“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.”
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The opinion that achievement of greatness in a field is more important than any personal faults of a person is a controversial one. In this age, when social values are disintegrating, this issue is inceasingly becoming important. One the one hand many people believe that greatness eclipses any personal faults while others believe that personal faults shines above and beyond any greatness that one may have achieved. In this essay, I will argue that greatness achieved in a field can not hide all personal faults of a person.
Main reason for my view is that people who have achieved greatness reflect on the society they belong to since they become role models to younger generations. If we let their great achivements hide their personal faults then that will set a wrong example for younger generations. The very basis of our society and constitution requires people to be weighted against their actions and not on their greatness.
For example, Bill Clinton achieved greatness by getting elected twice to the presidential office of united states. His personal faults were however are not any less important. We all remmember the famous Monika Lewinsky case. Bill Clinton was reprimanded, tried in court and almost got impeached. People remember him as much for the Monica Lewinsky case as for his achievements in the political arena.
Another interesting example which shows that personal faults are not eclipsed by great achievements is that of Richard Nixon, a great achiever in the field of politics. He was impeached because of his involvement in the watergate scandal and is more remembered for the scandal than for his achievements.
Another example is that of Martha stewart. She achieved greatness in the field of business by building a multi million dollar business empire on her own but she erred by breaking the laws of the land. She was tried by a jury and convicted for the crime. People know her for the case and her faults as much as they know her for her great achievements in the field of business.
Furthermore, another interesting case is that of A.H. Khan, scientist who developed the nuclear bomb for Pakistan. He achieved greatness in the field of science but is famous, all over the world, as the person who sold nuclear technology illegally to countries such as North Korea and Iran.
In sum, I concur that the personal faults do take importance depending on the scope of fault. Small faults can be ignored but personal faults that affect the society or break the rules of the land can not be undermined irrespective of the greatness one has achieved.
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The opinion that achievement of greatness in a field is more important than any personal faults of a person is a controversial one. In this age, when social values are disintegrating, this issue is inceasingly becoming important. One the one hand many people believe that greatness eclipses any personal faults while others believe that personal faults shines above and beyond any greatness that one may have achieved. In this essay, I will argue that greatness achieved in a field can not hide all personal faults of a person.
Main reason for my view is that people who have achieved greatness reflect on the society they belong to since they become role models to younger generations. If we let their great achivements hide their personal faults then that will set a wrong example for younger generations. The very basis of our society and constitution requires people to be weighted against their actions and not on their greatness.
For example, Bill Clinton achieved greatness by getting elected twice to the presidential office of united states. His personal faults were however are not any less important. We all remmember the famous Monika Lewinsky case. Bill Clinton was reprimanded, tried in court and almost got impeached. People remember him as much for the Monica Lewinsky case as for his achievements in the political arena.
Another interesting example which shows that personal faults are not eclipsed by great achievements is that of Richard Nixon, a great achiever in the field of politics. He was impeached because of his involvement in the watergate scandal and is more remembered for the scandal than for his achievements.
Another example is that of Martha stewart. She achieved greatness in the field of business by building a multi million dollar business empire on her own but she erred by breaking the laws of the land. She was tried by a jury and convicted for the crime. People know her for the case and her faults as much as they know her for her great achievements in the field of business.
Furthermore, another interesting case is that of A.H. Khan, scientist who developed the nuclear bomb for Pakistan. He achieved greatness in the field of science but is famous, all over the world, as the person who sold nuclear technology illegally to countries such as North Korea and Iran.
In sum, I concur that the personal faults do take importance depending on the scope of fault. Small faults can be ignored but personal faults that affect the society or break the rules of the land can not be undermined irrespective of the greatness one has achieved.
