Are you a moral person?

[fromderinside]

Hey, I attended may a Boeing business ethics sessions, even conducted a few. Those sessions were not very good for actual ethics. They were fine to show how to get out of ethical dilemmas of conscience as a Boeing employee though. Depending on leaders to emerge from continued associations is really a cop out. You are actually talking about risk taker identification here. Not the same thing as an ethical leader or standard you know.

Finally, how is it judgmental statements become ethical advice?

Yeah, my post is no more helpful than you post.

 

[steve_bank]

So now you resort to stupid insults you could never support in any way?

You really are useless.

There is a difference between a leader and a boss.

One leads. One gives orders.

They are not the same thing.

I have no problem with leaders. They are necessary.

Bosses and top down hierarchies are not.

You come across to me as someone who has lived an unexamined life.

If you and I were coworkes when I was 325 I'd say let's go outside and sort it out. I once decked a guy on the job in full view for harrasning me. That was acceptable to a point in those days.

Today if you were working for me I would not respond to any harrasment or insult, I would document it and refer it to human resources. If we were peers I'd do the same.

Ethics

In the 90s I worked for a company making avionics for Boring. I found a problem on asystem for the 777' I went to the engineer responsible for Boeing support and refused to deal with itt, it was potentially a serious issue. It could involve recall and a high cost for the company. There was a small but real risk to flight safety.

I documentd it and got peer review of the problem. The engineering manager called a meeting. At trhe end he said, "It may be the last email I write here, but I will write it".

I never forgot that. Integrity above job security. In the end the FAA agreed we could cycle field units from the airlines for upgrade, all was well. No recall and grounding jets.

- - - Updated - - -

Hey, I attended may a Boeing business ethics sessions, even conducted a few. Those sessions were not very good for actual ethics. They were fine to show how to get out of ethical dilemmas of conscience as a Boeing employee though. Depending on leaders to emerge from continued associations is really a cop out. You are actually talking about risk taker identification here. Not the same thing as an ethical leader or standard you know.

Finally, how is it judgmental statements become ethical advice?

Yeah, my post is no more helpful than you post.

I am seeing you a little more clearly now.

 

[untermensche]

So now you resort to stupid insults you could never support in any way?

You really are useless.

There is a difference between a leader and a boss.

One leads. One gives orders.

They are not the same thing.

I have no problem with leaders. They are necessary.

Bosses and top down hierarchies are not.

You come across to me as someone who has lived an unexamined life.

If you and I were coworkes when I was 325 I'd say let's go outside and sort it out. I once decked a guy on the job in full view for harrasning me. That was acceptable to a point in those days.

You really have problems with the distinction between a leader and a boss.

One leads and one is a bully.

You seem to have learned the part of the bully well.

Your kind is not tolerated any more.

You are an unenlightened poor soul.

 

[steve_bank]

So now you resort to stupid insults you could never support in any way?

You really are useless.

There is a difference between a leader and a boss.

One leads. One gives orders.

They are not the same thing.

I have no problem with leaders. They are necessary.

Bosses and top down hierarchies are not.

You come across to me as someone who has lived an unexamined life.

If you and I were coworkes when I was 325 I'd say let's go outside and sort it out. I once decked a guy on the job in full view for harrasning me. That was acceptable to a point in those days.

You really have problems with the distinction between a leader and a boss.

One leads and one is a bully.

You seem to have learned the part of the bully well.

Your kind is not tolerated any more.

You are an unenlightened poor soul.

Ok boss. You right boss, scuse me boss. Some of your lines seem to be cliches out of a movie or TV show.

The OP is morality on an individual basis. Have you ever done the right thing when it put you at personal risk? Have you stodd up for someting in the real world that was risky for you?

What are you ethics and morality. Ad homs aside.

 

[untermensche]

This is serious.

The distinction between a boss and a leader is a moral distinction.

The leader has moral authority to lead.

The boss has no moral authority to dictate.

That is just something allowed in this early stage of human social development.

 

[fromderinside]

This is seriously wrong.

The distinction between a boss and a leader is a moral distinction.

Fixed it.

But of course you'll need some guidance.

A boss is such as the result of power status. A leader is such as the result of trust status. The two can be in a single individual, but, morality never comes from any sort of advantage over others in status. So a leader who gains trust from others or exhibits confidence in self guidance to influence others can be called a moral person for she has integrity of conscious. A boss is one who decides what others do for his or his power center's advantage. And if she has integrity of conscious a boss can can also become a leader.

No way to make it any clearer.

So until you recognize the distinctions you'll never understand either what is a leader or what is a boss.

 

[untermensche]

A leader serves those they lead.

A boss serves themselves.

A leader tries to maximize the people they lead.

A boss tries to reduce them to unthinking servants.

To not see the moral distinction is just to be an average unthinking drone.

There is a mental illness present in the world today.

Many people call bosses "leaders".

They are not.

 

[steve_bank]

The tern boss can sometimes but not always be a pejorative. It us contextual.

Is this ok with you boss?

Someone in a group may be a leader. Sometimes a person is boss and leader. Etc etc etc.

 

[untermensche]

The tern boss can sometimes but not always be a pejorative. It us contextual.

Is this ok with you boss?

Someone in a group may be a leader. Sometimes a person is boss and leader. Etc etc etc.

In modern capitalism you have mainly bosses.

Very few leaders.

 

[fromderinside]

When i was at Pacific Missile Test Center at Pt. Mugu our director lived by the notion that the purpose of a boss it to assure his people have what they need to make him look good. Kind of like watching sand form in a pile. When all is done the pile slopes is between 30 and 45 degrees. Has to to with gravity and adhesion/cohesion which are impacted by altitude and moisture.

 

[untermensche]

As I said, a leader looks after the people they lead.

A boss looks after themselves.

Trump is a boss.

But because the distinction is hard for Americans, some think he is a leader.

 

[fromderinside]

Competing drives. Strong people lead by using force of advantage. Moral people as the result the of their consistency of motive. Both can lead both can be bosses. You need another analysis to support your attempt to make distinction based on what one does to others. Morality is a personal dimension not a social dimension. Try starting there.

 

[untermensche]

You can't turn somebody into your tool in a moral manner.

A boss looks at others as tools to serve him.

A leader looks at themselves as a tool to serve others.

They are distinct.

Yet as we see some have a problem with the distinction.

They somehow think self-serving bosses are the same thing as leaders.

 

[DrZoidberg]

You can't turn somebody into your tool in a moral manner.

A boss looks at others as tools to serve him.

A leader looks at themselves as a tool to serve others.

They are distinct.

Yet as we see some have a problem with the distinction.

They somehow think self-serving bosses are the same thing as leaders.

I think you're making distinctions that aren't. They're both synonyms for whoever is in charge. You can be a leader in various ways. Sometimes in a work-place. Sometimes in other ways. Boss is more narrow. But a leader can simply be somebody in the lead. That doesn't say anything about that persons inner life.

Please add loads of qualifiers. Until then you're just babbling

 

[untermensche]

You can't turn somebody into your tool in a moral manner.

A boss looks at others as tools to serve him.

A leader looks at themselves as a tool to serve others.

They are distinct.

Yet as we see some have a problem with the distinction.

They somehow think self-serving bosses are the same thing as leaders.

I think you're making distinctions that aren't. They're both synonyms for whoever is in charge. You can be a leader in various ways. Sometimes in a work-place. Sometimes in other ways. Boss is more narrow. But a leader can simply be somebody in the lead. That doesn't say anything about that persons inner life.

Please add loads of qualifiers. Until then you're just babbling

One is a dictator turning others into his servant.

The other is the servant of others.

If you see no distinction that is amazing.

Many leaders are trapped in dictatorial roles in current top-down economic structures.

 

[Jobar]

A leader serves those they lead.

A boss serves themselves.

A leader tries to maximize the people they lead.

A boss tries to reduce them to unthinking servants.

To not see the moral distinction is just to be an average unthinking drone.

There is a mental illness present in the world today.

Many people call bosses "leaders".

They are not.

I disagree. There can be good bosses, and terrible leaders. Any of us can list any number of actively evil leaders, and I have worked for bosses whose primary goal was getting the job done in the most effective, humane, and simplest way possible; who recognized and rewarded good workers, were conscientious and fair, and realized that profit should be shared out according to the amount and quality of labor put into the enterprise, whatever that happened to be.

 

[untermensche]

A leader serves those they lead.

A boss serves themselves.

A leader tries to maximize the people they lead.

A boss tries to reduce them to unthinking servants.

To not see the moral distinction is just to be an average unthinking drone.

There is a mental illness present in the world today.

Many people call bosses "leaders".

They are not.

I disagree. There can be good bosses, and terrible leaders. Any of us can list any number of actively evil leaders, and I have worked for bosses whose primary goal was getting the job done in the most effective, humane, and simplest way possible; who recognized and rewarded good workers, were conscientious and fair, and realized that profit should be shared out according to the amount and quality of labor put into the enterprise, whatever that happened to be.

Terrible leaders are called misleaders.

Good bosses are those secure in their dictatorship enjoying the fruits of dictatorship.

 

[DrZoidberg]

You can't turn somebody into your tool in a moral manner.

A boss looks at others as tools to serve him.

A leader looks at themselves as a tool to serve others.

They are distinct.

Yet as we see some have a problem with the distinction.

They somehow think self-serving bosses are the same thing as leaders.

I think you're making distinctions that aren't. They're both synonyms for whoever is in charge. You can be a leader in various ways. Sometimes in a work-place. Sometimes in other ways. Boss is more narrow. But a leader can simply be somebody in the lead. That doesn't say anything about that persons inner life.

Please add loads of qualifiers. Until then you're just babbling

One is a dictator turning others into his servant.

The other is the servant of others.

If you see no distinction that is amazing.

Many leaders are trapped in dictatorial roles in current top-down economic structures.

Yeah... I'm a pretty amazing guy. Thanks for noticing.

Just stop babbling. You don't get to decide how these words are used, or their implications. You are all over the map. Lol... "dictatorial power".... If you're the political leader of a dictatorship than that would be true. Otherwise not.

 

[DrZoidberg]

A leader serves those they lead.

A boss serves themselves.

A leader tries to maximize the people they lead.

A boss tries to reduce them to unthinking servants.

To not see the moral distinction is just to be an average unthinking drone.

There is a mental illness present in the world today.

Many people call bosses "leaders".

They are not.

I disagree. There can be good bosses, and terrible leaders. Any of us can list any number of actively evil leaders, and I have worked for bosses whose primary goal was getting the job done in the most effective, humane, and simplest way possible; who recognized and rewarded good workers, were conscientious and fair, and realized that profit should be shared out according to the amount and quality of labor put into the enterprise, whatever that happened to be.

Terrible leaders are called misleaders.

Here's the problem with just making things up on the fly to win arguments. "Misleaders" is an actual word. You're using it wrong. It comes from "mislead". It's a verb. Not a noun. Bad leaders can mislead. But if they do, they're not "misleaders". The misleaders is the activities the bad leader makes. They're still just leaders.

 

[untermensche]

One is a dictator turning others into his servant.

The other is the servant of others.

If you see no distinction that is amazing.

Many leaders are trapped in dictatorial roles in current top-down economic structures.

Yeah... I'm a pretty amazing guy. Thanks for noticing.

Just stop babbling. You don't get to decide how these words are used, or their implications. You are all over the map. Lol... "dictatorial power".... If you're the political leader of a dictatorship than that would be true. Otherwise not.

No.

You are babbling.

I am trying to straighten things out.

I am seeking clarity.

You are seeking a cloud of confusion.

The Spanish Anarchists had a motto "No Bosses".

They did not mean they did not want leaders.

You live in a boss society.

And you don't know the difference between a boss and a leader because of it.