Category: David and Goliath

David and Goliath is the story of a young shepherd whom lacking of any kind of combat training, managed to overcome a giant, who was sophisticated in combat tactics, just using his wit. In modern times, that act is used as an analogy to compare people who against all odds overcome a difficult situation in their lives. As a result, Malcolm Gladwell used it as a starting point of his book “David and Goliath: Underdogs, Misfits, and the Art of Battling Giants.” Gladwell’s book tells the story of people, whom as David, who overcome difficult situations, Goliath, and become successful, even though all the odds were against them. Therefore, Chapter 2 of Gladwell’s book studies the effects of smaller and bigger classes in countries all around the world, the relationship which money plays in parenting labor, and how assumptions of how thinks which appear to be of our best interest turn out they are not. With the author’s fascination and analysis on biblical tale of David and Goliath, his book managed to lead us to a new way in perceiving weaknesses and strengths, which exist in this world.

David and Goliath is a famous classic story that has been told and retold for more than 3000 years in various forms of delivery such as movies, books, or theatrical adaptations. Still, the story has a huge resonance to its audience until today. This is generally how the story is being told: an underdog (David) with unusual courage, dares to confront a giant warrior (Goliath) and the victory goes to the underdog. Supposedly, it is not uncommon that the story will come out with such a bore to its audience; bear in mind the story has been circling for years. But to the author, the problem with that version of the events is that almost everything about it is wrong (Gladwell, 2013). David and Goliath: Underdogs, Misfits, and the Art of Battling Giants by Malcolm Gladwell excel to reach an international bestseller book and has been assigned reading for business-school courses. With the author‟s fascination and analysis on biblical tale of David and Goliath, his book managed to lead us to a new way in perceiving the weakness and strengths, which exist in this world. Bringing out nine relatable modern stories that incorporate the tale‟s values, the New Yorker writer raises our consciousness and lessons that we have already known, yet often forgotten. This only increases our interest to dig deeper in this book since our perception and discouragement and this is where we might have misunderstood or misinterpreted. As Malcolm Gladwell said on his first chapter of the book, page 10, titled Goliath: „Am I A Dog That You Should Come to Me with Sticks?‟ “Giants are not what we think they are”. The writer‟s fascination of the book lies upon the value of how a man‟s story might change a process of thoughts or point of view. Stories within the book carry an unusual beauty of human struggles, spirit, and dreams. Facing a strange odd can really put hard times in life. But with this book, the writer can learn to cope with disadvantages within ourselves. Little, Brown and Company, and Penguin Group USA are among other publishers which published the book for public consumption. For this review, the writer reviewed the book published by Penguin Group USA. The book consists of 305 pages, with paperback covers, purchased at Rp. 129.820,00 rupiah.

Through the summer I read one of the most interesting books that I have ever stidied, it was the novel David and Goliath. David and Goliath was not at all what I expected it to be, it was not a whole book about the story of David and Goliath but it was a collection of stories that were connected to David and Goliath by their similar scenarios, messages, and outcomes. Soon after reading the essay The Power Story It made me think more and more about my summer reading and take those stories and situations from the book and connect with them and use them. The essay talked about how stories can change one’s personality or the way one person may think or act after reading, and I think that David and Goliath to many people will make them reflect on past situations that they have had and think about future ones that may occur and take things from the book and apply them in real life. Using your own disadvantages to your advantage is what you will get from this book, it will change the way you view challenges and help you conquer them. After reading the book, my thesis is that stories can really affect and change people and that people can take things from such relatable stories and apply them to their own lives.

In the first chapter of David and Goliath, there is one certain story that they told that I really connected with and understood. The story of Vivek Randive and his basketball team of 12-year-old girls was very interesting in many different ways. When Vivek Randive decided to coach his daughter Anjali’s basketball team, he settled on two principles. The first was that he would never raise his voice (Malcolm Gladwell 19). This was the opening part of the story that I found very interesting that I had really never experienced as I have played basketball for many years and to just hear this type of coaching, the majority of coaches raise their voice to make sure you hear them, trying to motivate you and to let you know when you did something wrong. This method also can make players nervous to make another mistake and it can make them get down on themselves, this style of coaching could be much more effective as it showed to work extremely well with Randive’s basketball team. The next part of the story was the most interesting as we were introduced to the fact that Randive has had no basketball experience in his life, on other sports such as soccer. Even though they played teams that had more knowledge about the game and had players that were much more talented than his he used his disadvantage to his advantage. As other coaches used normal coaching styles and made their teams play the normal way Randive made his girls use a full-court press the whole game. This was not often seen in basketball and it worked because of this. Opposing coaches had no idea what to do as it was not the normal way of playing. This strategy is what made them successful and help them win games. This relates directly back to the story of David and Goliath in the sense that they used an unconventional way to win their games, just as David did so in his battle with Goliath. In The Power of Story, Svoboda states, “ their brains revealed that they identified with the stories and characters on a visceral level.” The main theme of this story was that if you are not good at something and you just give it your all and try your hardest you will always give yourself a better chance at succeeding in that thing. After reading this story I can say this relates back to my thesis and I also can relate to this story because I have played basketball and used unconventional ways of playing to my advantage many times.

In chapter 4 of David and Goliath, there is a story of a man by the name of David Boies, who was a world-renowned lawyer who had dyslexia. Becoming a lawyer with the challenge of having dyslexia is an extremely hard thing to do as they read many documents and papers. But David Boies made himself capable of being a lawyer because of the hard work that he started at a young age. When he was young he had difficulty reading and it was challenging for him but he kept on working on fighting his challenge. David then started to work on memory skills by listening, “listening is something I’ve been doing essentially all my life. I learned to do it because that was the only way I could learn. (Malcolm Gladwell 109)”. He would try to take everything that he heard being said in his law classes and keep it in his mind. “His memory by that point was a formidable instrument. (Malcolm Gladwell 109)”. David was very different than other dyslexics as many of them could not do what he could, they could not read like him or listen and memorize things like he could. “…not being able to read a lot and learning by listening and asking questions means that I need to simplify issues to their basics (Malcolm Gladwell 111)”. This relates directly to my thesis and intro paragraph as well as the essay The Power of Story, “It’s this kind of gut-level empathetic story response that can inspire people to behave differently in the real world(Elizabeth Svoboda 4)”. The story of a man with such a challenge can be saddening to read but that’s what translates to the real world, it will make you help someone with a challenge. The main theme of this story is that even though you may not be good at certain things or may have unique challenges if you work hard enough and are persistent then you will achieve your goals. Challenges bring out the best in us and that’s what it did for David Boies, he gained a tremendous work ethic from fighting his challenge to live the life that he wanted to live, and if you can have that same push to do something in your life, you will develop a work ethic just like David.

In the United States, many social scientists can agree that the society they live in is stratified into social classes. There have been disagreements, various definitions, and competing models which make a social class very controversial issue in America. Social stratification is the main reason for the relational set of inequalities in economic, political, social, and ideological aspects. It is a system by which people rank and assess each other. Since the basis of evaluation with social stratification is education, income, wealth, and “memberships” a person or group can be rewarded with more wealth, prestige, power, and authority. CITE Karl Marx’s idea of social stratification separated people into groups such as the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. While in modern America, although it may appear more beneficial to be a part of the bourgeoisie due to their obvious advantages, it is just as harmful being a part of that wealthy class due to the boomerang effect that causes negative impacts such as, but are not limited to, decreased humanization, the David and Goliath effect, and emotional stunting in the youth being raised within the bourgeoisie and it is imperative for the bourgeoisie to realize these negative aspects because it continues of social stratification then the results and consequences will continue to impact them and also the distance between the upper class and lower class will continue to grow in a way that benefits neither sides.

In America, there are three classes that are generally recognized. These are the upper, middle, and lower classes. While this may be the common way majority of the time, however, it matters how much Americans recognize you based upon your significant wealth in the public eye. People like musicians, famous public figures, and even presidents can be physically seen being wealthy. If you are anything but, then you belong to the other and are classified and treated as such. The rich are treated better and have more power. That much is known. What is not placed into public is they fact the rich are suffering as well as the lower class that they often take advantage of.

One of the negative effects of social stratification on the bourgeoisies is the decreased dehumanization within this group. Those that have less are treated as second-class citizens and their worth is not equal to the upper class. People who are at the top feel the need to be constantly rewarded and reminded of their social status and in some cases in comes in the form of dehumanization. A sense of self-satisfaction at the expense that others are put down and seen as way less. Dehumanization can be best described as behavior that somewhat strips other people of their humanity or making them appear less human. In relation to the bourgeoisie, they have increased dehumanization in terms of how they view themselves and “others”. Although the proletariats are the minority, the ego of the upper class has evolved as time has gone on. When not being called out on their behavior, they normalize their mistreatment of the lower class thus making them careless for them and lowering them on their inferiority level. At the University of California-Berkeley, an experiment was conducted to determine which social class could read emotions better. They were told to do a test of emotional perception. In this test university students who were considered to be of higher economic standing (determined from each student’s self-reported views of their family’s socioeconomic status) had a more difficult time accurately reading the emotions of a person they did not know during a group interview. CITE A more specific example is when major corporations with factories abuse their power with them hiring lower-waged workers with terrible work conditions. They do not care about their worker’s well-being. Recently, there have been lawsuits against the famous company for terrible work conditions. An employee at Amazon simply wanted a more fitting break time to accommodate his Chron’s disease, instead, his was wrongfully framed and fired. He rightfully sued them and received compensation for his loss of employment. A simple “yes” from a manager could have helped this employer from getting sued in the first place. When this complaint was taken to the higher-ups, they should have given the okay for him, but instead, they chose to attempt to battle something that simple morals could have told them was not right. People live in a world where the rich are humanized and the poor are not, which is not the case.

Another negative impact on the wealthy class if the David and Goliath effect. Since there is the notion that the rich and elite feel more superior than those that are labeled within the proletariat class this is attached to them feeling as though they are untouchable. Recall the story of David and Goliath. To summarize the story of David and Goliath, Goliath assumed he was better and more worthy due to his size and armor, but in the end, David, the smaller opponent, triumphed because he was not alone. He also had God on his side. Think of the bourgeoisie as Goliath and the lower class as David. In relation to this concept important public figures and major corporations have this belief that they can do as they please without the consequences that are sure to come with their negative behavior, especially towards other people. For example, in the news recently there has been a singer catching everyone’s attention. This singer is known for his amazing vocals and also his history of engaging inappropriately with teenage women. This has been his known reputation for many years, and he had never suffered any consequences, until recently. Multiple women and their families are now bringing cases against the singer, whom everyone thought was untouchable, because of what has been happening to them. Another case that is recent is the fact that many well-known actresses and actors paid way for their children to get into prestigious colleges, and they were caught. The children were dropped from these schools and their famous parents are now facing the consequences of trying to skip the hard work and go for the easier expensive route. Another way to think of this is that people within the elite class should choose to pick fights with people of their class. There will always be someone richer than them therefore not creating an opportunity for them to believe that are superior and in fact a Goliath figure. It goes to show that simply money and power does not succeed over the proletariats if they can help it.

A more crucial negative effect than the previous impacts mentioned is the fact that the social stratification system can cause emotional stunting within the youth of the bourgeoisie. Research has found that children who are more privileged, socioeconomic status-wise, tend to be as a whole more depressed, self-destructive, and self-centered. These children also tend to be more narcissistic and they struggle to develop their sense of self. CITE Some of the most “at risk’ students tend to be those that are very wealthy and have resources (parents’ money) provided for them. CITE In this same study conducted by Suniya Luthar also found that these same students are more likely to experience more symptoms like delinquent behavior, psychological distress, some academic difficulties, and anxiety. CITE In America there are so many examples of rich children who’s lives had an issue within it. We see many public figures’ children getting caught with drugs, illegal alcohol consumption, DUI charges, and much more. A lack of interest in basic necessities leads to more wrongdoings it appears, not to mention children inheriting certain behaviors from their parents in relation to how their elite parents treat those that are not within the elite class.

By keeping the idea of social stratification, it ensures the idea that the top or the upper-class goal is unattainable by the lower class. It is a recipe for failed aspirations from the lower class because they are automatically classified by their wealth which in most cases, they have no control over due to the fact that the bourgeoisie that they aspire to become are profiting off of their hard work. There are people within the lower class that stigmatized and resent the elite class because of there mistreatment. There are also people who wish to join these upper classes without fuller being aware of the risks that are to come. This boomerang effect that comes as a result of social stratification benefits non one in the end. People should not be divided and judged by their wealth. Some of the richest people are the laziest and also some of the poorest people work the hardest. This can also be applied vice versa. Also, children should not suffer mentally at the socioeconomic status that they are often born into. Just because parents are wealthy it does not mean they do not deserve the same amount of attention a middle- or lower-class single mom would give her child. Social stratification does nothing but place people in a hierarchy and there will always be consequences to being on the top and using people at the bottom to get there.

In the Elah valley, a massive warrior Goliath was slain by a shepherd David in a battle. Many see the battle to be one of sheer luck and wit, but this fable could uncover a more broad and common perspective. Gladwell argues that the weaker person, or underdog, will not always lose or be at fault. He believes that “the powerful and strong are not always what they seem” and that power has a limit, citing various events and people who have overcome each of their own obstacles. These various references to past events and people along with the use of common rhetorical strategies make Gladwell’s argument that “the powerful and strong are not always what they seem” a plausible one.

Gladwell’s most remarkable way of helping to argue his point is through his use of various allusions to events. Whether he references a conflict between the Irish people, the moment cancer becomes cured by a doctor, or the invention of a new anticriminal law in California; Gladwell always uses them well to strengthen his argument. For example, Gladwell uses the story of a woman that he refers to as “Caroline Sacks”. She chose to go to a very prestigious university, Brown University, instead of the University of Maryland. The competition that she had in her classes caused her to flunk out. He uses the story to argue that at a less prestigious college, she may have completed her degree, since she would’ve had the same opportunities out of college and she would’ve had less competition in her classes. (However, the argument is more fully developed through the use of statistics, which will be discussed later.) Another allusion that Gladwell makes is a reference to the success of a Junior High basketball team led by Vivek Ranadivé. A majority of the players have little experience with basketball, so Ranadivé uses a full court press, where all players cover the field to play defense. This technique used little skill and didn’t require tricky, long-distance shots, so the players were successful. The result was that the basketball team beat more skilled competitors and reached the national championships for junior high basketball. Gladwell’s skillful use of allusions is strengthened furthermore when he connects this story of Ranadivé with the victory of Arabs under the Lawrence of Arabia, when he beat the skilled Turks using unconventional welfare. These allusions account for a large reason why Gladwell’s argument is so successful.

Gladwell’s argument is successful because of his use of ethos, logos, and pathos, as well. Gladwell connects to the audience by appealing to the emotions (pathos), as he questions the reader several times. For example, Gladwell asks the question, “You wouldn’t wish dyslexia on your child. Or would you?” after thoroughly discussing the problems that a dyslexic suffers through. Another use of pathos would be when Gladwell commands the reader to imagine he or she is a doctor and whether they would slack off more if they had fewer clients compared to working harder if they had more clients. This argument would be used to push the idea that fewer students in a classroom is not always a benefit to the students or teachers. Gladwell strengthens his argument through the use of information from knowledgeable people, referred to as ethos. He uses the knowledge of these people from the very beginning, even being used to explain how David may have been more advantaged in the battle than one may think. He cites that Goliath had a medical condition that professionals coined acromegaly, which made him not only gigantic but also impaired his vision. The point that David was advantaged in the battle is further explained using the knowledge of Eitan Hirsch, a ballistics expert with the Israeli Defense Forces, who said that a shot from an expert slinger at a distance of thirty-five meters would be enough to penetrate Goliath’s skull and to kill him. This leads to an analogy that this simple slingshot is similar to a simple, modern handgun, which is quite the powerful weapon.

Another reference to a knowledgeable person occurs in the discussion about Caroline Sacks. Sacks felt that she had a problem competing with the intelligent students at Brown University, so she dropped out. However, she would’ve been at the top of the class at a less prestigious college, like the University of Maryland (her second choice). Gladwell references psychologist Herbert Marsh’s idea of the “Big Fish-Little Pond theory” to further prove the point that Sacks may have still succeeded if she went to a less prestigious college. Marsh’s idea was that the more elite a college or university is, the less proud a student feels about his or her accomplishments. The idea becomes even more powerful when it gets connected to another competition—the contest to get into the Salon in France. Thousands of artists would try every year to get a spot in this Salon, but only a select few would get accepted. A group of impressionist painters who decide to not worry about the Salon and want to become a “big fish in a little pond”, leading them to become highly-regarded artists, which includes Renoir and Degas, just to name a few.

The most remarkable technique that Gladwell uses in his book to argue that “the powerful and strong are not always what they seem” is the use of statistics and facts, or logos. The chapter discussing Caroline Sacks uses statistics to argue that a person who is top of the class at a less prestigious institution may have the same success in being published after getting a PhD compared to one who is top of the class at a college like Princeton or Harvard. Gladwell compares the average amount of papers published after graduating with the percentile at which they graduated. The data shows that a person who has an easier chance of being top of the class at a less prestigious college will still have a great chance of succeeding after college. The use of statistics is so prevalent that even one chapter is devoted to a graph. The chapter discussed whether a small class size was truly the best relied fully on a graph. Gladwell dubbed the graph an “inverted U-curve”, stating that there is always a maximum value. After the maximum value, the success would begin to decrease, arguing that there is a limit to success. The U-curve is solidified once Gladwell asks teachers about their ideal class size. The teachers state that a size around twenty would be best. Anything higher would add too much work to the teacher’s work load and anything lower may allow for limited points of view in a discussion or a small amount of work that may cause the teacher to slack off. The idea of the U-curve continues up until a later chapter, in which Gladwell discusses why the police putting too many people in jail may be a problem. Gladwell finds out from criminologist Todd Clear that “if more than two percent of the neighborhood goes to prison, the effect on crime starts to reverse.” This information cemented the idea that there must be a limit to power and that law enforcement, like many other issues, follow an inverted Ucurve.

The world presents many with obstacles and challenges. Some challenges are lifelong and unchangeable, such as dyslexia, while others are able to be circumvented, such as getting into the Salon. The real premise behind David and Goliath is that these traits are commonly misunderstood and that power does have a limit. Gladwell’s constant use of allusions, statistics, and references to knowledgeable figures give credibility to his claim and prove that, after all, a giant isn’t as giant as he may seem.

“David and Goliath: Underdogs, Misfits, and the Art of Battling Giants” is a non-fiction book written by Malcom Gladwell, a Canadian journalist, author and public speaker, and was published on October 1st, 2013. This book’s purpose is to focus on the probability of improbable events to happen. It analyzes situations where one outcome is favor over another which makes it quite interesting to read as it gives a better to the audience idea of how the improbable happened. In order to analyze how Gladwell uses the “They Say/I Say method” I have chosen the introduction chapter which simply tells the story of the fight between David and Goliath and Gladwell’s explanation on the outcome of the legendary confrontation. I believe Gladwell expects us to know this famous story of David and Goliath as it is known worldwide, however, he goes through details and provides his own point of view about the fight that I have never known before and I found that truly interesting.

Gladwell quickly gets us going by introducing the location of the action and tells us what is happening in the Valley of Elah. He reminds us the famous fight between David and Goliath and summarizes the arguments about that fight, especially the ones saying that he has no chance of success against this giant because of the height and strength difference which allow us to understand the chapter’s topic of defeating giants while being an underdog. Gladwell also cite what the historian Moshe Garsiel said “To the Israelites, this extraordinary spear, with its heavy shaft plus long and heavy iron blade, when hurled by Goliath’s strong arm, seemed capable of piercing any bronze shield and bronze armor together” to explain why none of the Israelites wants to fight against Goliath. As he sees David determined to fight; the king Saul gives him equipment to at least have a chance to fight but he refuses and starts running towards his target. At this moment people starts to worry because he has no weapon but only a stone thrower and nobody believes that this can take down the giant. Goliath being huge and heavy expected like everybody else a close range but he got shot by a stone right in the forehead. David beats Goliath and liberate the population from the Philistines. In this chapter Gladwell get us current on the conversation as well because he succeeds to compare this story to situations where people from nowadays are currently in when he says that this book is about “what happens when ordinary people confront giants. By “giants” I mean powerful opponents of all kinds- from armies and mighty warriors to disability, misfortune and oppression”. We feel concerned about poverty and oppression because those are currently happening in this world and this show how he get us involved in this discussion.

After analyzing the story and consulting experts, Gladwell responds to this thinking that everything about it is wrong. Indeed, he offers evidences to support his argument such as the effectiveness of David’s weapon, he says that in good hands those stone throwers can do some devastating damages and to prove it he cites the work of the ballistics expert Eitan Hirsch who says that “a typical size stone hurled by an expert slinger at a distance of thirty-five meters would have hit Goliath’s head with a velocity of thirty-four meters per second- more than enough to penetrate his skull and render him unconscious or dead”. Gladwell also mentioned Goliath’s weaknesses that the people could not see starting by his extraordinary height which might have been the issue when he had to move and his bad sight.

In this chapter, Gladwell is trying to transmit a message that sometimes “giants” biggest strength are their biggest weaknesses. This is important to his audience to understand why sometimes underdogs defeats giants and the biggest meaning here is that sometimes what made the strength of somebody or something turns out to be the thing that makes them weak as well. In this chapter Gladwell gives us different examples to compare with the story of David and Goliath such as the epic fight between Titus Manlius and Gaul. Gladwell makes the connection between the two fights because Manlius is also young and considered as the underdog against Gaul but somehow finds a way to come out victorious of this confrontation. He also uses the example of Robert Wadlow, the tallest man in the history who suffered from acromegaly and compared him to Goliath who might have had the same disease which would explain the limitation in his movements.

To conclude, we can see how important an argument analysis is as it allows the author to check if his argument makes sense and prepare evidences to support it. This type of exercise is important to get better at reading instructions, evaluating the quality of the claims, conclusions and underlying assumptions or simply thinking about what needs to be added to the argument claimed. We can learn all of those skills by practicing argument analysis which is interesting.

How many time do we try to dress up just to put ourselves become someone we are not familiar? People would like to hear stories about the underdog, but rather than that, everyone loves to be a top dog! But it is unrealistic because not everyone is the same. The story “David and Goliath,” written by Malcolm Gladwell, introducing a new idea of being an underdog by a true story from history. Each chapter I have read so far reflected a lot of specific examples of how things do not happen in the way people want to be. And also, this book challenges the readers to look at things in another perspective ways that we rarely thought of before.

The story “David and Goliath” itself is an example, which reflects the idea behind “the beaten dog in a fight”. The book begins with a story between David and Goliath, the outsider against the insider. It is where the new word underdog brings out its metaphor. So what is exactly the meaning of an underdog? In short, an underdog is a person in the society, who popularly expected to lose. Whereas, the individual expected to win is called a top dog. The story digs into the ideas which are entered the reader’s languages for a metaphor as a victory by a weak party over the strong one. From the beginning, no one put the fate into David, a shepherd boy who volunteered to beat the Giant Goliath, even King Saul and the Israelites make the same mistakes. They don’t realize the real power can come from the invisible forms of all kinds. The giant makes fun, criticizes and even threatens, but it does not stop David from moving up and killing Goliath. Facing the difficulty odds help us empower the greatness in our inner strength. ” David refused to engage Goliath in close quarters, where he would surely lose”.

The willingness to try hard, to go through difficulty has defined the loser and winner. It’s happened the same to David when he uses the unconventional method to defeat the Giant. He refuses to come closer to Goliath, ignores to fight in the way the stronger wants, and win the battle in another wiser way. David is a shepherd boy, who always work in the dirty, dangerous place. But it taught him many skills the deal with the world through being a shepherd. When King Saul wants to dress David with full body armor, he refused to do so. Instead, he only uses his leather to be the weapon. That is because he has enough self-knowledge and self-confident to assure he does right. I have been an underdog numerous times in my life. It used to have some negative influences on me, which leads to low self-esteem, inferiority complex and loss of motivation. Gladwell’s idea of using the biggest weakness to identify one’s strength has affected my life a lot. I was born and lived as an underdog in a corrupt country. I spent my school years to absorb a bad and communist-influenced education, which prevent me from reaching my goal. In my earlier memory when I was a child, money was the only measure that people judged each other. Everything swings around cash. Unfortunately, I was naturally born to be poor. Nevertheless, facing the difficulty odds produce the greatness, and being an underdog produces changes on me. Being poor has shaped me into the person I am now. It teaches me to manage to live with a little amount of money.

Moreover, I have a home, a family with parents and an older brother, supporting me not only financial but also in mental, give me many changes to success in life. The misunderstanding of our disadvantages makes us easily give up or follow our challenges. Gladwell brings the idea of exploring our limitation as well as our opponent’s. Who could take such a courageous action in the fearful circumstances? The fight between David and Goliath has guided us the way to face the challenges: As long as we know our advantages and disadvantages, we can do whatever we want. For example, I am an immigrant from Vietnam two years ago. At that moment, I could not speak or understand English. I lost my self-confidence whenever I try to communicate with people.

However, I have a family who always believes in me, encourage me to face these difficulties. I use my biggest disadvantage to push me to learn and practice English frequency; and since I registered Mission College, my English has improved a lot. The perseverance to adapt difficulty makes me identify my strength. Being underdogs has changed the perspectives that we rarely appreciate the disadvantages and advantages. As long as we can be ourselves, we can face through difficulties and achieve success. If people judge you, that is their problem, not yours! We owe no one an explanation. Just do the best in life and stop overwhelm yourself. It is very tough to meet other people’s expectations, and we should not strive to do that. A starting from bottom gives us a unique perspective about how it takes to move our platforms to the next level. And the ability to be humble, empathetic are skills that make us stand out from the crowd!

Leadership is an important quality. It is the ability to provide direction. Being a leader can be both an honor and a difficult role. The bible provides a multitude of notable leaders. Among these leaders is David. David who is also known as King David was the son of Jesse and Nitzevet and was born in Bethlehem. David was a musician and a shepherd that became well known for his acts in the bible. In the bible, David demonstrates acts of courage, humility, and grace. David was an excellent leader. David’s character traits are great examples of qualities that nurses should possess to be great leaders.

David was known for being courageous. The book of First Samuel reports the infamous story of David and Goliath. Goliath was a giant man that was killed by David. David killed Goliath during a war between the Israelites and Philistines. Because Saul and his army were terrified to face Goliath, David showed an interest in fighting Goliath. Even though Goliath was over nine feet tall, David stood up to him. David had a feeling that God would guide him in the fight with Goliath. David had a strong faith that helped him to be able to conquer Goliath. According to Got Questions Ministries, due to previous experiences with God’s grace, David formed faith in the Lord (“What Should We Learn,” 2019). David’s act of courage shows that anyone can be willing to face any challenge that may be frightening or perceived as difficult.

In addition to demonstrating a courageous character, David also showed humility. David showed humility by showing kindness to Saul who was his enemy. When David saw Saul in a cave, he had the opportunity to kill him but he didn’t. David was even pressured to kill Saul by members of his crew. Even though Saul was looking for David to harm him, David wanted to do what he felt was righteous. David snuck up on Saul and his crew at the cave while they were asleep. As David spared Saul’s life, Saul left the cave. David then went after Saul and told Saul that he will not be harmed. David did not want to kill Saul because he felt that it was not up to him to take control of the situation. David carefully thought about the best way to react in regards to him and Saul being in the same place at the same time. Sometimes people can encounter persons that are not nice. In nursing, it is possible to face ungrateful or rowdy patients. Nurses must be able to control their emotions and handle situations appropriately. In the book of First Samuel, David demonstrates humility and grace by sparing Saul’s life. This shows that if people encounter mean persons, he or she should think about their reaction and show humility even though it may be difficult.

In addition to David’s encounter with Saul, David also showed humility by owning up to his transgressions. The book of Second Samuel reports that one day David was on the roof of a palace and saw a woman by the name of Bathsheba bathing. He sent messengers to her and slept with her even though she was married to Uriah the Hittite. The woman eventually became pregnant. David aimed to have Uriah the Hittite killed so that it would not be known that the unborn baby was his. Eventually, Uriah the Hittite was killed and Bathsheba mourned him. Although Bathsheba became David’s wife after the death of Uriah the Hittite, David knew that what he did was wrong. David admitted that he had sinned against the Lord and accepted responsibility.

David was known to be a forgivable person and repented when it was needed. He forgave people that did him wrong even though this can be difficult to do. According to Ligonier Ministries:

• David knew how to forgive, and he knew how to repent, too. He never blamed others for his mistakes. He did not make excuses based on family history, peer pressure, or the demands of leadership. He did not use passive language, referring to his sin as dysfunction or a growth edge. He did not lament over his sins simply because of the negative effects they could have on his kingdom and his relationships. (DeYoung, 2015)
• By David admitting his wrongdoings and accepting responsibility, it shows that nurses can be great leaders by being humble and accepting responsibility as the role of a nurse.
• On the other hand, David was compassionate. He showed compassion when Saul was killed. He showed compassion even though Saul saw David as an enemy. David showed compassion to Saul’s grandson Mephibosheth. After Saul and his son Jonathan were killed in a battle, David was looking to show kindness to Saul’s family. Mephibosheth met with David and David expressed that he will be kind to him. According to Richard Ezell:
• David said, “‘Don’t be afraid,’ David said to him, ‘since I intend to show you kindness because of your father Jonathan. I will restore to you all your grandfather Saul’s fields, and you will always eat meals at my table’’ (2 Sam. 9:7). David’s words were not just a token gesture; they were extravagant – symbolic of his love for Jonathan. His words were an act of grace – symbolic of God’s love for David. (Ezell, 2014)
• David showed acceptance to Mephibosheth. He was a man that could not do much for himself. He was crippled and considered an outcast. Just as David was accepting of Saul’s family members, a nurse should be accepting of everyone. Nurses can be great leaders like David was by respecting everyone regardless of who they are or their appearance. Nurses should also be willing to serve with a compassionate heart. David had put aside any feeling of animosity toward Saul and did not treat Saul’s family members terribly even though Saul was not nice to him. David did not have to be sensitive toward Saul’s grandson but he did anyway. This teaches that people should be willing to do what is right even if nothing will be gained from doing it or it may go unnoticed.

In addition to being compassionate, David was qualified to be a great leader because he was a man after God’s own heart. When looking to appoint a new king of Israel, Jesus was most concerned about the person’s heart rather than appearance. Before David became king, the Lord sent Samuel to anoint a new king. A man by the name of Jessie showed off David’s siblings to Samuel. However, none of David’s siblings were God’s anointed. Initially, David was not expected to be God’s anointed. Due to this, according to Loving Grace Ministries, David was left in a field tending sheep as Jessie was showing off David’s siblings (“Man Looks At,” 2017).

Saul failed at being a king because he was not submissive to God’s authority. God wanted a person that will submit to him and had a good heart. David was not perfect but had the qualities the Lord was looking for in a leader. Due to this, David became king. As the Lord calls people to go into nursing, the Lord wants these people to have the qualities of a great leader. Nurses should aim to understand the importance of having a heart that is good and submissive to do what God calls them to do.

If nurses aim to be like David, it would have a great impact on the world and the nursing profession. For example, nurses with great leadership qualities like David can be an example to future nurses and other nurses such as co-workers. Nurses can be great leaders by advocating for their patients and treating patients the way that they would want to be treated. Just as David was humble enough to aim to be a great server to Jesus, nurses should aim to humble themselves to be great servers to their patients and the nursing profession.

In conclusion, there are many great leaders in the bible who nurses can learn from. These leaders include David. David’s examples of leadership are great demonstrations for nurses and future nurses. David’s leadership abilities show nurses the importance of being humble, compassionate, and courageous. These characteristics allow nurses to be the best nurse possible. This is because being a nurse is about a passion for caring for people. To be a great leader like David, nurses should aim to practice having the qualities that David had, effectively manage emotions, and having a sense of integrity.

References

1. DeYoung, K. (2015, January 14). What Made David Great? Retrieved July 22, 2019, from https://www.ligonier.org/blog/what-made-david-great/
2. Ezell, R. (2014, January 1). Sermon – The Unexpected Response – 2 Samuel 9. Retrieved July 24, 2019, from https://www.lifeway.com/en/articles/sermon-unexpected-response-kindness-david-mephibosheth-2-samuel-9
3. Man Looks At The Outward Appearance, But The Lord Looks At The Heart. (2017, October 4). Retrieved July 23, 2019, from https://www.lovinggrace.org/single-post/2017/10/04/Man-Looks-At-The-Outward-Appearance-But-The-Lord-Looks-At-The-Heart
4. What should we learn from the account of David and Goliath? (2019, February 14). Retrieved July 23, 2019, from https://www.gotquestions.org/David-and-Goliath.html