Machiavelli’s view of human nature.
Machiavelli has long been required reading for everyone intrested in politics and power. In The Prince Niccolo M
achiavelli presents a unique view on governing a state. Machiavelli believes the ruling Prince should be the only authority that
should determine every aspect of the state and put in effect a policy which would serve his best interests. These interests
were gaining, maintaining, and expanding his political power. (Machiavelli,5). His understanding of human nature was a
complete contradiction of what everyone believed and taught. Machiavelli strongly promoted a physical society and felt
morality was not necessary but in fact stood in the way of an effectively governed principality. (Machiavelli,5). Although in
some cases Machiavelli's suggestions seem harsh and immoral one must remember that these views were derived from his
concern for the welfare of his country.
At Machiavelli's time everyone believed that an individual had much to offer to the well being of the state, Machiavelli
was quick to mock human nature. He truly believed that humans are not ready to serve their country unless there is a special
benefit to them as individuals. Machiavelli further goes on to question the loyalty of the citizens and advises the Prince that men
never keep their word to you so you should never keep youre word to them. (Machiavelli,6). However, Machiavelli did not
feel that a Prince should mistreat the citizens. This suggestion is only to serve the Prince's best interests.
If a prince can not be both feared and loved, Machiavelli suggests, it would be better for him to be feared by the citizens
within his own principality. He makes the generalization that men are, "ungrateful, fickle, liars, and deceivers they shun danger
and greedy for profit”.(Machiavelli, 54). He characterizes men as being self centered and not willing to act in the best interest of
the state. When the ruler is in danger they turn against him. Machiavelli reinforces the prince's need to be feared by stating: “
Men worry less about doing an injusry to one who makes himself loved than to one who makes himself feard. For love is
secured by a bond of gratitude which men, wretched creatures that they are, break when it is to their advantage to do so; but
fear is strengthened by a dread of punishement which is always effective.”...
... middle of paper ...
...w Italy beseeches God to send someone to save her from those barbarous
cruelties and outrages; see how eager and willing the country is to
follow a banner, if someone will raise it.18
Although Italy had become the center of intellectual, artistic and
cultural development, Machiavelli did not feel these qualities would
help in securing Italy's political future. His opinion was that Italy
required a leader who could have complete control over Italy's citizens
and institutions. One way of maintaining control of was to institute a
secular form of government. This would allow the prince to govern
without being morally bound. Machiavelli's view of human nature was not
in accord to that of humanists who felt that an individual could greatly
contribute to the well being of the society. Machiavelli, however felt
that people generally tended to work for their own best interests and
gave little obligation to the well being of the state.
Although Machiavelli doubted that this form of government could ever be
established it did appear several years after he wrote The Prince.
Machiavelli has become to be regarded as "the founder of modern day,
secular politics."
Maggie is introduced into the storyline quite subtle and quickly becomes the main focus of attention by the other three main characters. From the beginning, Maggie is a harsh contrast to the slum environment she has to endure. She "blossomed in a mud puddle ... a most rare and wonderful production of a tenement district, a pretty girl" (16) that not only had the physical beauty that her family seemed to lack, but also the hope that she could be better than what was around in her environment. Therefore, the slum environment that surrounds her contrasts her character greatly. "None of the dirt of Rum Alley was in her veins" (16) as she became the talk of numerous males in the neighborhood.
Machiavelli's realization of the penultimate import of the people is probably most significant reason his book holds so much influence on realpolitik. He writes, "it is essential for a prince to possess the good will and affections his people, otherwise he will be utterly without support in time of adversity." (Chapter 9). Clearly, Machiavelli understands the source of power within a princely republic lay with the people, whom the prince must constantly court. No other political philosopher before him had ever given much significance to those being governed. The reason that Machiavelli felt that the subjects were vital to the prince maintaining his rule was because the implications of earning the hatred and ill will of the people are dire for the political future of both the state and the prince. Of the two sources of attack the prince must fear, one is a conspiracy from within inspired by the hatred of the people (Chapter 19). Additionally, the prince must be aware that actions of his intermediaries can reflect upon himself. That is, if his army is cruel and brutish towards the people, the people will turn their hatred upon the prince, who is seen to tacitly condone the actions of the army. ...
In The Prince, Machiavelli separates ethics from politics. His approach to politics, as outlined in The Prince, is strictly practical. Machiavelli is less concerned with what is right and just, and instead with what will lead to the fortification of the government and the sustainment of power. Machiavelli believed that a ruler should use any means necessary to obtain and sustain power. He says, “…people judge by outcome. So if a ruler wins wars and holds onto power, the means he has employed will always be judged honorable, and everyone will praise them” (Machiavelli, 55). According to Machiavelli, the ends of an action justify the means (Machiavelli, 55). His motivation for these views in The Prince was the reunification of the Italian city-states (Machiavelli, 78-79). Machiavelli wanted Italy to return to its glory of the Roman Empire (Machiavelli 78-79). Some of the beliefs of Machiavelli could be perceived as evil and cruel, but he found them necessary. Machiavelli was not concerned with making people happy. His purpose was outcome and success, and in his opinion, the only way to be successful was to be realistic. These views of Machiavelli could classify him as one of the earliest modern
A prince should not concern himself with living virtuously, but rather with acting so as to achieve the most practical benefit. Such vices are truly evil if they endanger the state, but when vices are employed in the proper interests of the state, a prince must not be influenced by condemnation from other men. Machiavelli argues that a prince should always try to appear virtuous, but that acting virtuously for virtue’s sake can prove detrimental. Every action the prince takes must be considered in light of its effect on the state, not in terms of its intrinsic moral value. Machiavelli criticizes the concept of a “good life” reflected in the Aristotelian doctrine that demands virtuous actions in all types of behavior. But, a prince must break his promises when they put him at a disadvantage and when the reasons for which he made the promises no longer exist. In any case, promises are never something on which a prince can rely, since men are by nature wretched and deceitful. A prince should be a master of deception. Machiavelli does not argue that a prince should actively avoid doing what is good but that, if necessary, a prince must be prepared to act
Politics could not exist without the concept of morality. As Walzer states, “moral life is a social phenomenon, and it is constituted at least in part by rules, the knowing of which (and perhaps the making of which) we share with our fellows” (Dirty Hands, page 170). The same definition could be used to define a law, and one could argue that a law is just a political moral. Political life is also a social phenomenon, constituted by rules, which are acknowledged and created by our peers. Laws are political extensions of our morals, the commonly agreed upon virtues by which we live our lives. As the human race, we have universally agreed upon morals we expected to abide by. As a politician is an extension, not an exception from, the state, the
People live in a society that encourages getting as many things done as quickly as possible. Whether they realize it or not, multitasking as become a part of their everyday lives. They perform multiple tasks at the same time in order to save time. They use multiple electronics to take more in all at once. Multitasking can seem to be the more efficient way to handle things because people can spend the same amount of time on several tasks as opposed to just one. However, they do not stop to think of the amount of effort it takes the multitask and the consequences that can come along with it. Several experiments have been performed to determine just how detrimental multitasking can be. Attempting any form of multitasking
Machiavelli says that “If a ruler who wants always to act honorably is surrounded by many unscrupulous men his downfall is inevitable” and if a ruler want to remains his power must be prepared to act immorally.
Written almost 500 years ago, Niccolo Machiavelli’s “The Prince” brings forward a new definition of virtue. Machiavelli’s definition argued against the concept brought forward by the Catholic Church. Machiavelli did not impose any thoughts of his own, rather he wrote from his experience and whatever philosophy that lead to actions which essentially produced effective outcomes in the political scene of Italy and in other countries. While Machiavelli is still criticized for his notions, the truth is that, consciously or subconsciously we are all thinking for our own benefit and going at length to achieve it. On matters of power where there is much to gain and a lot more to lose, the concept of Machiavelli’s virtue of “doing what needs to be done” applies rigorously to our modern politics and thus “The Prince” still serves as a suitable political treatise in the 21st century.
For all of Machiavelli’s ruthlessness and espousal of deceit, he knew the value of authenticity and relying on his administration. A true leader cannot achieve greatness alone. Machiavelli says that the prince is the state, and the state is the prince. This means that whatever vision and principles the leader holds in the highest regard, they must be known to the state so that they can be realized. He believed that no matter how a prince was elected, his success would depend largely on his ministers. Collaboration between a prince and ministers would create an atmosphere of harmony and camaraderie, highly reducing the chances of rebellion. Without the support and cooperation of the people, military action is not possible, expansion is not possible and most importantly, governance is not possible. If a leader does not satisfy the needs of the people, they have the power to overthrow him through strength in numbers. Thus, a leader depends just as much on the people as they do on him. A leader must be able to convince the people to buy into his visio...
Machiavelli’s “The Prince” brought up some controversial characteristics on what a Machiavellian ruler is. The characteristic that was most stressed was that “A prince must have no other objective, no other thought, nor take up any profession but that of war.”(Machiavelli 37). With a main focus on the art of war a ruler can protect the state he governs from attacks against him and his state. Machiavelli offers us an analogy to prove the importance of war. He speaks of two men: one armed and one unarmed. He tells us how it would be unrealistic to believe that the armed man would obey the unarmed man. It would also be unreasonable to expect that the unarmed man would feel safe and secure if is servant held a weapon that could cause death. The unarmed man would feel suspicious of the armed man and the armed man would feel contempt for the unarmed man ruling him, so cooperation would be unattainable. He brings the analogy at an end when he speaks of a prince who does not understand the art of war is like an unarmed man attempting to lead the armed man. Another important characteristic of a prince is to be feared rather than loved. This is because with fear comes respect and less chance for a revolt. Anyone who does not agree with the ruling style of the prince will stand idly by because they fear the wrath of the prince should they be caught before they succeed. Though fear is a great emotion to invoke in the people, one must be sure not to go so far as to be hated because that could cause severe implications. Love is a great tool in ruling a state, but in times of war people are likely to go against their prince because they are angered by the effects of the war. Since the prince is not feared they are susceptible to an attack becaus...
Machiavelli in his famous book “The Prince” describes the necessary characteristics for a strong and successful leader. He believes that one of the most important characteristics is to rule in favor of his government and to hold power in his hands. Power is an essential aspect of Machiavelli’s theory, and a leader should do whatever it takes to keep it for the safety of his country because “the ends justifies the means.” To attain and preserve the power, a leader should rather be feared than loved by his people, but it is vital not to be hated. As he states, “anyone compelled to choose will find far greater security in being feared than in being loved.” If a leader is feared, the people are less likely to revolt, and in the end, only a threat of punishment can guarantee obedienc...
Machiavelli believes that a government should be very structured, controlled, and powerful. He makes it known that the only priorities of a prince are war, the institutions, and discipline. His writings describes how it is more important for a prince to be practical than moral. This is shown where he writes, "in order to maintain the state he is often obliged to act against his promise, against charity, against humanity, and against religion" (47). In addition, Machiavelli argues that a prince may have to be cunning and deceitful in order to maintain political power. He takes the stance that it is better for the prince to be feared than loved. His view of how a government should run and his unethical conduct are both early signs of dictatorship.
Machiavelli’s views were drastically different from other humanists at his time. He strongly promoted a secular society and felt morality was not necessary but stood in the way of a successfully governed state. He stated that people generally tended to work for their own best interests and gave little thought to the well being of the state. He distrusted citizens saying, “In time of adversity, when a state is in need of its citizens, there are few to be found.” In his writings in The Prince, he constantly questioned the citizens’ loyalty and warned for the leaders to be wary in trusting citizens. His radical and distrusting thoughts on human nature were derived out of concern for Italy’s then unstable government. Machiavelli also had a s...
Machiavelli believed human nature is manipulative and unchangeable for the better, unlike More who believed human nature can be improved and changed for the better. For example, Machiavelli stated that a prince should be ruthless and use force to gain and maintain power because people in real life are vicious and selfish. In Chapter VI, he explained that people can easily be managed at first, but they are difficult to control over a period of time. He wrote “the nature of the people is variable, and whilst it is easy to persuade them, it is difficult to keep them in that persuasion. And thus it is necessary to take such measure, that, when they believe no longer, it may be possible to make them believe by force” (The Prince, Chapter VI, pg. 2). Here it is proven that a prince who relies on his own ability and force will succeed better than just relying on his own ability, when dealing with the people. He also advised the prince that it is better for the prince to be both loved and feared, but when he cannot be both, then it is better to be feared. Machiavelli again argued that people by nature are
The evolution of mass media have impacted american culture in many ways. Technology advances played a role in mass media changes. Traditional media and emerging media are sourcecs people depend on to get information such as the latest news and events. Mass media consists of all means of communication intended to reach a genral, public audience. Some examples of mass media include; newspapers, magazines, flyers, bill boards, automated telemarketing, radio broadcast, televison broadcst, articles on the internet and social media post. Mass media indirectly affects cultures. Different cultures are affected by the evolution of mass media due to a number of factors.