Machiavellian Folly in The Prince
In the annals of history, many individuals have contributed great works of literature, waxing philosophically on the meaning of life, death, and love. Niccolo Machiavelli wrote not on love or life, but on power: How to capture it, how to consolidate it, and how to defend it against all comers. His work has been talked about and dissected to the extent that his subject matter and methods have earned their own moniker: Machiavellian. Nonetheless, this great philosopher's works did not meet with unanimous approval. His own student, Thomas Hobbes, presented a very different account of politics. This essay offers a Hobbesian critique of some of Machiavelli's arguments, focusing in and around the ninth chapter of The Prince. Although Machiavelli and Hobbes share many of the same views - like the moral depravity of the human character and the absence of natural justice - Hobbes differs from Machiavelli in three key respects: The position of glory and honour, the role of competition, and the function of the state.
Hobbes and Machiavelli share the same understanding of human character. Machiavelli wrote during a time when people believed in absolute moral virtue. But as Machiavelli struck pen to paper, he rebelled from this norm. Having criticized Christian doctrine in Discourses on Livy, Machiavelli proceeds in The Prince to outline a sinister, ruthless understanding of virtue. Hidden deep within this dark design is his greatest contribution to modern politics: Rationalism.1 Machiavelli was the first philosopher to employ a truly pragmatic approach to politics. He examined human beings in light of their motives, their desires, and their fears. While other philosoph...
... middle of paper ...
...ts of the citizenry.
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
Curley, Edwin [Ed.]. Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan. Hackett Publishing Company, United States of America; 1994
Mansfield, Harvey C. [Trans.]. Machiavelli, Niccolo. The Prince. University of Chicago Press, Chicago; 1998
1 Sometimes referred to as Realism.
2 Pangle, Thomas. Class Lecture. Jan. 25, 1999
3 Mansfield, Harvey C. [trans] Machiavelli, The Prince. Ch. XVII. P. 66
4 Curley, Edwin [ed.]. Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan. P. 58
5 Mansfield, Harvey C. [trans] Machiavelli, The Prince. P. x
6 Curley, Edwin [ed.]. Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan. P. 76
7 Ibid. P. 78 ** Emphasis added in translation.
8 "Good" here refers to the conventional, Biblical and Aristotelian understanding.
9 Mansfield, Harvey C. [trans] Machiavelli, The Prince. P. 62
10 Ibid. P. 71
He never would regain the position in politics he had enjoyed earlier in life. “The Prince” though not published until five years after his death, was Machiavelli' best known work. One of the key chapters in “The Prince” is “Of Cruelty and Clemency and Whether
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.
The Catechism (1997) #2267 says, in part, "... the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor...."
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 Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica. “Prince Hal (fictional Character).” Encyclopedia Britannica Online. Encyclopedia Britannica, n.d. Web. 20 Mar. 2014.
Karl Marx, born on May 5, 1818, died on March 14, 1883, was a German
The era of the Italian Renaissance was a time period for many great thinkers whose minds helped shape the way that people see the world today and Niccolo Machiavelli is certainly no exception. He is most assuredly one of the top philosophical and political minds in the history books and has been an inspiration for many leaders. Unfortunately, tyrannical dictators such as Adolf Hitler were known to use Machiavelli’s teachings in their quest for power so the world has not always viewed this man in the most positive light, even with the things that he tried to teach.
of participating in a conspiracy to restore the republic, because of this he was sent to jail for three weeks, and tortured. He fled the city of Florence, and decided to settle down in a calm quiet town called Sant’Andrea. He also decided to continue his dream and career as a writer. In 1513 he started to write his Discourses, this book focused on states controlled by the prince and the citizens. It was not finished until 1521, because he interrupted his work on Discourses to write the very famous The Prince.
When looking at Hobbes’ idea of the state and its relation with the citizen, it is strikingly shocking how supportive of the authoritarian and absolutist form of monarchical government he is. His ideas are extreme for today’s democratic world however, he is seen as the founder of great liberal political thoughts such as the natural contract. Furthermore he gives great emphasis to the study of the individual in the first book of his work. Although, obviously monarchical, Hobbes also argues in favor of democracy and aristocracy: two less authoritarian forms of government. Hobbes has a historical reputation for validating absolute monarchy, and his work is often dismissed as dictatorial. But it must be remembered that, for Hobbes, sovereignty does not only reside in a king but also in sovereign congresses and sovereign democracies and ultimately the people enable any of these three forms of government to rule, according to what best suits the community.
It is commonly believed by both lay people and political philosophers alike that an authoritative figure is good and just so long as he or she acts in accordance with various virtues. If the actions of a ruler are tailored toward the common good of the people rather than himself, then that ruler is worthy of occupying the status of authority. By acting in accordance with social and ethical norms, the ruler is deemed worthy of respect and authority. Niccolò Machiavelli challenges our moral intuitions about moral authority in his work, the Prince, by ruthlessly defending the actions made by the state in an effort to preserve power. In particular, all actions made by the state are done in order to preserve its power, and preserving the state’s power preservers its people. In doing so, whatever actions the state exercises are justified with this end goal in mind. Although such reasoning may seem radical, it is practice more readily that most people are inclined to believe. Machiavelli's moral philosophy is deeply embedded in the present day justice administration. Due to this, Machiavelli’s political thought can serve as a reference for illustrating how today’s administrators can benefit from following the examples of other great leaders, such as on matters of global warming.
The sections that I will be presenting are 73, 74, and 75. I will discuss the political ideas of Niccolo Machiavelli, Francesco Guicciardini, and Thomas Hobbes during the time of Florence Republic. First, Niccolo Machiavelli was born in Florence, Italy in 1469 at a time when the country was in political upheaval. Italy was divided between four dominant city-states, by which each of them was always at the mercy of the continual changing of princes and governments.
To understand the politics we have, we must look at two philosophers who have shaped the ideas and politics of this world. Niccolò Machiavelli and Thomas Hobbes founded a new kind of political science that opposed the classical view of politics. Both of these men believed classical philosophy and Christianity focused on reaching imagined republics; these imagines republics were unreachable. Under these imagined republics men were held to high standards, men had to be virtuous; and men could not keep all the virtues because they lived in a world where men were not all good. Machiavelli’s book The Prince redefines virtue in order to allow rulers to keep their power; he lowered the standards of politics with this action. While Machiavelli’s writings meant to influence rulers, Hobbes’ book the Leviathan focused on appealing to the people. Hobbes placed political philosophy on a scientific basis; as a result human life was reduced to only self-preservation and commodious living. This essay will examine the innovations Machiavelli and Hobbes created especially with their views on virtue, necessity, and liberty.
In the sixteenth century, there were three sets of socioeconomic statuses that one could acquire or be a part of, the clergy, the nobility, and the peasantry. The divide between these three generalized classes was far more complicated in reality that it seems, as socioeconomic classes consist of multiple branches. Nonetheless, it all essentially came down to two undeniable factions, the oppressors and the oppressed. Niccolo Machiavelli, being a mixture of the two due to his living situation while writing the book, gained a middle-ground which allowed him to achieve omnipotent intelligence that so many rulers normally lack, first hand experience of what it like to live both lives, one as a peasant and the other as a nobleman. This omnipotent
Two of the greatest philosophers of all time are Thomas Hobbes and Niccolo Machiavelli. Hobbes was born in 1588 in England, when absolutism was taking hold in Europe. His most famous work was 'Leviathan', written in 1651. Hobbes discussed the ideal state and innate laws of man and nature, among other things. Machiavelli was born in Italy in 1469, a time when his home country was ruled mostly by foreign powers. His hometown, Florence, was still independent. Machiavelli's most famous work, 'The Prince', tells of his ideal state and ideal ruler. Machiavelli goes on to describe the perfect prince, a picture of cruelty and cunning. Though both genius philosophers, their views differ greatly. Hobbes believed in a minimalist government where the state only interfered with the lives of the citizens when it had to. The ideal kingdom was the kingdom of God, in Hobbes' mind. In Machiavelli's 'The Prince', he describes his ideal government with a strong monarch, and fearful subjects. In Hobbes' system, a close relationship was kept with God, while in Machiavelli's reason was the only rule. The most important and most dealt-with area of dialogue is the 'ideal' government.
The Prince by Niccolò Machiavelli isn't about one man's ways to feed his power hungry mindset through gluttony, nor is it just explaining altercations between a nation's states. This writing is regarding to how one's self-confidence can make them become powerful in a society and also, the way morals and politics differ and can be separate in a government. Originally, Machiavelli wrote The Prince to gain support from Lorenzo de' Medici, who during the era, was governor of Florence. As meant as writing for how a society should be run, this book has been read by many peoples around the world who want to have better knowledge of the perfect stability of beliefs and politics required to run a good civilization.