Those who see their ideas through, regardless of doubts or criticism others may express, are the ones who tend to leave a lasting legacy.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your re

The research conducted by Behavioral Society of India in 2016 concluded that critics are essential element of any decision making body since it provides complete understanding of issues and sometimes highlight important mistakes and inconsistencies. While there are no reservations that people who think through with their ideas and disregard critics have limited scope and understanding of the affairs of the public and can jeopardise their own careers, there are reasons to believe that the behavior of neglecting the critics often led to unprecedented outcomes, which have changed the world the way someone sees it. Going ahead with adamant behavior often affords an opportunity to work on ideas relentlessly and to come out with the novel things, which could have been impeded by critics.

The first reason that supports the idea of ignoring the critics and continuing forward with the idea is that ignoring the critics saves one from wasting time, cost and energy which could have been better utilised in implementing the idea. In the political circle especially, during debates in the parliament for passing new legislations, it is not only necessary to ignore the opposition but also mandatory to ensure the passing of legislations since people had showed their confidence in the Government through votes that this Government would resort to austerity measures. A good example of this is the implementation of Goods and Service Tax regulations that was implemented in India in 2017. The idea of the Government was to amalgamate different taxes under one name with one rate of taxation to bring in uniformity. The opposition intended to block its passage through various legal challenges, but the commitment of Government to pass it by ignoring them proved that India was on the track of landmark reform. Therefore, thinking through new ideas without consideration of criticism leaves unprecedented remarks in political circle.

Second reason that buttresses the thought of going along with the idea and neglecting the critics is that it provides the opportunity to focus on idea with more passion which often resulted in unseen theories to explain behavior. In the world of economic relations among countries, it is often touted that international trade among countries put poor countries at the mercy of advanced countries since these advanced countries have skills to exploit poor countries. However, the data of past three decades from 1980 to 2010 showed that poor countries took advantage of international trade and overcome their poverty. This can be illustrated by the economic theory of international trade that was offered by Noble Prize winner, that is Paul Krugman in 2002 who postulated and predicted that by joining the forces of international trade, poor countries can enjoy relative advantage in labor costs, which would make them superior to advanced countries since labor costs in these advanced countries were higher. Initially, the theory was severely criticized because of no precedence of such occurrence, however, he continued with his work towards the relationship between poor and advanced countries. Later, in 2016, economic society of USA recognised that what Paul had predicted was valid and applicable and the society named his theory as relative price theory of international trade, which is being used today to understand international trade. Hence, critics often prevent something from being developed which would prove valid later.

However, one idea that argues that heeding to the critics often provides the opportunity to have a comprehensive understanding of issue. In the world of rationality, where everyone tries to maximize his/her return, it is said that critics highlight important points, which proponents have not understood or neglected because of being over rational. For instance, the theory of monetary policy states that when economy faces risks of depression, the central bank of a country should decrease interest rates in order to make borrowings cheaper and thus would lift the economy. However, during the time of financial crisis of 2008, bankers across the world implemented what was suggested by the theory and ignored critics who were presenting that reducing rates would not help since the problem was with risk attitudes of investors, but not with deflation in an economy. But bankers ignored these critics and went ahead with decrease in rates, which did not work but exacerbated the problem. Later, it was realised that what critics were saying was prudent and thus bankers changed their policy as per directions given by the critics which helped economies to back to normal level. Thus, sometimes critics provides the knowledge and understanding which is beneficial for the proponents.

As can be seen from above paragraphs that although critics provide comprehensive understanding of issues, but in the world of uncertainty and self-interest, critics act to prevent landmark reforms with the objective to prove their own superiority over risk-takers. Therefore, for new ideas and discovery, a person should ignore critics and continue with his/her ideas incessantly.