Machiavelli, the well-known philosopher of the Italian Renaissance, poses this question in this famous book excerpt The Morals of the Prince: "is it better to be loved than feared, or vice versa?" Machiavelli answers his own question, arguing that a prince is much safer being feared than being loved. Inducing fear upon his subjects with cruelty will keep them united and loyal. Those who are fearful of a person of any authority are more inclined not to cross the boundary of disrespect, for fear of punishment. Without a doubt, being loved is desired and has a greater value compared to being feared. Love has the power to nurture, support and ultimately, liberate; fear restricts, denies and imprisons. Personal growth and human achievement thrive on love, while fear hampers and destroys potential. Many people who aspire to be feared actually are fearful people themselves. They command respect rather than earning it, but they desperately want it all the same. To allow ourselves to be loved we have to also allow ourselves to be vulnerable. If we are very fearful people then we may feel that we need to form a protective emotional barrier around ourselves and shut out love. When this happens we may come across to others as cold and unfeeling. At the same time we may want to have as much control as possible, including control over other people. Being loved is not about having to abandon discipline, or being soft and fuzzy. For me, love means that the support, instruction, good example and encouragement help others towards freedom and goodness. It brings respect, emulation and admiration. Yet there are some in positions of power and authority, who would disagree, believing that fear achieves more. A dictatorial and rigid boss will rule by fear. Fear of the consequences, for workers, if they cannot meet his or her demands, is the way such a person chooses to operate. The unfortunate people who have to work for such a tyrant will be afraid of losing their jobs. Those...
...Is it better to be Feared or Loved?
In today’s society princess, kings and rulers are few but our government stands on the same principles and views of those in leadership position. To fear or to be feared means to reverence or respect those in higher position. To love or to be loved is an essential part of life, but to be feared by individual is earned. Therefore I believe that to befeared is best when it comes to authority.
In the early 1500s kings, princes, and rulers were set both based on their characteristics. This was one of the things that Niccolo Machiavelli and Cesare Borgia expressed. Chapter 15 concerning things for which men, and especially princes, or praised or blamed the author(s) stated that “for many have pictured republics and principalities which in fact have never been known or seen, because how one lives is so far distant from how one ought to live, that he who neglects what is done for what ought to be done, for a man who wishes to act entirely up to his professions of virtue soon meets with what destroys him among so much that is evil”(Edward.Ch 15.The Prince. United States,Bantam,1513.Print) That is saying that fear preserves you by a dread of punishment which never fails which shows that it is better to show love or friendship in such power.
Men in leading positions in today’s society say much for our nation. As civil...
...TO BE LOVED OR FEARED AS A LEADER?
Leaders in fields ranging from military and politics to business and even education have been posed with the choice of instilling love or fear among their respective followers. Traits like warmth and trustworthiness of a leader instill love among followers and fear of a leader originates mostly from his strength and competence. Although there are numerous other traits in a leader, warmth and strength are the most influential. According to psychology, a major part of other people's perception about a person is determined by these two dimensions of personality (Cuddy, Kohut and Neffinger, 2013, p. 56).
The dilemma of the choice between these two is inherently present in the nature of the two extremes i.e. either of the choices will make you fall at the opposing ends of the human emotional spectrum. It is interesting to note that the question of choosing between the two extremes is not a new one . Tracing this conundrum back to the sixteenth century takes us to the writings of Machiavelli. His political philosophy in 'The Prince' acknowledges the best leaders to command both fear and love. Having said that, Machiavelli recognizes the opposite polarity of the two emotions and maintains that since it is difficult to combine both in one person, it is better to be feared as a leader than to be loved (Machiavelli, 2003, p.53).
Today, about five hundred years later,...
...It is better to be feared than loved
Hello everyone, my name is Catarina and with Carolina and Rafael’s help, we are going to prove how and why we feel this statement is wrong. We believe that is way better to be loved than feared.
Lets start with simple definitions. Fear is an unpleasant caused by the threat of danger, pain or harm. Why would you want people to feel this way about you? Do you think people will respect you more because they fear you? To be loved is to be held in deep affection, cherished by someone.
Although the statement by Machiavelli is well known, and although he claims that to be feared is better than to be loved, I feel the opposite. How can we let one man in History, decide on which is better? His reasons against love are not well justified. Hs main argument is that if we continue to be generous, those around us will want more.
Simple gestures such as being kind to one another or simply smile can show love and it is a much better way to know that people around you care about you. If you think like that, you understand that love has nothing to do with what you are expecting to get, only with what you are expecting to give, which is everything in relationships.
Think about relations based on fear. Couples that stay together because they are afraid of the other person. In my opinion,...
...In The Prince, Machiavelli states that it is better to be hated then loved as a leader. I disagree with him, and say that it is much better to be loved then hated. There are certain people, like Alexander the Great and Caesar who were loved when they ruled, there is human nature that affects the way people respond to things, and how a prince treats his people.
Through out the ages there have been many good and bad rulers. Some of them ruler by fear, but some, like Caesar and Alexander the Great ruled by love. Caesar made most of Rome happy by giving them more rights and freedom to do what they wanted. I know he was assassinated, but that was only because a select few started to fear him. Alexander the Great was a loved ruler because he let the areas that he conquered live like they usually did. He also allowed religious tolerance so that everyone under his empire would remain happy. Sometimes human nature has an affect on whether someone is loved or hated.
Human nature can also affect if a ruler is loved or hated. Some people are naturally kind and some people aren’t. Some people can trust someone instantly, and some people have to build trust. If the people in a prince’s country dislike him, they will probably create a plot to kill him. So, a prince must treat all of the people who live in his country with respect.
Finally, if a prince loves...
...It’s Better To Be Feared Than Loved
It is easier to rule with terror and fear than to force the people to be happy and to love the
ruler. According to Machiavelli, to be an effective ruler, one must rule without a moral
conscience, because feelings and emotions would interfere with difficult decisions. In the play,
Macbeth by William Shakespeare, Macbeth is a notorious leader who rules with the power of
fear among his people and leaves behind his moral conscience. Macbeth is a successful ruler
with terror because he causes Duncan’s heirs, Donalbain and Malcolm to flee Scotland, he gains
authority quickly and with little suspicion, and displays acts of justice towards Macduff.
Macbeth instills fear among Duncan’s heirs who are supposed to take the throne if
Duncan was to die. After everyone discovers that Duncan had been murdered, Donalbain and
Malcolm acts quickly and flees Scotland in order to protect themselves. Donalbain says to
Malcolm, “What should be spoken here, where our fate, hide in an auger hole, may rush and
seize us? Let’s away. Our tears are not yet brewed” (II.iii.12-15). Because of Macbeth’s actions,
he successfully takes control and causes Donalbain and Malcolm to flee. This makes it easier for
Macbeth to become king. They both agree to separate, and Malcolm says, “What will you do?
Let’s not consort with them. To show an unfelt sorrow is an office which the false man does say.
I’ll to England”...
...Although times have changed and centuries have passed by, some parts of life will always remain the same. The relationship between a man and a woman is complicated . Count Baldasarre Castiglione described the difficulties of these in his book, The Courtier, where he describes the perfect courtier. The book, at some point, describes the benefits of Platonic relationships over sensual ones. One recurring theme that sensual relationships often bear is pain. During the Sixteenth Century, Sir Thomas Wyatt wrote love songs. One in particular "Farewell, Love," is about loss and pain. The liberal ways of the nineteen hundreds has brought to light different types of "acceptable" relationships and practices, but still we cannot avoid the pain of love. Irving Kahal wrote "I'll Be Seeing You," which shows love lost in a modern love song.
Wyatt's poem can be read in two different ways. Either the author means what he says and really feels "Thy baited hooks shall tangle me no more," or it is just a hurt man trying to rationalize what he has no control over. The former is most likely, but seems too rational. "And 'scape forth since liberty is lever," shows that he escaped from her grasp. Wyatt here is portraying the author as a victim who has been freed. Freed of what though? That is the issue.
The title "Farewell, Love" may sound as if it is directed at a specific person. However, it has a double meaning. I believe there is no single "Love" he is referring to,...
...rule effectively while acting ethically and morally to avoid chaos and destruction. However, as history has shown us this has not been an easy endeavor and very few rulers have been able to accomplish this. "This leads us to a question that is in dispute: Is it better to be loved than feared, or vice versa?" (Machiavelli, 51) An effective ruler would be one that relies upon fear without hatred, rather than love, as described by Niccolo Machiavelli in his book The Prince.
In a perfect world all people would be good-hearted, all would treat each other equally, and all would follow and respect the rules of society. Machiavelli points out that people tend to focus how the world should be rather than how it is. "Let us leave to one side, then, all discussion of imaginary rulers and talk about practical realities." (Machiavelli, 48) It is easier to complain about problems and society than it is to become a leader and produce positive change. All individuals have different perceptions of what it takes to keep order in a world where not all is good and not everyone gets along. It is easy for one to discuss ideals of how things ought to be, and to use reality to form a dream of something different that we believe would be better than the current state of affairs. Dreams though can not be actualized without action, and all the discussion in the world will accomplish nothing if everyone sits idly by. We all want peace, and in...
The Chinese Exclusion Act
The United States of America is a typical country that stresses fairer for people. Americans advocate that everyone should be free and equal. They emphasize the basic rights of humans. In the Declaration of Independence, it says people have three unalienable rights, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Nobody can despoil these rights without suitable reason. But, after a hundred years that the Declaration of Independence was passed, the American government passed a very unfair federal law. It unreasonably deprived these unalienable rights of the group of people who live in America. They lost liberty and were treated unfairly. The act was named The Chinese Exclusion Act.
The Chinese Exclusion Act was signed by Chester A. Arthur on May 6, 1882, following revisions made in 1880 to the Burlingame Treaty of 1868. These laws allowed the U.S. to suspend Chinese immigration, a ban that was intended to last 10 years.
The background of the act
During 1848 to 1865, the first group of Chinese immigrated to America with the California Gold Rush. They continued to immigrate with the large labor projects, such as the First Transcontinental Railroad. At that time, a lot of Chinese immigrated to America. During the early stages of the gold rush, surface gold was abundant, and Americans tolerated the Chinese took the gold. But later, the gold was less and less, the white men began to hate Chinese labors. They said the gold was belonged...