LearnHub

This question – rather dilemma – again has its root in the basic question – What is love (read ‘true’ love) for human beings? I don’t think it requires a great philosophical explanation as to what is the naturally cherished aspiration, common to all beings – from a newly born child to an old man, an introvert to an extrovert, selfish to altruist and so on – It is ‘Love’, ‘to be loved’! It is another matter that fear arises in any situation naturally liked by us out of our another feeling (fear) of “not losing such naturally liked/loved situation/person”. You would find such conflicts in all situations of life/nature. This is so because of our clinging too much and our one sided attitude to a particular situation/feeling. I believe as we grow and pass through our life experiences, we realise this (conflict) gradually and the need to train our attitude to be able to successfully cope up with all kinds of situations. With the right attitude, we should be able to rise above any fear that comes in our natural feeling of love!

I never bought into Machiavelli’s Prince ideas. The thing that always got me was- let’s say everyone started behaving according to his principles. What would happen then? Everyone would backstab and manipulate each other for more power, which would cause power to constantly fluctuate between individuals, resulting in a chaotic environment.

Basically, I’d rather be loved than feared. As a leader I’ve tried both, and I actually managed to find a nice combination, but being solely feared would result in a very ineffective form of leadership that causes compliance but no committment, in my opinion.

I agree with oLahav’s sentiment. May elaborate later.

Darn, I thought someone would at least agree a bit with what he has to say. I would have to agree with Machiavelli. Obviously I think it’s a very good thing to be loved, as a person or a leader, but when that option is unavailable or if you are in a situation where you want to be in control, sometimes it’s better to be feared. Not necessarily that one should be scared OF you, but rather scared of what would happen WITHOUT you. That’s the difference between being able to let something go as opposed to wanting to have it forever.

I think his ideas are realistic in the sense that he considers stability (political or otherwise) the most important. It’s easier to flake on someone you love than on someone you fear.