Is it Better to be Feared Than Loved?

                When referring to how to lead a group of people, a common and popular question asks: Is it better to be feared or loved? Now, most people may look at this and say "loved, of course" without giving it any thought. This is always true in two instances. One, individually, it is better to be loved by individual people, however I am discussing about leading a group. And two, in a perfect world, this would be totally and completely true. However, this world is far from perfect. I wish to look into the pros and cons of being feared by a group of people that you are in charge of.

                Fear can be very powerful as both a tool and an enemy to us. When making a group of people follow you, fear is used as a tool more than one may think. Throughout history fear has been used to control and dominate others. It is frowned upon by most society, yes, but if we think about it, fear is a much more logical answer than to be loved. Wars are not solved with love most of the time (perhaps there can be a marriage between two high ranking officials from both sides), but other than that wars are not won by love. To win a war, one side must invoke enough fear into the opponent to the point where they surrender or, they completely overpower the opponent. And even in matches in a much smaller scale, such as sports or simple board games, fear can be used. If enough fear is invoked it makes them nervous, and does not allow that person to think clearly. Intimidation can even be seen in the animal kingdom. Gorillas for instance, the silverback, who is the leader of the pack, makes himself appear larger and tougher than the other gorillas. If anyone challenges the silverback, they can ether beat the previous leader and become even more feared than he was, or they could be beaten down and looked down upon. This principle of  loss and victory applies to human society as well as gorillas. Each loss and victory for a county will determine how the rest of the world looks at them. If someone loses a war, they are look at as weak, and if they win, they are feared as a mighty country. However, there are downsides to this powerful tool. If one gains too much power this way, people may try to split off, and over through the government. There have also been many revolutionists and anarchists in history. And some succeeded (such as the American and French revolution), and others failed terribly (The Revolutions of 1848). This shows fear can be a powerful tool, but it can backfire.

                Love. According to the Beatles, "all you need is love". And, if everyone loved each other, this would be a perfect world but, as I have stated, this is not a perfect world. And, some may argue (like myself) that with the world constantly growing darker and harder to live in, we will need more love for one another to survive, but this is a different topic. I believe that a ruler should be loving, and loved. As I have stated though, love will not end wars typically, there needs to be an element of fear upon other opposing groups. So, I concluded that a ideal leader would have both qualities, and this would be respect. Respect is composed of many elements. From your followers point of view, they look up to you, care for you, but understand that you have earned that rank, and you are there to help them. And to your enemies, you are not feared to the point where they will start a war or grudge match against you, but they do not look down upon you either. This is the perfect median between love and fear, but respect is closer to love than fear. So, in conclusion I believe, over all  it is indeed better to be loved over feared.              

Great Minds

     Madness. By definition, madness is a state of mental instability which may cause irrational and/or unnatural behavior. Is it really this though? I have a different idea of what is crazy and what is clever. I think society has trouble seeing the difference between a great mind, and a madman. If society or just any person does not understand someone or something, they consider it alien or different, and they call it insanity. Those with great minds are not insane, they just see things differently than the rest. They are just above the crowd, they deviate from the norm. That is not mental instability, their mind is just more in tune to the world around them. However, on the flipside to this, just because one is not mentally or emotionally unstable does not mean that they are normal. Ian Fleming wrote in his book Dr. No:

                " You are right, Mr. Bond. That is just what I am, a maniac. All the greatest men are maniacs. They are possessed by a mania that drives them towards their goal. The great scientists, the philosophers, the religious leaders — all maniacs."

                Anyone who aspires to and does something great with their genius can be considered a maniac. According to the dictionary, a maniac can be defined as "any intemperate or overly zealous or enthusiastic person". So, if someone is enthusiastic about doing something, and do it well, they can be considered a "maniac". So indeed, in the words of Dr. No the greatest scientists, thinkers, philosophers, innovators, inventors, leaders, etc. were all maniacs. There is a difference, in my opinion, from a crazy madman and a maniacal philosopher.

 

                You are probably familiar with the phrase: "All great minds think alike". I disagree with this phrase. Sure, sometimes it is true that great minds are capable of thinking, and seeing the same things, however I believe that it is the ability to see things differently that makes a great mind great. If you give three different people the same problem, a paradox with no real or correct answer, such as:

If someone says "I always lie", are they telling the truth? Or are they lying?  

                Two of them may say it is impossible to tell if this man is lying or not, and they are right in a sense, there is no answer. But, a cleverer mind may say, it is a paradox, and if there is no real answer, how can stating “it is impossible” not be an answer. Concluding that impossibility is an answer, will lead to the conclusion that a paradox itself is another paradox. Anyone who thinks like that would surely be called crazy by today’s society. But, even if his answer (or non-answer) is crazy, he is still smart because he looked beyond the norm of just saying it is impossible. A great mind is a great blade forged in the fires of experience. Weak minds are pieces of metal rusting from lack of use and care. With a great mind you can overpower any problem and person. This is why it is important to think outside the box, and not be afraid to blaze your own trail in life.

In the Beginning There was a Philosopher

     The world continues to spin through space and through time as we know it. That is the truth; it has been proven time and time again. Our world just continues to turn and has been for millions of years, and will continue to do so for years to come. This is one way to view the world around us, a large mass of various elements, and life, spinning in space and and revolving around a star. That is the scientific view of things, and yes, it is true, however, I wish to look deeper into the world around us. Here I shall record my philosophical thoughts and ideas. So, as the world continues to turn, so shall my mind. The Islamic philosopher Al-Farabi once compared philosophy to “An art, which has an aim to achieve the beauty” and here, I hope to be able to paint a picture with my words. These will be the adventures of an all too curious mind.

 

                “A serious and good philosophical work could be written consisting entirely of jokes.” The philosopher, Ludwig Wittgenstein, said that, and I completely agree. Life is full of comedic moments, whether or not we recognize them at the time, they are there. They are those moments that seem to suck at first, but as you look back at them, you laugh. The seemingly hard times sometimes provide the best stories and memories later on. Those tough moments make us stronger physically or mentally, and a lot of times, both. And, if it did not make us stronger, than we would not laugh at it in the future, we laugh at our hard times because we overcame them. And, if we look back and complain and regret our trials then we have not grown at all. So, a good philosophical work can very easily be made of jokes. Experiences that make us laugh, is that not all there is to philosophy? Experience and our ideas on it? And if it is funny, that makes thinking all the better.