highest; on this point I think the speaker’s view is biased, as discussed below.

Admittedly, few people will deny the fact that public officials are required to maintain high ethical and moral standards, and without which they are doomed to fail in the long run not only to himself but also to the public. Leaders who are ethical demonstrate a level of integrity that is important for stimulating a sense of leader trustworthiness, which is very important for followers to accept the vision of the leaders. Some of the basic moral standards, such as honesty, loyalty, and selflessness, show great influence to help leaders to win the public, then to smooth the way to carry out relevant policies. As the first president of America, Washington, who was equipped with high ethical and moral standards, not only established a united state for his nation, but also gained high prestige among his people, and no doubt he was an effective leader. To the contrary, the Nazi leader Hitler, a crazy war fanatic, brought about human disasters and he was destined to fail. In short, high ethical and moral standards make up one of the basic elements of being an effective leader.

However, as far as I concerned, merely highest ethical and moral standards do no mean an effective leader. It is not only ethical and moral standards, but also brightness, capacity of leadership that makes up an effective leader. We never see one, say a bookworm, who judges only by the moral rules but performs well as an public official. As is known to all, society offers a variety stage for all kinds of people, honest and dishonest, ingenuous or guilty, and this is the very reality a public official must face. Obviously, if the leader tries to execute every policy exactly according to moral rules, he will harm the advantage of some people who make their profits by doing some immoral but legal affairs, losing some of the public and making him a passive position. An effective leader hands this kind of issues more flexibly than just obeying the moral rules.

In addition, to be an effective leader, one should in first place have his work well done in justice, objective and in a best way, instead of requiring the highest ethical and moral standards. After all, nobody is utterly good or evil and public officials are normal human beings, we should not ask them too much to act perfectly. If a public official can build, maintain and expand the wealth, prosperity and political influence of his nation, even though he gets some scandals, can be regarded as an effective leader. Take two American presidents for example, Nixon and Clinton, the former was related to "Watergate scandal" while the latter involved with sex scandal with Monica Lewinsky, but how can this overshadow the contribution they made to the nation? In most people's opinion, they are still effective leaders.

In conclusion, I think that maintaining the highest ethical and moral rules can not uniquely judge whether a public official is an effective leader, and is not necessary or sufficient quality to make one. In order to perform more effectively, the leader require justice and impersonality, not merely moral rules.

azoiUID: 2636348

按要求再发一遍吧
The speaker's asserts that a public official must require the highest ethical and moral standards to be an effective leader, which I take leave to doubt. Ethical and moral standards are indispensable for an effective leader while the speaker unnecessarily extends them to the highest; on this point I think the speaker’s view is biased, as discussed below.

Admittedly, few people will deny the fact that public officials are required to maintain high ethical and moral standards, and(是否应删去？) without which they are doomed to fail in the long run not only to himself but also to the public. Leaders who are ethical demonstrate a level of integrity that is important for stimulating a sense of leader trustworthiness, which is very important for followers to accept the vision of the leaders. Some of the basic moral standards, such as honesty, loyalty, and selflessness, show great influence to help leaders to win the public（未查到此搭配，建议改为 win public support）, then to smooth the way to carry out relevant policies（两个to连用建议改为for + carrying）. As the first president of America, Washington, who was equipped with high ethical and moral standards, not only established a united state for his nation, but also gained high prestige among his people, and no doubt he was an effective leader. To（on） the contrary, the Nazi leader Hitler, a crazy war fanatic, brought about human disasters and he was destined to fail. In short, high ethical and moral standards make up one of the basic elements of being an effective leader.

However, as far as I concerned, merely highest ethical and moral standards do no（not？） mean an effective leader. It is not only ethical and moral standards, but also brightness, capacity of leadership that makes up an effective leader. We never see one, say a bookworm, who judges only by the moral rules but performs well as an public official（没看懂这句= =！）. As is known to all, society offers a variety stage for all kinds of people, honest and dishonest, ingenuous or guilty, and this is the very reality a public official must face. Obviously, if the leader tries to execute every policy exactly according to moral rules, he will harm the advantage of some people who make their profits by doing some immoral but legal affairs, losing some of the public and making（未查到此搭配，建议改为put或throw + into） him a passive position. An effective leader hands this kind of issues more flexibly than just obeying the moral rules.
这一段的逻辑貌似有些dark，似乎把责任都推到了和法律打擦边球的人

In addition, to be an effective leader, one should in first place have his work well done in justice, objective and in a best way, instead of requiring the highest ethical and moral standards. After all, nobody is utterly good or evil and public officials are normal human beings, we should not ask them too much to act perfectly. If a public official can build, maintain and expand the wealth, prosperity and political influence of his nation（这句在网上找到雷同的了，慎用）, even though he gets some scandals, can be regarded as an effective leader. Take two American presidents for example, Nixon and Clinton, the former was related to "Watergate scandal" while the latter involved with sex scandal with Monica Lewinsky, but how can this overshadow the contribution they made to the nation? In most people's opinion, they are still effective leaders.

In conclusion, I think that maintaining the highest ethical and moral rules can not uniquely judge whether a public official is an effective leader, and is not necessary or sufficient quality to make one. In order to perform more effectively, the leader require justice and impersonality, not merely moral rules.