Introduction

The excessive confidence in the social sciences can cause just as much harm as religious fanaticism.

Nicholas Taleb, The Black Swan: the Impact of the Highly Improbable (2007)

This paper will demonstrate the significant role that higher education leadership has in developing a strong bond between higher education and wealth equity. Higher Education leaderships’ shift toward empathic enhancement, coupled with a resiliently trained will, develops a moral direction which fosters a deeper relationship between higher education and wealth equity. By wealth equity we mean not only assets such as land and capital ownership, but we also use the term in its moral sense of the “rights” of individuals to achieve their place in the economy that allows both self-determination and personal growth. It is tied logically to the elimination of poverty. Higher education remains a uniquely privileged venue through which the elusive goal of professional and economic advance can be achieved. It remains however, implausible that more than a small movement will occur since it is impossible to achieve without a firm act of the will both individually and politically. The will exercises itself within an arena where other strong wills are also actively managing the organization for their own personal benefit. Wealth distribution remains unlikely, though there are inroads that can be attempted. It is a disheartening reality that our egocentricism appears to nullify a more appropriate ethical and moral process. One simply can witness the second-level status of women that endures to this moment (Carey 2015). We also make as an assumption that wealth equity is a right of the human person as we review the social and Papal documents which provide the theoretical underpinnings. We have chosen the papal documents because they were the original international presentation of the topic of human rights. However, beyond the papal documents, we have had to move to more current discussions particularly the 1981 United Nations Convention for the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women that brings the issue of inherent discrimination into fuller clarity. This is a necessary addition to the discussion as the church’s attitude toward women has been itself discriminatory and problematic.

Success, sine qua non, requires justice to “flow down” through various structural and organizational systems to ensure the sacrality of the person, and by extension, to guarantee that education is in place to assure self-determination. Throughout history either apprenticeship or higher education has been the conduit of success.

Among the topics we will explore in this paper include:

  • Human Dignity as Pre-eminent

  • The Common Good and Solidarity

  • Subsidiarity

  • Governmental Obligations

  • Rights and Obligation

  • Training in Empathy for the Leader

  • Training of the Leader’s Will

Papal Documents on Social Teaching

A significant wealth of materials is already extant in Catholic Social teaching which is well grounded philosophically so that “faith membership” is neither required nor necessary.

As we approach the thorny issue of achieving even minimum equity, a complex analysis between higher education and wealth equity requires a careful examination of social science. It further requires an analytic of the interface between ‘freedom,’ ‘solidarity,” and ‘subsidiary’ as they relate to human rights and expectations, moral choices, developing the will and enhancing empathic sensitivity.

We begin our analysis of the social documents with fundamental principles among which is subsidiarity which argues that matters ought to be handled by the smallest, lowest or least centralized competent authority. Political decisions should be taken at a local level if possible, rather than by a central authority. The Oxford English Dictionary defines subsidiarity(2013) as the idea that a central authority should have a subsidiary function, performing only those tasks which cannot be performed effectively at a more immediate or local level. Solidarity has been defined operationally in Sollicitudo rei socials by Pope John Paul II (1987):

We are all one family in the world. Building a community that empowers everyone to attain their full potential through each of us respecting each other's dignity, rights and responsibilities makes the world a better place to live.

In this model of understanding, higher education should be tightly bound to equity enhancement as it relates to developing power and wealth within local and immediate environments.

Freedom (2013) is a correlative component deeply tied to subsidiary and is defined in the OED as “The power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants without hindrance or restraint.” Further, we note that there is freedom “from” and freedom “to”…both of which are necessary in the calculus of morality required in empowering self to achieve equity that is both professional and economic.

An Unexpected Starting Point

How, though, can this be achieved? Perhaps, a useful question to raise is Tertullian’s Question: “What has Jerusalem to say to Athens?” (Ante-Nicene Fathers, n.d.). This question is obviously metaphorical rather than literal and opens up the ongoing debates that include perennial questions such as how should a believer or someone with a highly developed moral sense, hold together the tensions of their belief system and their political views? How do these disparate commitments impact? In short, how would individuals from disparate political and social backgrounds come together to create a segue for others to become actively incorporated into the community with its attendant rights and benefits, among which are wealth? This is, as various historical narratives remind us, no easy task.

The problem is made more complicated by the continuing decline of organization value-based commitment which means operationally that the organizations now often lack the capacity to reach out to large groups as the churches once were able to do. Alongside this is a movement away from orthopraxis based as it was on orthodox, and its articulated principles. This creates a parallel and non-institutional belief system that makes prediction of outcome highly speculative.

Where once one could refer to the kerygma as the foundational argument for equality and wealth equity, the attitude now is: “Prove it.” These problems are intensified when one follows the Tertullian question further. How can one blend these disparate points of view? The resultant has devolved into two polar camps as one might expect: 1) personal belief can be blended with the body politic and 2) the insights are antithetical to any effective interaction so no meeting of the minds is possible (Ante-Nicene Fathers, n.d.). We now have a political chess game with warring parties some pushing to achieve mutual wealth equity and an equally forceful group in opposition. Depending on the historical context, either side may win. This leaves the individual often “hanging by a thread” choosing the group that promises him/her the easiest access to self-determination and wealth equity often uncritically.

Obviously, a res media is required. Tertullian reminds us that it is clearly preposterous to suggest that Jerusalem has nothing to say to Athens as, indeed, to assume that Jerusalem has everything to say to Athens. Dialogue is quintessential if more problematic.. It is within the context of this dialogue where individually trained wills and empathic moral compasses are argued and tested.

Amidst growing cultural pluralism and diversity, empathic engagement appears a preeminent approach that transcends sectarian concerns. As Tertullian’s question reminds us, dialogue between higher education and the free pursuit of self-determined mobility require deep discussions, not simple edicts.

To achieve these goals, we will need to specify particular issues and these will include:

  • Create vision that guides action and policy

    • Tie empathy to the moral compass thereby successfully assisting individuals in achieving wealth equity

Social Teaching Redivitus

It is axiomatic that the rights of others enjoy the same status as our own. This must be the datum of experience that governs any further argument. If this is the case, then the approaches to higher education and its impact on wealth equity needs, by extension, an analysis founded on ethical and moral principles enshrined in already extant documents such as the Papal Encyclicals on Social Realities. For our purposes we will review the concerns raised from Rerum Novarum by Leo XIII (1891) to Caritas in Veritate by Benedict XVI (2006) to establish an effective context for our argument.

If the family is seen as the fundamental unit of society, then certain principles flow from that which include the argument from subsidiarity which suggests that the family is “anterior both in idea and in fact to the gatherings of men into a commonwealth…must necessarily have rights and duties which are prior to those of the latter, and which rest more immediately on nature.” Accordingly, the family must have access to a certain amount of wealth to function effectively. Unfortunately, assumptions about the 'family unit' as a basic unit of society are most often the reason that women in many parts of the world cannot achieve any approximation of wealth equity. Economists assume joint ownership between men and women in the family but often women in marriage are excluded from partial or whole ownership of the family assets through law, culture, religion or some combination of all three. The United Nations' approach through the Convention for the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women of 1981 attempts to treat the individuals within the family unit - particular the adults—as distinctly individual and as having rights in terms of acquisition, inheritance, ability to sell or retain assets as part of requirements for the elimination of inequality and the ability for both women and men to acquire and maintain wealth equity. (Deborah Poff, in correspondence 9/15/15)

The documents include the assertion that there is a fundamental right to private property (which one can relinquish by an act of will but not duress). This nets out to mean each individual has the right to the essentials for a human life which include a home, clothing and the ability to earn a living based on equality of all. In effect, the right to a human life requires wealth equity or some kind of approximation such that people in some countries are not living on even minimal survival income. For instance, “with [Democratic Republic of Congo] citizens earning on average $394.25 a year, the country stands in sharp contrast with Qatar—where people earn an average of $105,091.42 a year” (Tasch 2015, July 13). This number violates all norms of human respect. Clearly there is no mode of moving toward wealth equity. Even human survival is at stake.

The underpinning of this argument lies in the nature of freedom which is much more than a negative state of doing what one wishes but demands a consideration that freedom is directed toward living a life that is consonant with human dignity which returns us to the notion of the person as inherently having moral significance in themselves which further argues individuals possess basic rights to sharing in education both for social and economic advancement.

Although the above model proliferates the papal encyclicals, it is not without precedent in Kant’s Critique of Practical Reason (1997) as well as his Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals (2002). This argument flies in the face of Hobbes’ (2007) model of society as only a social contract without reference to the required preconditions of knowledge, power and economic social conditions required to enter into a valid contract. Each of the previous components is a “given” in any understanding of the human person as a moral entity. The contract into which they enter must include wealth in some clear way.

Of course, history is filled with varied points of view that can simultaneously enrich and confuse the arguments. What we see emerging is not a society that is evolving based on the social contract alone. We observe an alternative model of “family, friendships, congregations of persons” wherein there is the notion of covenant over contract. This refocuses the previous argument. Although this is not a common model, one hears it spoken about in election campaigns clearly geared to the populace desire for wealth equity in their lives.

Looking at the papal documents sequentially, we observe more profound shifts that range from Augustine’s negative view of human nature to the more rational Thomistic model in which one’s nature may be flawed but that “flaw” could be significantly remedied in part by education in virtue and empathy. In short, higher education becomes a primary focus and detailed rule governed behaviors yield to a life of virtue. Augustine “loses” to Aquinas. Accordingly, to remedy errors or weaknesses, higher education becomes a powerful intervention enabling success and supporting leaders whose will is trained and empathy is high to create venues to approach wealth equity.

From Theory to Action

From the very beginning of human debate, there have been at least two extreme formulations of social and communal concerns. These range from total withdrawal to extensive engagement. Withdrawal is implausible as change can be achieved only by engaging the system to modify, direct, and, perhaps, even change it.

In order to provide for others, the shift appears to involve a movement from the “direct” administration of care and concern (individuals) to creating the broader social system that supports an approach to justice. It is not a simple giving of the particularly directed concerns (food banks, etc.) but insists on a broader technique that involves modification of social systems. The most synergistic and effective remedy appears to have justice “flow down” through these various structural and social organizational systems to ensure the sacrality of the person and, by extension, to guarantee that higher education is in place to assure that self-determining social structures provide access to wealth equity. In order to assure this, an educational curriculum is needed for higher education leadership to equip them to manage the opportunities that they control to the advantage of others. One such component would be to provide university leaders with a moral education geared to sensitize them for the ongoing need to assure access to economic equity.

Educational Intervention; A Potential Approach

At a minimum, moral and ethical curricular education requires the presentation of a number of components, some already identified by John B. Wilson (1967) and aspects of this model expanded by Samuel M. Natale (1972). These components can easily be implemented because of its highly cognitive nature. Once understood, the components strengthen the decision making context in leaders’ concern for others.

As recently discussed by Straughan (2000), the aforementioned components consist of:

  • PHIL: The extent to which an individual can relate to others and can, hence, understand that the rights of others enjoy the same status as their own. This component means that the leader identifies with others ensuring that others enjoy the same kind of wealth security as others do.

  • EMP: The ability to understand what others are feeling as well as what one is feeling oneself. This ability to not only identity but to restructure the leader’s own personal world allows the leader to energize his/her understanding and to fortify his/her will to take on the necessary conflicts that arise in guaranteeing justice of access to wealth equity.

  • GIG: The mastery of information and knowledge. (the “facts of the case”). This component is a “given” in higher education where the leader is expected to understand the fact pattern of the cases before him/her and to create structures that impart to students the information needed to place themselves in a position to achieve wealth equity by modeling and action on their own part.

  • DIK and PHRON: The ability to formulate a set of rational rules to which one adheres regarding others’ and one’s own self-interest. This is where the leadership creates policies and programs that support neophyte students going through various programs and readjusts and helps manage their goals so that among their desires and outcomes are concrete abilities to achieve and manage their own wealth and status. Within this and the previous component, will training becomes essential to test one’s stamina within structures and in answering and defending use of resources to achieve this wealth equity via higher education.

  • KRAT: The capacity to interpret these ideologies into action and behaviors.

Not only can these components stand on their own, but they can also become involved in complex interactions, including the psychological and sociological contexts. The particular strength of this model is that it is highly cognitive initially and sets the framework for later application via simulation and case analysis as well as face to face workshops and discussions.

The university leadership must utilize the organizational sub-systems such as various schools, deans, support services and monitoring to assure students remain engaged and on the correct track to self-determination. As the corporate model increasingly dominates university life, this is a more daunting task and requires perhaps special directorships or project directors to manage this specific criterion of student growth into professionalism geared to their successful wealth acquisition.

The inferences of this model as demonstrated by Floyd (2013) encompass the capacity of higher education leaders to understand individual’s cultural differences, encourage open conversation regarding the importance of ethics and values, and encouraging the adoption of an empathic approach to decision-making,

Each of the above moral and ethical components can be divided into specific behaviors and measured by outcomes. Synchronous conversations can reinforce and enhance each of the components. Over time, these abilities and insights become imbedded within the individuals who emerge from the programs emulating, as they must by observation, the moral compass, energy and will of the president-leadership team.

This internalization can be tested by providing simulations and experiential training among and between components of the university which enable participants to test their moral point of view An example of this would be the Mount Everest Simulation from Harvard Business School (Roberto and Edmondson 2008), where decisions have direct impact, including the deaths of expedition members. This simulation, along with synchronous meetings, enhances the affective component which is, perhaps, the most powerful driver of ethical decision making. In short, decisions taken about individuals have impact. A well trained will, combined with clear moral principles which guide action are imperative. Without them, wealth acquisition is not possible.

In state-run institutions of higher education, government has the obligation to the commonwealth to provide similar experiences that place emerging students at the threshold to claim their professional and wealth status. However, this problem becomes exacerbated because the growing model of government is shifting continually. These governmental shifts reflect shifting emphases in philosophy as well:

In accordance with this limited conception of the state’s role, politics increasingly became a technocratic affair carried out by a small group of bureaucratic experts, mainly with a view to increasing a nation’s GDP. Meanwhile, the pluralism of the postwar period slowly turned into the postmodernism and moral relativism of the 1960s and 1970s, in which it seemed to some that no one had the right to tell anyone else how to live, and all moral agendas were really covert attempts to impose our own interests on others. Postmodernists insisted that there is not such thing as an essential and unchanging human nature, so any attempts to ground a view of morality in human nature is really a disguised form of power and domination. Morality, and truth itself, is not grounded in human nature but, rather, is an artificial construct, a convenient fiction.

Jules Evans, Philosophy for Life and other dangerous situations, (2012), p. 209

Such a fiction can and does damage lives.

In a centrally controlled government, implementation is easier but its dangers are overwhelming tending as it can to brain washing and not individuation. Higher education must survive within the social context within which it finds itself and has done so for centuries. The issues become more complicated as the definitions of wealth vary along with social definitions.

After postmodernism reached its height in the 1980s, there was a restlessness and return to a more Aristotelian model that argued that some forms and ways of living are simply better than others… a point of view supported by growing literature in psychology and social work. It is here, at this point, that higher education can reclaim its rightful priority as the institution that both can and has used the intellectual capital of its membership to address the nuances of adapting curricula to various social contexts.

Scholars and administrators often seem shocked that affect is an intrinsic part of decision making. But the leader/president ought not to be grounded as he/she is in empathy, ability to plan with willful certainty (which does not preclude consultation) and move the organization forward into its chosen vision (e.g., “The Engaged University”). Although we benefit by informing our choices with flow charts and “big data”, actual implementation arises from verifiable and current data converted into information driven by a moral compass that has at its center, the goal of providing student with involvement in the commonwealth equipped with their own professional and wealth equity.

It is not surprising that planners and leaders are often surprised about the amount of affect that must govern “objective” decisions. What this nets out to, bluntly, could only be said by a British Professor who commented “Forgiveness is a rather unfashionable subject in moral philosophy…” (P.F. Strawson 1974, p. 6). Indeed, it may be the case but one needs to ask SHOULD it be the case? To sever the world of feeling and emotion from moral decision- making is to reduce it to an empty calculus. Human affect is quintessential in the development of any path toward human and professional success arriving at a clearly defined self and equipped with wealth of one’s own.

One of the most effective ways to teach empathy and develop the will is modeling those we observe around us. Our previous research has addressed some interventions, based on case modeling, that have impacted corporate structures as large as e-bay as well Procter and Gamble (Natale et al. 2014). The insight that has emerged is that empathy enhances not only the corporate structures and is contagious, but also enhances corporate performance as well. Part of this performance enhancement is wealth acquisition. This has been directly imported into university life with the corporate model of running higher education as though it were a business. What this has taught us is that higher education is also governed by a direction of producing wealth equity participation for all members of the academic community.

Just as we earlier argued that Augustine gave way to Aquinas, organizational command-control structures have given way to varied models of effectiveness based on human values, attitudes, needs and expectations. We now add to that organizational shift the agenda of explicitly selecting a president/leader with a developed moral compass, energized by an empathic and will-filled vision that moves all members of his/her organization toward independence and equity, both professional and economic.

It is given that one can increase empathy and that the affective energy released energizes an individual’s and/or corporation’s moral compass. Once the direction is clearly established, motivation, reward and penalty function to become the traditional modes of reinforcement. But for these elements to have impact, they must be tied to curricular concerns addressing issues of achieving equity. In short, professional and wealth equity must be explicitly articulated within the curriculum.

Clearly, the most impactful component of developing empathy involves modeling and mentoring which has been previously discussed (Natale et al. 2014). Further, this learning needs to be based on real-world experience rather than isolated theory. As discussed in Empathy: A Leadership Quintessential:

“[we have] demonstrated how tightly empathy is bound to effective leadership. The leader must be present and engaged in the life of the stakeholders, living with them affectively to provide appropriate responses.” (Natale et al. 2014, p.108).

The empathic engagement is “intra-psychic”, “interpersonal”, and externally motivated and monitored when it has been incorporated. It becomes organizationally systemic as does the goal of gearing student success to achieving wealth equity.

Higher education leadership needs empathy to manage for success of students and other important stakeholders as these students make their way forward beyond consideration of wealth, gender, class or family background. Sadly, there remain many obstacles that ought to have been rectified, but rather have been reinforced by an elitist and sexist society.

A Will-Driven Empathy and a Moral Compass

An excellent example of this kind of effective leadership are the changes wrought by Adelphi University’s President, Robert A. Scott, Ph.D. who used his empathic leadership and energized will to enhance student and faculty achievement and empower individuals to move toward excellence while, at the same time, achieving equity as the goal.

When President Robert A. Scott came to Adelphi University, it was faltering. Instead of relying on flow charts and other tools, Dr. Scott got out among the people on campus and, in a landmark speech, called for the “engaged campus”. He explained that:

“I [President Scott] have called for Adelphi to be the ‘engaged’ university, engaging faculty and students together on campus and with community groups off-campus, and engaging members of the broader community in our activities… The engaged university is not a distant tower or a lonely island, it is an active participant in preparing citizens who are professionals and in contributing to the intellectual and cultural life of the community” (Scott 2001, p.4).

To incarnate his vision, Dr. Scott created many listening forums with external and internal stakeholders to exchange ideas. These interactions created trust and energy. Altruism and moral sensitivity were encouraged and rewarded. Dr. Scott willfully drove the process toward effective goals which included growth in participant ownership and equity (Scott 2000). Students, faculty and administrators were universal in their enhanced wealth equity, both in terms of corporate investment in the institution and in concrete financial growth. The institution of these various educational forums emphasized the need for transparency and communication with regard to the University’s leadership role, as well as promoted equity and ethics. (Scott 2002). Furthermore, these forums enabled President Scott to take an empathic approach towards the stakeholders’ concerns, and take the necessary actions to address those concerns.

The Adelphi example illustrates the positive impact of empathy when incorporated into the leader’s policymaking; a decision that proved to be significantly successful, in spite of the many challenges faced by the University. The University’s endeavor to become an “engaged campus” proved to be financially successful, as reflected in greatly enhanced enrollment and significantly increased funding. (Clancy, 2006; Adelphi University, 2010).

Ultimately, empathic engagement via a developed moral compass driven by a forceful and aware will was the reason for success. (Scott 2002).

All of this returns us to the connection between higher education and wealth equity. We are not arguing that wealth will be equally distributed. We are arguing, however, that we can raise the awareness of the centrality of the person, our mutual equality in our humanity and can use the educational system to provide increased mobility as well as economic rewards. The only possible hope is making people aware of their empathic ability, teaching them how to develop and manage it and, finally, of course, implementing a moral compass that understands, affirms and celebrates not only equality but generates at least a more adequate wealth distribution. The underpinning for all of this is a well-developed and informed act of will.

This is not just theory. In a disconcerting article in Scientific American entitled, “How Wealth Reduces Compassion” (Grewal 2012) we begin to see the impact not only of the disenfranchised population with a stake in the commonwealth but current research argues that those who have been successful in acquiring wealth equity, now respond negatively to those less fortunate. Clearly, a will-driven empathic engagement program needs to continue beyond the university and needs to be incorporated into business organizations as well. What we have described above could easily be adapted.

It is clear that the quest to achieve wealth equity via higher education continually requires the leader to adjust both his/her empathic self and manage his/her will to focus on concerns that transcend “feelings”.

At no time in our culture has an empathic educational intervention been more needed.

The Critical Variable that is Traditionally Absent

"Homines sunt voluntates" (men are wills).

What is the will? For our purposes, we operationalize the will using Rudolph J. Rummel’s (1975) definition:

The will is also power. It is that which exerts conscious control over a person's behavior; it is that power of choice between alternative actions;1 it is that which intentionally directs the mind toward thought or action. In short, will is a rational causality belonging to our, the power of practical reason.

St. Augustine, never at a loss for description of humanity with a clearly negative slant did equally capture the essence of a significant problem and one central to our paper on education and wealth equity. In reality, all of the cognitive training that could be quite easily achieved, does not address the condition sine qua non that for one to not only be empathic but to understand the conditions required on each of our part of induce significant change must have a strong and trained will that can move forward with an arena of adversity when needed. And, in fact, based on recent research, this trained will needs also to continually be “corrected” to return to empathic engagement even when economic success has been achieved. This is far more than mere cognitive understanding and empathic engagement because it requires the training of the will… a hotly contested issue…yet one that the great philosophers, often in disagreement (Aristotle vs. Sophocles) continue to argue can be achieved. Current advances in neuroscience further support that the brain continues to learn and modify itself as needed (Brothers 1989). In short, change can be accomplished in terms of will training and empathic ability but this needs continually to be reinforced and updated.

People need to take a position in life and such positions require a managing of emotions that are universal: anxiety and fear. While we are not arguing that the training of the will assures banishment and creates superheroes, it does assure a sense of direction and stamina in the face of adversity. Further, it allows one to self-discipline when one’s empathic engagement fails. One of the required positions for higher education leadership requires the leader to tie his/her moral compass as well as his/her will to producing an environment that is conducive to student growth and confidence to empower them to demand their rights and claim basic wealth equity.

It is, we suspect, normally in a crisis that one’s will becomes fully engaged. It was the ability to manage the fight/flight reaction so common in all of us where we are tested and, if the empathic bond is sufficiently in place and energized, we will take our own stand and energize others to do so. It is often observable in the ancient writings as well where the hero, as in the Aeneas announces “ego sum pius Aeneas” with all that entails in terms of presence, courage, stamina and will power. It is particularly moving because it touches the deep human desire to have that precise kind of will. But it does not come naturally or easily. It requires continual adaption of self to keep one’s eye on the prize which in this case is wealth equity.

Higher education remains the conduit to achieving wealth equity by a curriculum that enhances not only skills and understanding but by positioning the students to claim their own rightful place with its attendant wealth achievement. There is no shortcut to the process as it is morally fraught at every level as indicated by Cicero:

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.

Marcus Tullius Cicero, Selected Works, (1960), p. 177

Once one has established their goals as higher education leaders, they must connect it to their empathic sense and will development. This is not so difficult or far-fetched as it seems and requires what all training demands: commitment, repetition and precision. A simple example was from a mutual friend who suffers from ADHD. What his therapist insisted upon was that upon waking in the morning, he was to be “dressed to shoes.” In short, the day would begin with order no matter how tedious he might have found it.

A de more schedule is quintessential to will training. We must manage our day and manage our point of view. This is done by a fairly rigorous schedule and maintaining order in our daily lives. This requires continually staying focused and building in penalty functions when we fail. The Stoics knew of what they spoke.

The will’s function is to direct the various aspects of our lives and to manage the various issues that emerge. In order to achieve maximum will power, one must not allow oneself to be overcome by emotion. Depending on one’s temperament, this is not easily achieved. However, it is essential. When it comes to acquiring wealth, the topic is highly fraught and requires continually checking of the moral compass.

Actually, the “program” of training the will has been applied for millennia and are today reflected in some groups such as Stoic Societies, Philosophy Clubs, etc. What it actually involves is both simple and elegant and is easily implemented within the universities or any educational institution. It includes physical discipline and physical education, a controlled schedule which is, more or less, invariant, focusing on our own needs and the needs of others. This is achieved through the development and enhancement previously discussed. To achieve these goals, one must continually test and refocus their wills as well as surround themselves with those who support their vision.

Aristotle argues that we become better by noting the morally best people in our community and imitating them. His optimism is clear in his belief that one can continually improve oneself by imitation. This is where the central role of education and the educator comes into play significantly. The higher education leader must be the model par excellence to provide those desiring to develop their skills and enhance their wealth equity. It is a high moral concern that this be the case. It is among the only easily available ways that students can train their own wills by observing the rigor, empathy, scheduling, and other previously discussed virtues.

The most important component of training of the will requires the acquisition of moral exemplars (both in our lives and in history). Depending on one’s background, various models are available including historical figures, current people or saints.

To achieve this blend of training of the will as well as empathic engagement with others, it requires focus, precision, repletion, and discipline which include a physical health program, scheduling and commitment to transcending goals focusing on the reality that it is not a battle of wills but a blending of common wills into a unified whole. At this point, empathy and will become united…and achievable. Higher education leadership will be able to guide its charges toward the equity for which humanity searches…personal and economic success and wealth.

Conclusion

This paper has argued the importance of the creation of a moral compass, driven by empathy and a rigorously trained will in university leadership to develop a tighter relationship between education and wealth equity. Higher education remains a uniquely privileged venue through which the elusive goal of professional and economic advance can be achieved. It has become an established universal mode of access in today’s society to equip oneself for not only a fair portion of the available wealth but to support families and pass on the necessary modeling for success.

It remains, however, implausible that more than a small movement will occur in wealth distribution. Be that as it may, this paper has argued there are possibilities to approach the perennial moral issue that requires that all be given enough to survive with innate human dignity.

Equality,’ said Steerpike,’ is the thing. It is the only true and central premise from which constructive ideas can radiate freely and be operated without prejudice. Absolute equality of status. Equality of wealth. Equality of power.

Mervyn Peake, Titus Groan, (1982)