To be a leader is it wiser to be loved or feared?

Question

I had to re-ask this question because I think I needed to expand on it a little more for it to catch ppl's eye, and besides it is more unique than "Whats the meaning of life???" i SWEAR im getting tired of seeing tht question on here.

Answer 1

A wise question.

Love is the true opposite to fear, not hate.

Love is admiration for, and a consequent drawing toward something.
Fear is a disapprobation for and a consequent drawing away from something.

Hate is the active form of fear--used against a present danger.
Affection is the active form of love--used toward a present
admirability.

So the answr to your question is "love is greatly the better quality in a leader"; it is respect, admiration-and these qualities cause someone to listen to, and want to agree with a "leader" before he even announces his progress and aim.
Fear would do the opposite--it would cause people to demur, run from or sabotage a hated program quite soon, any way they could.

Answer 2

The most effective leaders are the most loved, admired and respected because of wisdom)and not the most hated and reviled.
Effectiveness is the measure of a man attempting to lead.

The fearsome might be able to save money (cents)by belittling the employees beneath him to milk the maximum work for the littlest pay.
When that happens, all the better or the best employees will look elsewhere for better workplace, take the companys vulnerabilties and secrets with them, and eventually feed it all to the competitor.

Answer 3

Both. It depends on the goal the leader has been tasked with accomplishing.

People love something because they get something in return for their love, whether it be a physicality or mental thought. So the leader must provide something in return for the love.

People fear something because of the pain or loss it could cause. In this case, if the leader is not followed, I will lose something, physical or mental. The leader must give nothing.

With the above argument, perhaps the feared leader could be considered wiser since they do not have to give anything up to be the leader. Otherwise a loved leader may have to sacrifice themselves to remain loved.

Answer 4

Depends on what you need. Jesus, son of Mary, was feared during his lifetime, by both the Roman administrators, and the secular leaders of the local church organization. Yet, long term, he is loved under the concept of Son of God, originator of the New Testament of the Bible, and founding concept of the Christian churches. Mahatma Ghandi was hardly ever feared during his life, as he too promoted non-violent protest, but India is again a free and independent country by his actions - yet both were killed by people of their day. Ditto, Martin Luther King, Anwar Sadat, and practically everyone else who has stopped and said, "Let's not be killing each other anymore". Makes you think, doesn't it?

Answer 5

In my opinion its best to be loved because that way fewer people will be out to kill you.
If you were feared you would probably be quite unhappy as well considering that people are likely to hate you.. although perhaps you would feel more powerful because you would have more control over people as they would be scared of what would happen if they did/didnt do something.

Answer 6

Both, like a parents relationship with their children, its best to be loved and feared.

I believe if you pick just one or the other i'd say love.

You can pick....

Saddam Hussein (however you spell it)

or

George Washington

Love would be better.

Answer 7

It is wiser to be loved.... who wants to be hated? People will talk about you for years to come. And u have no fear of rebellion.

Answer 8

thats a deep question.
but i would rather be feared than loved
+ i agree with you about the meaning of life thing

Answer 9

"Would I rather be feared or loved?
"Um, easy, both.
"I want people to be afraid of how much they love me."

--Michael Scott, "The Office"

Respected is best

Answer 10

Loved.

Love always wins out. Fear breads contempt.