Years could go by after that one boy or that one girl left your life before you start accepting that nobody will ever take up the same amount of space as they did. According to Machiavelli, to be an effective ruler, one must rule without a moral conscience, because feelings and emotions would interfere with difficult decisions. Inducing fear upon his subjects with cruelty will keep them united and loyal. Nobody can despoil these rights without suitable reason. If it happens again I will be happy. While he sees aggression and war as vital to the success of any leadership, this is not exactly something that exists for its own sake.
You think you are doing something nice by letting them love you, and this may make you cruel. Maybe they master some, tap a network of for others, and hire people to do the rest. Yet there are some in positions of power and authority, who would disagree, believing that fear achieves more. Leah wrote about meeting a man who reminded her of her first husband. It has to be enough to encourage obedience without tipping the scale.
If you're a reader of LessWrong at all, you'll love it. In 20+ years of working on career issues, I estimate that I have encountered more who lead by fear sticks, command and control style , rather than by love carrots, collaboration style. And sometimes people keep parts of themselves buried under their skin. The author seems to not realize, or account for, the sizable contingent of people - both single and married - who have fallen in love, but must still live with unrequited love every day, because the one who is loved can't, or won't, return the affection. I want to be optimistic that I will be blessed to feel that same love again one day. As a realist, Machiavelli understood that, at times, loyalty had to be bought, not earned.
In his famous statement, Macchiavelli argued that being feared is better than being loved. Sure, love that's lost hurts. For the initiator has the enmity of all who would profit by the preservation of the old institution and merely lukewarm defenders in those who gain by the new ones. Nevertheless a prince ought to inspire fear in such a way that, if he does not win love, he avoids hatred; because he can endure very well being feared whilst he is not hated, which will always be as long as he abstains from the property of his citizens and subjects and from their women. In other studies, married people are divided by the quality of their marriage, or their economic or class status, or any of a wide array of other variables. This kind of love never hurts you, and never makes you feel left alone! These laws allowed the U. Furthermore, while I'm not ready to seek a new relationship at this time, I fully intend to seek out a mutually loving relationship someday in the future.
It may be answered that one should wish to be both, but, because it is difficult to unite them in one person, it is much safer to be feared than loved, when, of the two, either must be dispensed with. But what about dating and love? For instance, even though he discusses at length the times when violence is a necessary evil, he does not condone wholesale cruelty at all times. Is it better to have loved and lost? I think people who wrote this article are confusing real love with lust. It brings pretty amazing though usually hard to predict results. I was at a party in Harleysville near Lansdale last weekend and two people asked if I had a man in my life. Family quarrels are bitter things but are of slightest importance. Are you prioritizing meditation, quiet reflection or some other mindfulness practice in your regular schedule? People more often respond to fear than to compassion and thus a prince must endeavor at the very least to make his subjects fear him.
Our on-and-off romance was high-stress, but I was completely invested. I lamented over all the time I had wasted on someone who was never going to love me the way I did him. That keeps wanton destruction and arbitrary betrayals in check. What type of leader are you? Weird to read the guy's perspective. You just have to flexible. Fear is an unpleasant caused by the threat of danger, pain or harm. 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.
All my self-worth had been jeopardized by the destructive properties of my past relationship. Finally, going back to the initial question that motivated this post is it better to have loved and lost. There is something else important about the published literature on marital status. Nobody can replace my husband - he was one of a kind! It works well, reads well, lots of good insights. It truly is better to have loved and lost. If you were to ask single people about such experiences and plot the lifelines of their happiness the same way the lifelines of the once-married are typically plotted, I think you would see something similar. As I've said before in this space, I think we should embrace big, broad meanings of love.
Dick Morris, in The New Prince, argues that the modern choice is between being aggressive and being conciliatory. Those people afraid to offer innovative ideas, and afraid to approach the feared person with even the simplest request work under duress, as stress and resentment build, disgusted to go to work, but fearing to do anything other than what the boss demands. I remembered this quote that says I did the right thing. If not, you still might like it. Simple happiness is not the goal in life. This is the fastest and easiest way to grow your audience and get your writing in front of new people. Single people may experience just as profound of a loss when it comes to a significant other not a spouse but that's just a label discrepencey.