People face various situations in their lives, which invariably affect their thoughts and behaviors. These kinds of situations can be generally divided into two types. One is intentionally created by the individual, and the other is caused by external factors. The former usually arises when people try to achieve their goals by changing their environment. For example, if someone wants to improve their spoken English, the person might put themselves in a situation where there is no choice but to speak only English. This is a form of meta-cognitive behavior intended to take conscious control of external conditions, with outcomes aspiring to affect primarily the actor alone.

However, not all situations can be controlled. In some cases, people may find themselves in a specific situation due to external factors. Suppose that an introverted person is required by their company to meet 50 clients each week. Over time, the person may feel more comfortable, even though their intrinsic introversion remains. This is an example of how an unintended situation can change people. As in the previous example, the result of becoming comfortable around people does not affect others.

Nevertheless, in some cases, the effects of personal change go beyond the individual level. When such a change from an external factor affects others, the situation becomes complicated. Even if a person is not the one who causes the circumstances, the choices they make carry significant meaning at this point. That is because humans reflect on their behaviors through thoughts shaped by the influence of the situations they face. According to Hannah Arendt, those who behave without acknowledging this complexity demonstrate thoughtlessness, a failure to consider others, and an inclination to “just follow orders” without profound reflection. A tragic example of this can be seen in the South Korean army’s massacre of civilians under martial law during the May 18 Democratization Movement.

“Thoughts” here refers to deep consideration of what one’s behavior signifies in relation to others. This process of thought leads to judgment that allows one to see a situation from another person’s perspective. If the soldiers on duty that day had truly thought about the harm their actions that would inflict upon the citizens and chosen their paths correctly despite their subordinate positions, such a tragedy might have been avoided or, at least, mitigated. Hanna Arendt warned that the more people eschew critical thinking, the more likely totalitarianism is to prevail.

This issue becomes even more crucial when it comes to a leader whose decisions can affect many people. A leader, in particular, is responsible for carefully contemplating the potential outcomes of their choices upon their citizens and beyond borders, and for making final judgments, regardless of whether they encountered these situations intentionally or not. In addition, what distinguishes leaders from ordinary individuals is their obligation to take full responsibility for the predictable consequences of their decisions. This is why they must not overuse their power. When the consequences of one’s actions affect many others, it is clear that the influence of situational factors that shape human behavior cannot be taken lightly.

By Choi Daniel, Editor-in-Chief