Follow a fool or risk dying alone?

I suspect most of us hear have a similar approach- it can be hard to convey meaning in print without writing a novel.

In Boy Scouts- for about a year of my time, we had a Leader who was a former Marine. Most of us thought we were junior street thugs but he saw through our bravado and taught us alot about working together. Determining who had the skills in certain areas, that each person should teach what he knew to others and how to break a large task into bites each of us could take. I was the firebug and hunter/fish gatherer. Others had other areas but we all taught each other our skills.

Humans do better in groups, we may "survive" as loners but we thrive together. Even the mountain men needed rondevous to reattach to humanity and many lived with native tribes for that same human bond.
The line comes at follow a person or group hell bent on seelf destruction and unwilling to listen. Lemmings over a cliff.

Bill
 
interesting thoughts expressed so far

So many variables .....

Id more than likely help out , but let someone else take the lead . If they were unreasonable , or going to try something Id consider suicidal , Id separate myself and my own family out of their group and let them go their own way . If they were just going to go about getting out of the situation by the hardest way possible and they were dead set that it was what they were going to do .. Id probably tag along to make sure they actually got there ...

I have a conscience that I have to sleep with at night , if I see people in need of help and I can help out , I will ..unless sits going to endanger my own self and or family .

I find it is far better to quietly be helping out in the background un noitced than to be drawing attention . it prevents people thinking you are valuable to them and need to be kept around if you want to go your own road . The people you help out tho for however long you are with them , if they are of a mind to notice they will ...
 
I'd try to keep the fool at the disaster site and then have me and one other person leave for help. Then the group would have strength in numbers and I wouldn't be slowed down with a whole group following me but yet I'd have one other person for help should I get hurt on the way to help.
 
For me personally I always tend toward a leadership position. Sometimes I seek it out, I am a crew leader for Wilderness Trail Maintenance crews, and sometimes I am elected to do it. I think I am a good leader and have been told so by others that I greatly respect. Now that being said I am also of the same type that Mistwalker was talking about. I can be a real A$$hole sometimes, but I am working on that the benefits of working for a leadership development program. My personal take is that a leaders job is to make sure that everything is being taken care of not take care of everything yourself. For instance in some of my medical training we cover Mass Casualty Incidents where one person is in charge of everything that happens, that person is the Incident Commander. The IC does not give any medical care at all, his sole job is to make sure the best care is given to everybody and to coordinate everything. That to me is the job of the Leader in a situation like this. If that ends up having to be me then I gladly step into that role, but I will say that I don't like being sidelined from the actual work. I also am completely happy sitting second seat to somebody who is doing a good job of leading the group. For me it is all about the BIG picture. But I also feel that in this type of a situation the most knowledgeable person will most likely be the most effective leader, there are of course exceptions to this. In my experience in times like this everyone tends to look towards those that know the most. The challenge for the expert is to teach the needed skills to those who don't know them and need to as well as organization.

Now as for what I would do, no way am I leaving the group. I feel it is my personal responsibility to be there to assist and to lend my knowledge to those who need it, especially if the current leader is somebody who has no Idea what is going on. All of this is contingent upon the fact that a party had to leave the crash site for whatever reason and that I felt that the wounded were being properly cared for and that I couldn't be of more use there.
 
I don't suffer fools easily. If the chosen leader were without skills, then I am sure that I would wind up on my own.
 
Oh dear!
Follow a fool or risk dying alone?.
The question is actually
"Chance of Survival: alone or with a poorly lead group"

It depends on the dynamics of the group
Who is the leader and why
What is your releationship to the leader

Presuming there a leader in place
Presuming you are the only expert on survival
Presume they are a 'fool' (so you are in failure mode, change your attitude)

Survival is not confrontation
it is adaptation
You need to adapt the situation

You use your survival skill in how to convince the leader of his need for you
Do not publically confront
Private discussions
Act to educate the uninformed leader

An skilled advisor is a very powerful and influencial position

Win - Win
 
Last edited:
"You use your survival skill in how to convince the leader of his need for you /Act to educate the uninformed leader"

Neeman,
Given that these two options are open- I would agree. My issue is that these two issues may NOT be open. The leader may indeed be headset on his position and decision. I think we all have a "line in the sand" we would try to work with the group up to a point, question being, when have each of reached that point?

We have all watched both fiction and non fiction accounts of survival situations in which bad decisions cost lives. We all have sat and played "If I was there, I would have done this..." We have control over our own decisions and actions but we may not be in a position to significantly influence others- we owe it them and our own conscience to try but their reception is not under our control. & we could be in a position to accept the fact that they are unwilling to accept our help and our only choice is to put ourselves at greater peril by staying or start making our own best decisions.

Bill

Given best case scenario, the event never happens, given second best scenario- the group is able to work together for everyones benefit- 3rd option is the hard one.
 
Last edited:
If you ever end up in situation like that do a test - might be really useful too as you'd find what skills you have in the group:
1. starting fire
2. making cordage
3. building shelter
With those, if someone can beat you, you know there is someone better at it than you - you can follow. You win - the group will be leaning towards your leadership as they will want to know you can provide the basics...
 
elof_alv said:
If you ever end up in situation like that do a test - might be really useful too as you'd find what skills you have in the group:
1. starting fire
2. making cordage
3. building shelter
With those, if someone can beat you, you know there is someone better at it than you - you can follow. You win - the group will be leaning towards your leadership as they will want to know you can provide the basics...
Click to expand...

I agree with this partly. However, survival situations should NEVER (IMHO) be a "competition." There is simply too much at stake. If I make my views known and the "leader" ignores them or shoots them down or whatever, I say ; "ok, have a nice trip" and then punch out on my own. Now, if the "leader" does, in fact, know survival better than I, I will certainly shut up and listen for a while and help out where I can. Again, a "true leader" is one who realizes they don't know everything and will defer to the experience of those that do. I have taught leadership to my old employees and sat through a ton of lectures and that is one thing that is stressed over and over again...
 
I think the question is defined by the leader being identified as a "fool". No, I would not follow someone who would quite obviously lessen my chances for survival.

The "fool" would deny you any portion of food and supplies if you left the group? Fine.

He would lead others to their doom needlessly by insisting on camping on a bare, lightning struck ridge in an approaching storm? He would insist on dangerous, unneeded river crossings? He would seek to "punish" people he didn't like out of spite?

No, I would tend to head off in my own direction and likely have a better chance of survival. Do I owe something to the group? I would attempt to contribute skills and council as long as I could, but would not take unneeded risks just to go along with the foolish leader. Anyone who wanted to come with me could, but I would not likely "compete" with the fool for group leadership. If he has already been chosen group leader or assumed the position by force of personality, little would be gained by challenging the group's choice. Some of them might see the same foolish behavior and poor choices as I would see and others may not.
 
@Codger- I think the mindset that the leader is a moron comes from almost every movie ever. The loud mouth always takes control and screws everyone over.
 
It is a recurrent theme of a lot of books and movies. And the more recent spate of group survival reality shows. "QUest for fire", an older movie is a good study. Group dynamics is an interesting subject. And survival situations, real or imagined compress the dynamics to a small group. Sometimes leadership shifts from the incompetent to the competent. Sometimes the opposite happens.
 
I think I would survive better alone...but that would make for a painful existence knowing I could have helped or maybe saved others. I wouldn't lead, I prefer to influence.
I like Cicero's timeless quote for this scenario.
"What is morally wrong can never be advantageous, even when it enables you to make some gain that you believe to be to your advantage. The mere act of believing that some wrongful course of action constitutes an advantage is pernicious.”
*
 
Depends on the specifics, but my first choice would be to stick with the group. Power in numbers and a broader range of knowledge and skills. I wouldn't follow a fool if I felt that he/she was making dangerous decisions. However, I would follow a good leader even if he/she had poor nuts-and-bolts survival skills. Good leaders know how to evaluate, organize, motivate, and direct groups of people. Good leaders can get get things accomplished on a scale that a single technically skilled individual has no chance of accomplishing. Poor leaders are often driven by ego, or mistakenly believe that their technical skills entitle them to a leadership position. For example, over the years I've worked with many very skilled engineers, some in leadership positions, who couldn't lead the way out of a wet paper bag. They serve a purpose, and play an important role, but in the wrong role they make a mess of things. Same could apply to a survival situation. That said, except in politics fools don't often remain in leadership positions for long. Eventually people figure it out and make a change.
 
In a situation like you described i would let me skills speak for me. I am a survivalist and once people started seeing me with a fire and shelter water, eating whatever wild edibles are around i think they would gravitate toward me or anyone else with good survival skills. unless you have intimate knowledge of the area you are stuck in going it alone would be a bad idea even if it meant putting up with a jack-hole for awhile. When it comes to group survival you must be selfless and not selfish, when terrible things happen people panic and can't always think in the right frame of mind so we must have patients and help who we can when we can not run the other way like a coward in the face of adversity.
 
lmalterna said:
"You use your survival skill in how to convince the leader of his need for you /Act to educate the uninformed leader"

Neeman,
Given that these two options are open- I would agree. My issue is that these two issues may NOT be open. .............
.............Given best case scenario, the event never happens, given second best scenario- the group is able to work together for everyones benefit- 3rd option is the hard one.
Click to expand...

The question is actually the 3rd option which is the hard one
"Chance of Survival: alone or with a poorly lead group"

Then you need to do your educated calculation for survival.
Act upon it, with the least amount of noise to create the least amount of power play
 
Last edited:
neeman said:
Oh dear!
Follow a fool or risk dying alone?.
The question is actually
"Chance of Survival: alone or with a poorly lead group"

It depends on the dynamics of the group
Who is the leader and why
What is your releationship to the leader

Presuming there a leader in place
Presuming you are the only expert on survival
Presume they are a 'fool' (so you are in failure mode, change your attitude)

Survival is not confrontation
it is adaptation
You need to adapt the situation

You use your survival skill in how to convince the leader of his need for you
Do not publically confront
Private discussions
Act to educate the uninformed leader

An skilled advisor is a very powerful and influencial position

Win - Win
Click to expand...

exactly my thoughts :thumbup:
 
stanley_white said:
I hear in a survival scenario fools are good eatin'!

Eat enough of them and you'll eventually be in charge.

:D

-Stan
Click to expand...

That was what I thought when I saw the thread title for some reason.

I have been in the situation before where someone takes the lead just because they have I guess what you would call good networking skills. It seems that there are a lot of those types associated with things I like to do. What I would do is if you decide to follow the guy is to bring your paper and pencil and make a reconnaissance map of the area, because I would imagine that you were half hearted about it in the first place, and then you would have your escape plan from the unwise decision to follow.
 
Man o man...just reading thru these posts freaks me out. I had this thought rolling thru my head about just getting it done.Helping the injured/shock cases,starting to build a fire and get everyone started on basic needs while the wannabe chieftains are measuring each others cranks for leadership position. Probably be warm and fuzzy by the time the "leader" is designated.I cant imagine a group situation unfolding and someone wanting me to prove anything by a cordage/fire making race?????
I have always taught and until just now, was under the impression that the basic needs of a lone survivor would be the same for a group, and therefore negate any one person declaring what they may be.... does it really need to be the fastest guy at firecraft telling me it`s cold and we need a fire????? because i`ve built plenty but i`ve also had 2 back surgeries and dont move with the same cat like reflexes i used too.
I suppose after i stopped laughing at the "deemed necessity" for someone to be given a title in the middle of a disaster, i`d sigh, walk away from the group area; declare myself "EL Tigro numero uno" of a 10 foot circle of earth, and meet my needs and help others whenever i could and watch the group from a distance...just close enough to watch my new favorite survival show unfold.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top