Summary Of Moral Consequentialism In Machiavelli's The Prince

1605 Words4 Pages

Summary of the key points presented by Nicolo Machiavelli Machiavelli 's works represent moral consequentialism. He argues if nothing is intrinsically right or wrong, and that being good isn 't necessarily rewarded, the "goodness" of our actions is inconsequential. "The Prince," in its essence, is a book about how to be an effective ruler. It does not present information as "right or "wrong in the philosophical or spiritual sense, but as "correct or "incorrect" in terms of being the most effective and powerful ruler one can be. In this sense, Machiavelli is separating ethics from politics and dealing with each of them separately. This is why Machiavelli is not necessarily tell the "prince" to be bad, but merely that being bad is acceptable …show more content…

One of the most important points presented in "the prince" is the struggle between love, fear, and hatred. Machiavelli says that to be loved is good, but to be feared is better. This is because love is fickle and subjects who once loved you may stop, but those who fear you will always fear you. However, Machiavelli warns rulers of the danger of being hated. He says that a prince should be sure that those who hate him can no longer rise up against him before he takes action that will make subjects hate him (Machiavelli 2006). The relation between ability and fortune is also important. These two shape the difference between a leader who is adaptable and a leader who is not. Fortune is the idea of chance or random happenstance, and ability is what allows the leader to act in the circumstance in which he is thrust (Callahan). This ability to recognize the difference between the things a prince can change and the things which are beyond his control is crucial to his …show more content…

He proposed an objective moral code that is universally applicable. This is the opposite of what Machiavelli advocated. Kant 's moral code is called the categorical imperative and has 3 maxims. The first maxim is universality. This is the belief that a decision should only be made in such a way that it would be okay if everyone in a similar situation made the same decision. The second maxim is that every person should be considered an end rather than a means to an end (Anders 2005). This means that there is no acceptable situation in which one person is worth less or more than another, ergo the "greater good" or the consequences of the actions are irrelevant because your actions towards each person are not a step but an end in themselves. Finally, the third maxim is that each person should act as if they are the absolute moral authority. In this sense, the ideal moral person transcends themselves as not only a moral figure but a moral law (Anders 2005). Another important idea presented by Kant is the idea that enlightenment is achieved when a person is first able to use their own understanding without the help of another. If the reason for not thinking for oneself is not ignorance but fear, Kant argues that persons lack of enlightenment is their own fault. Therefore, in order to be enlightened we must have the courage to think for ourselves (Kant 1784). Kant relates this to law and states that a just ruler would give his

Open Document