Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 1

->The greatness of an individual can be decided only by those who live after the m, not by their contemporaries.

As one's speech is his thoughts verbalised, one's deeds are his beliefs visualis ed. The present assertion poses the question over deciding the greatness of an i ndividual, whether by his contemporaries or those who live after them. It basica lly depends on the state of cognition, the system of knowledge and discretion in deciphering the great acts of individuals, by which one can tag an individual a s great. In this debate where one side hardly seems to outweigh the other, it ca n be said that closer the book to the eyes, the more difficult it is to read. Greatness is basically the contribution one makes to the human race or in fact, to the human history. The contemporaries are less likely to decide the greatnes s of individuals because, being in the same sand of time, they are unable to con template over the foresight, vision beyond the horizon, thinking out of the box of the great individuals. And in this course, individuals many a times have to g o against the tide, antithetical to the concurrent confluencing forces and thoug hts. Due to which they are condemned to inquisition of being iconoclast, and are dejected. History is rife with such examples. Like, Jesus Christ, Gautam Buddha were criticized by their contemporaries and today are considered Gods. Not only in this field of spirituality, also in the field of science who tried to shatte r the prevailing doctrines with rationale thoughts, were mortified because the c ontemporaries were obsessed with orthodox philosohical dogmas. For instance, Bru no who proposed the cosmic theory of expanding universe was simply looked at wit h scorn by the contemporaries. It is only after his death, when the actual scien ce took its place, was he renowned as great. Moreover, when talking about contemporaries, there is a sense of competition, ri valry, jealousy and other antagonistic emotions. One who is replete with these h ostile stuff, is not at par deciding one's greatness. Also, in order to adjudica te anyone's deeds, one can not be in the flow, as there will be predilections, b iasing, inclinations, personal attachments. It is only when viewed from a distan ce, can one visualise the entire progress of the individual, the struggle behind the achievements, hardships endured, the difference actually made to the mankin d, and then come to a conclusion of elevating an individual to being great. For instance, even Monalisa, now considered as one of the finest creations till dat e, was criticized. John Keets, a prolific poet on love, was ridiculed throughout by his contemporaries. On the contrary, contemporaries are the ones who can actually and directly reali se the benefits of the greatness of an individual. They belong to the same perio d, know what are the difficulties one would face, and even after that emerge out making a difference. Considering the example of the freedom fighters of INdia, all belonged to the same time and appraised each other as great in their own ter ms and being. ALso, in the field of literature, Shakespeare was considered a par agon since his own period, to renaissance in 16th centure till today. LAtest exa mple is of Barack Obama, the president of United States of America, is considere d one of the greatest presidents by all. Although all these are true examples, a s it is said, it is only after something is over, we realise its true importance . So, is the case of the greatness of the people. Recapitulating the aforementioned ideas, it can be discerned that though contemp oraries evaluate individuals on the same time scale, but their vision seems to b e far away, and it is when their prudent foresight combines with future, is ther e true greatness realised.