<p>Out of six. Written under a strict timeframe of 25 minutes and not proofread. </p>
<p>Topic: is it important to question the ideas and decisions of people in positions of authority?</p>
<p>I certainly believe that there are situations in which authority must be questioned. No human being is perfect that people who hold positions of power are no exception to this rule. </p>
<p>Several organisations, more specifically the military, exhibit what is commonly known as “chain of command syndrome” - a strict adherence to established protocol and unquestioning allegiance to the ranking official. Such a system works, and works well. In the military scenario, decisions must be taken quickly and carried out without delay, which is aided by COCS. However the main issue with COCS is that the chain must have an end and the person on top is ultimately the one who controls the everything - no matter how intelligent, skilled or experienced that person may be, he certainly isn’t infallible, and a wrong move by the person in power, especially in relation to the military, can result in disastrous consequences. </p>
<p>This very flaw has been addressed in the form of a pseudo-democracy. A company has a board of people who hold the largest stakes in the corporation who, holding massive sway, play a significant role in the decision making process. For the army or military, the highest ranking official, who is often the head of the country, is assisted by a group of advisers, generals or otherwise, who raise arguments and allow for refined decisions. This scenario is highlighted in the television show “24” in which the president is almost always engaged in debate with his or her council or government agents resulting in thought out, informed decisions that often turn out to be for the good. Another interesting detail about the show’s protagonist, “Jack Bauer”, who constantly questions authority, acts out of his own jurisdiction and almost always ends up “saving the day”. </p>
<p>While a fictional television show isn’t theperfect example to exemplify the virtues and prevalence of the habit of questioning authority, the aforementioned system of “checks and balances” is very prominent in today’s world, as it should be. An authoritative position means that the person in the position of power affects the lives, often quite literally, of several others, and those people ought to have a right to comment or second-guess decisions. A leader, after all, is nothing more than the servant of his people.</p>