‘The Prince’ was the most largely known of Machiavelli’s bodies of work. The tome was so controversial that it was placed on the Papal index of banned books in 1559. The adjective “Machiavellian” is commonly used as a synonym for a rapacious, shrewd and ruthless power seeker and Machiavelli was infamous for being ‘evil’. However he wasn't actually evil, he was advocating good virtuous behaviour as a general rule. He just recognized that in reality not every situation can be solved by virtuous means. The meanings behind both phronesis and virtù illustrate the differences between Machiavelli’s view of being an efficient ruler and Aristotle’s view of being a virtuous ruler. In the Prince Machiavelli shows with three excellent references that it …show more content…
The first story is of King Agathocles whom rose to power through an act of brutality. Agathocles was a common citizen, his father a poor potter. As a youth he joined the militia and “always kept to a life of crime at every rank of his career” . With a mind to better his life a grown Agathocles assembled a meeting of the senate in which he ordered his men to kill all of the senators, attaining power in one savage blow. He sought out and achieved power, keeping his enemies at a distance with his savage rule. Machiavelli describes Agathocles as a criminal but his crimes were accompanied by remarkable “virtue of spirit and body” …show more content…
Machiavelli remarks that it was necessary for “Moses to find the people of Israel in Egypt, enslaved and oppressed by the Egyptians, so that they would be disposed to follow him so as to get out of their servitude ”. Machiavelli goes on to say that “without that opportunity their virtue of spirit would have been eliminated, and without that virtue the opportunity would have come in vain”. Machiavelli’s view that in certain circumstances that the ends justify the means is apparent in this passage. Moses leading his people out of Egypt is from the Old Testament in the bible and is sacred to Christians all over the world. The need for that great act to have occurred is evident in Machiavelli’s interpretation of
Machiavelli was a Florentine Statesman. In 1512, the Florentine Republic collapsed and the Medico's came back into power. Machiavelli was labeled a traitor and was sent to prison where he was tortured and threatened with execution.1 He was subsequently released into exile. He went to the country and wrote “The Prince”. He had wanted to present it to Lorenzo Medici as a show of his loyalty but it did not have the effect that Machiavelli had envisioned.
The most astounding aspect of The Prince is Machiavelli’s view that princes may indeed, be cruel and dishonest if their ultimate aim is for the good of the state. It is not only acceptable but necessary to lie, to use torture, and to walk over other states and cities. Machiavellianism is defined as “A political doctrine of Machiavelli, which denies the relevance of morality in political affairs and holds that craft and deceit are justified in pursuing and maintaining political power (Def.)” This implies that in the conquest for power, the ends justify the means. This is the basis of Machiavellianism. The priority for the power holder is to keep the security of the state regardless of the morality of the means. He accepts that these things are in and of themselves morally wrong, but he points out that the consequences of failure, the ruin of states and the destruction of cities, can be far worse. Machiavelli strongly emphasizes that princes should not hesitate to use immoral methods to achieve power, if power is necessary for security and survival.
As mentioned earlier that this book has attracted a lot of debates, one such debate is that of morality. Many philosophers claim Machiavelli’s work to be immoral or at least amoral, out of which arguments of some are given below.
Machiavelli is undisputedly one of the most influential political philosophers of all time. In The Prince, his most well-known work, he relates clearly and precisely how a decisive, intelligent man can gain and maintain power in a region. This work is revolutionary because it flies in the face of the Christian morality which let the Roman Catholic Church hold onto Europe for centuries. Machiavelli's work not only ignores the medieval world's ethics: The Prince suggests actions which oppose the four most basic of Christianity's Ten Commandments.
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.
The fortuna-virtù dichotomy has become one of the most fundamental aspects of Machiavelli’s view of the political. The first concept refers to the way in which would-be rulers deal with the contingent occurrences that take place in realm of the political. The second principle is related to the ability to interpret and control the social environment in order to advance the interest of the state and the personal standing of the ruler (Bobbitt, 2013: 43). Most importantly, the existence of virtù entails the possession of a set of skills that are geared towards preserving the viability of the state, even if the means to attain it require the pursuit of amoral actions (Fischer, 2000: 54). This essay begins by outlining the description
Machiavelli does not trust nor believe in human reason. He was sarcastic and satirical towards the very thought of human reason, which allows us to interpret that he was mocking the people of his time. In The Prince, Machiavelli expressed what the ideal Prince should embody, what he should do in times of war, what he should do for the economy daily, and how to rule in times of peace as well. Human nature to him however, is described as, rude, pessimistic, and shallow. Machiavelli makes it evidently clear that, “Men are much more taken by present than by past things, and when they find themselves well-off in the present, they enjoy it and see...
Virtue manifests itself differently within Christine de Pizan’s novel The Book of the City of Ladies and Niccolo Machiavelli’s novels The Prince and The Discourses Letter to Vettori. Pizan describes virtue in a moralistic sense, one closer to Aristotle and Plato’s traditional view. On the contrary, Machiavelli has a warped sense of morality and his view of virtue is one without a moral tone; he argues that a prince must adapt himself to whichever situation he finds himself in. Despite their disagreement of the materialization of virtue, they both attribute it to powerful people. Glory is attained through establishing a good political community; it can be marked in preserving the rule, stability, freedom and military power. Although their expressions of virtue differ, their ideas are similar regarding the relationship between virtue and glory; virtue should indefinitely leads to glory.
Is the thought pattern of Machiavelli perceived as immoral or moral? Immorality, is known as, not conforming to accepted standards of morality. Morality, is known as, being concerned with the principles of right and wrong behavior and the goodness and badness of human character. Machiavelli does not seem to fit either the definition of morality or immorality. He does not care for the concerns of right and wrong, which puts him outside the definition of morality, but Machiavelli also does not try to not conform to the accepted standards of the community. He is more concerned with the safeguard of the princedom, and teaching princes how to try to be all powerful, by this, Machiavelli would be considered amoral, when it comes to how he thinks about politics. Amorality, is when, one is unconcerned with the rightness or wrongness of something. This is the case within the terms that Machiavelli gives to be a great prince, he is aware that his teachings break the code of morality of the majority within most princedoms. This is the reason that Machiavelli speaks on how one has to be a fox like character, to hide that the princes have to be amoral to protect the greater good of their princedom, but not be hated by the people he rules over. Being hated by the community is one of the worst things that a prince can have happened.
In Julius Caesar, Machiavellian traits are manifested through multiple characters. Those characters who obeyed Machiavelli’s guidance were successful in achieving their goals; those who did not conform to the recommendations failed. Machiavelli teaches tactics to achieve a goal, regardless whether or not these tactics are humane. On the other hand, religious books teach compassion and kindness. In short, one perspective is, to get ahead, people must drop all humane beliefs and focus solely on their aspirations.
Machiavelli believed that, ethics and morality were considered in other categories than those generally known. He does not deny the existence of, but did not see how they can be useful in its traditional sense as in politics and in the government of the people. According to Machiavelli, a man is by nature a political angry and fearful. Machiavelli had no high opinion of the people. It is assumed that a person is forced to be good and can get into the number of positive features, such as prudence and courage. The prince can only proceed gently and with love, because that would undermine the naivety of his rule, and hence and the well-being of the state. He thought that, the Lord must act morally as far as possible, immorally to the extent to
To understand Machiavelli’s conceptions of liberty it is best to first research the cultures and ideas that influenced him politically to gain the knowledge of both liberty and therefore the enemy of liberty, corruption. Machiavelli references the ancient Romans in many of his works due to how the Romans defined and employed certain conceptions including liberty as well as corruption. When discussing the nature of a free city, the Romans considered a city free if the city possessed autonomy, when the citizens lived under their own laws, and were not under the jurisdiction of foreigners. One term Machiavelli uses in describing the jurisdiction of foreigners is “Servitù” despite the foreigner’s institutions of ruling or matters of mercy or cruelty. In matters of liberty the Romans considered liberty a positive right that ...
Machiavelli redefined the term virtue from the classical understanding. He did this by incorporating vice into virtue. Machiavelli new understanding of virtue is required and by rulers and soldiers in order to maintain power. The Prince determined that men were not all good. He believed that the classical understanding of virtue could only be applied or used by men in what Machiavelli called imagined republics or kingdoms. Because men were not all virtuous and did not keep their promises, Machiavelli believed the ruler should not be all virtuous or always keep his promises. The necessity to maintain power drives a ruler to step...
Machiavelli has long been required reading for everyone intrested in politics and power. In The Prince Niccolo M
Machiavelli's views have been misinterpreted since his book was first written, people take him in the wrong way, and are offended by what he says. Careless readers take him in a completely wrong way, such as they think that he believes that the end justifies the means, that a leader should lie to the people, and that a ruler has to rule with force. In actuality, Machiavelli means no such thing, he says that there are times when the common good outweighs the means, and the morality of a rulers actions. He also says that you cannot be loved by everyone, so try to be loved and feared at the same time, but of the two, choose to be feared. The Prince is considered to be one of the most important nonfiction literature written in the history of mankind.