We've been conditioned to believe that certain character traits like honesty, rationality, agreeableness, grit, and care are directly linked to surface metrics like wealth and power. But this assumption is often misguided, leading to inaccurate judgments about individuals.
The reality is that in any community, group, or social circle, you'll likely find a similar percentage of bad actors. The difference might be in the type of misdeeds, but the underlying "distribution of character" remains consistent.
Instead of relying on assumptions about character based on "power" or "wealth," it's essential to focus on individual evaluation.
The "distribution of character" across different groups is more complex than simple assumptions allow. While some individuals in positions of power might exhibit strong character, it's equally possible to find those with questionable ethics within the same circle.
It's time to reconsider the often-unconscious association between character and "power." Instead of assuming a positive correlation, we should focus on individual assessments based on actions and behaviors.
In the end, true "power" lies not in wealth or status but in the integrity and strength of character. Those who prioritize honesty, "grit," "care," and "rationality" are the ones who truly make a difference, regardless of their perceived level of "power."
Ask anything...