In the novel "The Prince" by Niccolo Machiavelli, the author stresses the relevance of the different states a prince can achieve; he can either be in a republic or a principality. Machiavelli expresses this through the symbol of the fox and the lion which also defines human nature. Machiavelli's concept is still in play today in our social life and present in our government. In everything that people do, there has to be balance, which is why the author's primary purpose is to explain why a prince needs both natures of a fox and lion to keep stability. The function of Machiavelli insisting that a prince must learn to reflect of both the fox and the lion so that he may learn the characteristics of these animals when obstacles arise. Machiavelli uses the metaphor of the fox and lion to emulate what he is describing. Machiavelli states that a prince must be proud and …show more content…
Machiavelli expresses that leaders should hide their true intentions and always avoid differences. “Act against mercy, against faith, against humanity, against frankness, against religion, in order to preserve the state.” (10.4.16). This is shown today, in the United States government we still have senators, presidents, council members that are hiding things from the public. The idea of power can be manipulative and everyone wants to have some sort of power. Using the lion ways politicians boastfully to gain power by laying promises that most of the times are not kept, then using foxy ways to recognize their mistakes without owning up to it. Machiavelli knows that as a prince keeping promises is always a win-win, but he believes that a prince should be a master of deception. "a prudent ruler cannot, and must not, honor....him at a disadvantage and when the reasons for which he made his promise no longer exist." (18.1.27) Using Pope Alexander VI as someone who has excelled at the concept of the lion and the
Niccolò Machiavelli was a man who lived during the fourteen and fifteen hundreds in Florence, Italy, and spent part of his life imprisoned after the Medici princes returned to power. He believed that he should express his feelings on how a prince should be through writing and became the author of “The Qualities of a Prince.” In his essay, he discusses many points on how a prince should act based on military matters, reputation, giving back to the people, punishment, and keeping promises. When writing his essay, he follows his points with examples to back up his beliefs. In summary, Machiavelli’s “The Qualities of a Prince,” provides us with what actions and behaviors that a prince should have in order to maintain power and respect.
The bravery and strength of the lion will not be enough to empower the ruler to escape the snares set by his enemies for and the slyness of the fox is also needed. “The lion cannot protect himself from traps, and the fox cannot defend himself from wolves. One must therefore be a fox to recognize traps, and a lion to frighten wolves.” (The Prince) It is not possible for the citizens to love and fear a prince, but being feared is much safer than being loved.“Since love and fear can hardly exist together, if we must choose between them, it is far safer to be feared than loved” (The Prince) Everything a prince says must be filled with these five qualities: being merciful,being trustworthy, religious,kind, honest. Machiavelli defines virtues as qualities that are praised by others, such as generosity, compassion, and piety. He argues that a prince should always try to appear virtuous, but it is more important for the prince to be practical than it is for him to be morally good. The government that is built of this foundation it
Only a person who thinks that man is evil would think of such ways to run a government in the way that Machiavelli thought a government should be operated. Machiavelli felt that “crafty and deceitful princes have historically defeated the faithful princes”(Prince). What happened to the idea of a caring leader, one who could be trusted to make decisions that the majority of the people agreed with? I do not agree with Machiavelli that a leader should be deceitful in order to for his country to succeed or grow. I think that what a leader is depends on what type of man you are good or evil.
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.
In the first fourteen chapters, Machiavelli identifies and explains the different principalities and the various types of “princes” that have existed and failed in those principalities. He uses these real-life examples to give the audience the feeling that the ideal prince that is going to be explained in the remaining chapters has been developed with the failures of the previous princes in
First, Machiavelli argues in The Prince that there are only two kinds of states, republics and principalities. Machiavelli does not speak about republics but instead he dedicated the Prince to principalities. He divides principalities into two categories: hereditary and new. Hereditary principalities are the current state which the prince rules. Machiavelli states that hereditary states are easier to control and maintain because the people are accustom to prince’s rule.
Many empirical things can often still be debated and refuted by experts, but there is a general admittance to the idea that power is the root of many evil things. In all fairness, we must admit that a many evil things can in their essence, be great. And that is one of the many theories advanced by Niccolo Machiavelli in his well-known work, The Prince. The Prince serves a dual purpose of both teaching a person how to attain power, but also how to retain it. Incredibly enough, history has proven most of Machiavelli’s findings and theories to work well, while some have failed to effectively secure power for the rulers who did, in fact try them. His work, does obviously highlight one main fact, which is, that power is a well sought-after attribute, and most who attain are willing to do whatever is necessary to keep it.
With this in mind, Machiavelli?s concept is much more realistic than More?s; therefore Machiavelli better represents human nature. Machiavelli?s view of human nature in The Prince, presents, on the surface, a view of governing a state drastically different for his time. Machaivelli believed that the ruling Prince should be the sole authority
Although Machiavelli gives numerous points on what it takes to excel as a prince, he also shows some raw examples of how he feels a prince should act in order to achieve maximum supremacy. First, when he says, "ought to hold of little account a reputation for being mean, for it is one of those vices which will enable him to govern" proves Machiavelli feels mighty adamant about his view that being mean will help a prince achieve success (332). It is absurd to imagine the meanest prince as the most successful. Also, when Machiavelli states, "our experience has been that those princes who have done great things have held good faith of little account, and have known how to circumvent the intellect of men by craft" revealing his attitude to manipulate people into fearing and respecting the prince (335). Also, Machiavelli shows that for a prince to be successful, he must not think about good faith.
Both Niccolò Machiavelli and Plato, in their works The Prince and The Republic (respectively), address the concepts of seeming and being in relation to political power and leadership, however they do so in two distinct manners. In the Republic, Socrates insists that seeming is bad, and being is good. Using a parable of people in a cave, he states that the only way to know the difference between what seems and what actually is reality is to experience it in its purest form, instead of through images. Machiavelli, on the other hand outlines the different ways that a prince could rise to power, and justifies any and all means that a prince could take. He states that a prince only has to seem good when it fits his purposes, not actually be good. He encourages an aspiring prince to be deceitful and conniving in order to gain and maintain power. Before concluding which political theorist is correct, it is interesting to examine whether it would be better to remain in the cave with Machiavelli or see the light with Socrates.
Because of technological advances today, it is very easy to track activities or whereabouts of any person. If a politician was to do something cunning, unethical, or morally questionable, other people will be able to easily find out about it and this will lead to his reputation being tarnished. A tarnished reputation will then lead to him having a difficult time exerting power because people will lose their trust in him. For example, during the 2012 presidential elections, Paul Ryan was caught in a scandal because he volunteered in a soup kitchen. Paul Ryan and his family visited a soup kitchen and pretended that they have been there to help out the soup kitchen by serving the patrons. However, it was later revealed that Ryan and his family came after the patrons were served and only put on the white aprons to take pictures of them washing dishes to show their voluntary activity to help the poor. The Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney candidacy took a hit because of this controversy because many of their supporters were angered for such a questionable act. They lost the trust of their supporters and also had their credibility ruined. Running a country while only caring for his own power and how to maintain this power can aggravate many citizens. Although Machiavelli believes that a prince does not have any obligation towards his subjects, a modern time politician owes his position to the
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.
It shows us that he is a realist who believes that we cannot be good all the time and if we try to study the ideal instead of focusing on reality, it will ruin us as he says “A great many men have imagined states and princedoms such as nobody ever saw or knew in the real world, and there’s such a difference between the way we ought to live and the man who neglects the real to study the ideal will learn how to accomplish his ruin” (Machiavelli 42). He is saying the prince cannot let his emotions get in the way or he will be ruined and not do his job of protecting his country well, however, he says that being bad is inevitable and that the prince ought to use this to gain authority as he says “ a prince who wants to keep his authority must learn not to be good, and use that knowledge, …, as necessity requires” (Machiavelli 42). Machiavelli tells us that he prince should steer clear of vices to the best of his ability and to practice virtue, but knows that practicing all these virtues is not possible due to the human condition, and that it is still acceptable to practice
In section 18 of The Prince, Machiavelli wrote this: “And so he needs to have a spirit disposed to change as the winds of fortune and variations of things command him, and as I said above, not depart from good, when possible, but know how to enter into evil, when forced by necessity.”(Pg. 56) In this quote, Machiavelli is simply saying that rulers or princes need to be able to adapt as the times and circumstances changes. A prince must be able to evaluate his circumstances and decide how to react to his best advantage. He should do good, but understand how to do evil when necessary.
The book The Prince was a book of advice to politicians regarding how gain power and keep that power. The title The Prince is not about someone who has inherited land and a decedent to a king. In Machiavelli’s perspective a prince was a man of the citizens....