I need help answering question one and two In this passage, Sydney Hook, a contemporary philosopher, addresses the concept of theGreat Man (Individual) theory in history:The key distinction... is the distinction between the hero as the eventful man in history andthe hero as the event-making man in history. The eventful man in history is any man whoseactions influenced subsequent developments along a quite different course that would havebeen if followed if these actions had not been taken. The event-making man is an eventfulman whose actions are the consequences of outstanding capacities of intelligence, will andcharacter rather than of accidents of position...The merely eventful men in history play a role that may be compared to that of the littleDutch boy who kept his finger in the hole of the dam to save the town. Without meaning tostrip the legend of its glamour, we can point out that almost anybody in the situation couldhave done it. All that was required was a boy, a finger, and the lucky chance of passing by.The event itself in the life of the community was of tremendous significance. It saved thetown... But the qualities required to cope with the situation were of a fairly commondistribution. Here, so to speak, one stumbles upon greatness just as one might stumble on atreasure that will ransom a town. Greatness, however, is something that must involveextraordinary talent of some kinds and not merely the compounded luck of being born andof being present at the right place at a happy moment.Both the eventful man and the event-making man appear at the forking points of history.The possibility of their action has already been prepared for by the direction of antecedentevents. The difference is this. In the case of the eventful man, the preparation is at a veryadvanced stage. It required a relatively simple act-- a decree, a command, a common-sensedecision – to make the decisive choice. He may "muff" his rule or let someone steal it fromhim. But even if he doesn't this does not prove him an exceptional creature. His virtue orvice is inferred from the happy or unhappy consequence of what he has done, not from thequalities he has displayed in the doing of it.The event making man, on the other hand, finds a fork in the historical road, but he alsohelps, so to speak, to create it... At the very least, like Caesar and Cromwell and Napoleon,he must free the path he has taken from opposition and, in so doing, display exceptionalqualities of leadership. It is the hero as an event-making man who leaves the positive imprintof his personality upon history-an imprint that is still observable after he has disappearedfrom the scene. The merely eventful man whose finger plugs a dam or fires the shot thatstarts a war is rarely aware of the nature of the alternative he faces and of the train of eventshis act sets off.It is easy to make a sharp distinction in analysis between the eventful man and theevent-making man, but there are few historical figures that will fit snugly into eitherclassification. We must leave to historians the delicate task of ascertaining whether anyparticular “hero" of human history is, in respect to some significant happening, anevent-making character --- or merely lucky.(Excerpt taken from "The Hero in History", first published in 1943)Reflection Questions1. What is the difference between the "eventful man" and the "event-making man"according to the passage?2. Is Mao an eventful or event-making individual in history? Is Hitler? Be sure toexplain your answer.

Question

I need help answering question one and two In this passage, Sydney Hook, a contemporary philosopher, addresses the concept of theGreat Man (Individual) theory in history:The key distinction... is the distinction between the hero as the eventful man in history andthe hero as the event-making man in history. The eventful man in history is any man whoseactions influenced subsequent developments along a quite different course that would havebeen if followed if these actions had not been taken. The event-making man is an eventfulman whose actions are the consequences of outstanding capacities of intelligence, will andcharacter rather than of accidents of position...The merely eventful men in history play a role that may be compared to that of the littleDutch boy who kept his finger in the hole of the dam to save the town. Without meaning tostrip the legend of its glamour, we can point out that almost anybody in the situation couldhave done it. All that was required was a boy, a finger, and the lucky chance of passing by.The event itself in the life of the community was of tremendous significance. It saved thetown... But the qualities required to cope with the situation were of a fairly commondistribution. Here, so to speak, one stumbles upon greatness just as one might stumble on atreasure that will ransom a town. Greatness, however, is something that must involveextraordinary talent of some kinds and not merely the compounded luck of being born andof being present at the right place at a happy moment.Both the eventful man and the event-making man appear at the forking points of history.The possibility of their action has already been prepared for by the direction of antecedentevents. The difference is this. In the case of the eventful man, the preparation is at a veryadvanced stage. It required a relatively simple act-- a decree, a command, a common-sensedecision – to make the decisive choice. He may &#34;muff&#34; his rule or let someone steal it fromhim. But even if he doesn't this does not prove him an exceptional creature. His virtue orvice is inferred from the happy or unhappy consequence of what he has done, not from thequalities he has displayed in the doing of it.The event making man, on the other hand, finds a fork in the historical road, but he alsohelps, so to speak, to create it... At the very least, like Caesar and Cromwell and Napoleon,he must free the path he has taken from opposition and, in so doing, display exceptionalqualities of leadership. It is the hero as an event-making man who leaves the positive imprintof his personality upon history-an imprint that is still observable after he has disappearedfrom the scene. The merely eventful man whose finger plugs a dam or fires the shot thatstarts a war is rarely aware of the nature of the alternative he faces and of the train of eventshis act sets off.It is easy to make a sharp distinction in analysis between the eventful man and theevent-making man, but there are few historical figures that will fit snugly into eitherclassification. We must leave to historians the delicate task of ascertaining whether anyparticular “hero&#34; of human history is, in respect to some significant happening, anevent-making character --- or merely lucky.(Excerpt taken from &#34;The Hero in History&#34;, first published in 1943)Reflection Questions1. What is the difference between the &#34;eventful man&#34; and the &#34;event-making man&#34;according to the passage?2. Is Mao an eventful or event-making individual in history? Is Hitler? Be sure toexplain your answer.

Accepted Answer

The excerpt mentioned above provides the diction between an eventful man and an event-making man. An…

Reflection Questions 1. What is the difference between the "eventful man" and the "event-making man" according to the passage? 2. Is Mao an eventful or event-making individual in history? Is Hitler? Be sure to explain vour answer