Much like a musician practicing a musical instrument maybe? How can a three year old become a master violinist and awe the world on TV while someone else practices their whole life and will never hope to achieve the same?
Leaders, Artists, Mathematicians. It seems there has to be some rough framework in your brain for your particular destiny before you can fill it in with books. Can anyone become a master painter? Can anyone become a great theoretical mathematician?
Can an average person be a leader, artist, musician, and mathematician....to an "average" extent? Of course.
Co60Slr, surely you understand how the solar system is similar to the atom, with planets orbiting the sun like electrons orbiting the nucleus. We also know that electrons jump valences or from orbit to orbit; therefore, astronomers must have observed the planets exhibiting the same behavior, planets jumping from orbit to orbit. I’m sorry; your argument to compare leadership with musicianship or artistry is just as invalid because you are using bad analogies or spurious similarities.
Leadership requires the action of two or more persons to exist, not true for any of your examples of supposed parallels to a leader: artist, musician, or mathematician. Nevertheless, may we get philosophical for a moment? Allen (2004) interpreted the French sociologist Michel Foucault’s view on power:
Foucault . . . depicted power as a behavior or process that pervades all human interaction. In contrast to the "power over" stance, which implies that power occurs occasionally, Foucault asserts that "power resides in every perception, every judgment, every act." Foucault contended that people enact power to produce and reproduce, resist, or transform structures of communication and meaning, even in the most mundane social practices. (p. 25)
Michel Foucault (1979) wrote about power:
It is never localized here or there, never in anybody’s hands, never appropriated as a commodity or piece of wealth. Power is employed and exercised through a net-like organization. And not only do individuals circulate between its threads; they are always in the position of simultaneously undergoing and exercising this power. They are not only its inert or consenting target; they are always also the elements of its articulation. In other words, individuals are the vehicles of power, not its points of application. (p. 98)
Power always involves a set of actions performed upon another person’s responses and actions. In essence, a power relationship can exist only if two prerequisites are continuously in play: that the person whom power is exercised on is recognized as a person who will act, and that those acts will necessarily be carried out by a multiplicity of reactions, results, and innovations (Foucault, 1982).
According to Foucault, nobody can have power over you unless you choose to participate; power requires a relationship. In light of this, I posit that when one who wishes to exert power over another is not getting him or her to join the dance, the oppressor raises the stakes with threats, innuendos, hiding behind social equality rhetoric, or similar behavior we have observed in this thread: fallacious arguments such as bad analogies, spurious similarities, argument by dismissal (an idea is rejected without saying why), argument by vehemence (that’s B.S.), and so forth.
__________
Allen, B. (2004). Difference matters: Communicating social identity. Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.
Foucault, M. (with Hurley, R. [translator]). (1979). The history of sexuality: An introduction. London, England: Penguin Books.
Foucault, M. (1982). The Subject and Power. In Dreyfus, H. L. & Rabinow, P. (Eds.). Michel Foucault: Beyond structuralism and hermeneutics. IL: University of Chicago Press.