When someone achieves greatness in any field-such as the arts, science, politics, or business-that person's
achievements are more important than any of his or her personal faults.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The authors argues that a person's achievements are more important than his or her personal faults. To an extent I agree with this statement.
When a person achieves something great, the public is more interested in the person's achievements than the person himself. For example, an artist is known to the public for his art, a musician for her music, and a scientist for his discoveries or inventions. The public largely ignores the private life of these people, with certain exceptions such as movie stars. Even in their case, the public is only interested in the show they put up to the people. No one is interest in looking inside their houses to see who they are fighting with. Even if celibrities like these throw tantrums, the public readily accepts them, mainly because they worship these celibrities like god.
However, there are certain exceptions to this general rule. People believe that their politicians should be clean, as they are supposed to represent them and lead them. Any personal fault in them, if known, is not tolerated by the public. Faults like corruption, crime and even GMAT scandals become a huge issue for them, causing them to turn against the very people they once venerated. But, this is not to say that their achievements become less important, they will always be important. History remembers people for what they achieved in pulic, not for what they did in their private lives. Nobody remembers the personal faults of leaders like Mahatma Gandhi and Nelson Mandela. Even the coming generations, when they read about these leaders, will know them for what they did more than for the people they were.
Again, there are some personal faults that cannot and should not be ignored by the public, or history. Faults like criminal tendencies bring out the worst in people, no matter how genious or gifted they may be. But such cases are few and far between. They cannot be used to state that the achievements of a person are less or even equally important than their personal faults.
Overall, I would like to state that although exceptions exists in both the kind of people and the nature of the faults themselves, a person's achievements are always more important than his or her personal faults. If someone achieves something great, he or she deserves to be seated on a pedestal, both in the present and in history, no matter what his or her personal follies may have been.
achievements are more important than any of his or her personal faults.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The authors argues that a person's achievements are more important than his or her personal faults. To an extent I agree with this statement.
When a person achieves something great, the public is more interested in the person's achievements than the person himself. For example, an artist is known to the public for his art, a musician for her music, and a scientist for his discoveries or inventions. The public largely ignores the private life of these people, with certain exceptions such as movie stars. Even in their case, the public is only interested in the show they put up to the people. No one is interest in looking inside their houses to see who they are fighting with. Even if celibrities like these throw tantrums, the public readily accepts them, mainly because they worship these celibrities like god.
However, there are certain exceptions to this general rule. People believe that their politicians should be clean, as they are supposed to represent them and lead them. Any personal fault in them, if known, is not tolerated by the public. Faults like corruption, crime and even GMAT scandals become a huge issue for them, causing them to turn against the very people they once venerated. But, this is not to say that their achievements become less important, they will always be important. History remembers people for what they achieved in pulic, not for what they did in their private lives. Nobody remembers the personal faults of leaders like Mahatma Gandhi and Nelson Mandela. Even the coming generations, when they read about these leaders, will know them for what they did more than for the people they were.
Again, there are some personal faults that cannot and should not be ignored by the public, or history. Faults like criminal tendencies bring out the worst in people, no matter how genious or gifted they may be. But such cases are few and far between. They cannot be used to state that the achievements of a person are less or even equally important than their personal faults.
Overall, I would like to state that although exceptions exists in both the kind of people and the nature of the faults themselves, a person's achievements are always more important than his or her personal faults. If someone achieves something great, he or she deserves to be seated on a pedestal, both in the present and in history, no matter what his or her personal follies may have been.
