HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
 By Jack Lepiarz Mar. 22, 2006 Some people spend their whole life afraid of criticism. They spend their whole life trying to avoid getting criticized, taking an equivocal approach to any and all problems. They seek to appease. They seek to keep everyone happy. But what happens when somebody does criticize them? This criticism can be constructive or angry. Some people deal with it better than others. Some people thrive on it. One thing I've noticed, however, is three specific ways that people respond to criticism. For the past year, I have been one of the three co-heads of the Personal Development Program (PDP) at my school. This position put me in charge of working with the two smartest people in my class and two teachers, with whom I had to remain in constant contact. As with anyone making decisions or running programs, the time came when the two other heads or I made a mistake, and had to deal with some criticism from the two teachers. Each one of us displayed a certain reaction to the criticism. The first one of us immediately tried to place blame elsewhere. What's new? A teenager trying to say "It's not my fault" is nothing to be surprised about. However, many adults often use this strategy. Many Republicans blame any problem that George W. Bush encounters on Clinton, while at the same time, attributing every positive part of Clinton's legacy on the Republican-controlled Congress. The same applies to many Democrats, who blame the national debt on Reagan while ignoring the more positive parts of his legacy. The blame always falls to the other side. Unfortunately, people are often too stupid to realize this and go on attacking the other side, preventing any kind of real progress from getting made. Oh well. The next leader's reaction was a bit more positive, albeit still not the best way to react to criticism. This girl repeatedly stated how she took full responsibility for what happened and how it would never happen again (although it did still happen occasionally). Very few politicians are willing to take this standpoint because it makes them looks soft. However, it often serves a better purpose, and usually makes them even MORE popular in the public eye. Jack Kennedy publicly apologized after the Bay of Pigs, even though part of the blame fell squarely on Eisenhower's shoulders. Instead of playing the blame game (as current politicians often do), he took responsibility. My own personal reaction to criticism is generally to shut up and listen. I have two ears and one mouth, which means I should be listening twice as much as I talk. Sometimes it's good to blame someone who is responsible for something. Sometimes it is good to accept responsibility for something. In most cases, it is usually best to stay quiet and see how you can improve your performance. Franklin Roosevelt was famous for that. He did not blame Hoover for the depression, but instead offered solutions. He, as a general rule, did not take responsibility for the negative problems of the country, but instead described how he would improve and how the nation would benefit. Remember what happened to him? Knowing when to accept blame and when to ignore it are the qualities of a true leader. A man that knows how to take criticism and overcome adversity is the man that is fit to lead the United States. A man that blames his predecessors and makes excuses is not. ------------ About the author: Jack Lepiarz is a senior at Madison High School. Born in Waco, Texas, he lived with the Big Apple Circus for much of his early childhood, eventually moving to Madison, New Jersey, where he now resides. Although he is often described as stubborn and egotistical, he tries to keep an open-mind towards new ideas and treat people the way he would like to be treated. Email: Jackwuzhere42@aol.com Comment on this article here! ------------ All articles are EXCLUSIVE to Useless-Knowledge.com and are not allowed to be posted on other websites. ARTICLE THIEVES WILL BE PROSECUTED! |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
