Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Niccolo machiavelli essay
Morality and politics of machiavely
Machiavelli philosophy to the contemporary world
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Niccolo machiavelli essay
A philosopher puts a microscope to the nature of the world. Niccolò Machiavelli was a philosopher and the essence of his posthumous discourse The Prince revolves around the nature of princes and their education. This is why the core of his teaching is that a prince should ruthlessly acquire and maintain power by using fear, his own arms, and a strategic combination of vice and virtue instead of fortune. Cesare Borgia, an armed non-prophet, used fear and his own armed forces to successfully maintain his empire. However, Machiavelli felt that his rise to power through fortune made his fall from power inevitable. Moses, an armed prophet, used virtue instead of fortune and the fear of God to conquer the enslaved people of Egypt. Thus, by Machiavelli’s …show more content…
If a prince is merely a prophet without arms, he will fail. If a prince is a prophet with arms, he will conquer. Machiavelli asserts that a prophet with strong foundations upholds “veneration”(p. 24). In turn, the armed prophet will “remain powerful, secure, honored, and happy”(p. 24, p. 25). This, according to Machiavelli, is of the utmost importance and a “high example”(p.25). By letting the Israelites experience a prolonged suffering and then releasing them from enslavement with God’s army, Moses cleverly uses vice and virtue the way Machiavelli suggests using them. In the Exodus, Moses is divinely inspired to take the people of Israel out of bondage so that they “would be disposed to follow him”(p. 23). This following, according to Machiavelli, constitutes as the prophecy with which Moses garners much of his power. Instead of doing what was just, Moses did what was necessary, “for war is just to whom it is necessary, and arms are pious when there is no hope but in arms”(p. 103). One may contend that Moses could not veritably contribute to this teaching because he was divinely inspired. However, at the end of his writing, Machiavelli asserts, “God does not want to do everything”(p. 103). Machiavelli’s admiration of Moses, use of arms, and treatment of the conquered land inspired his core
Machiavelli strongly believes that a prince should be involved in the military and understand all military matters. A prince must always be concentrated on war. Whether his country is at war or not, he must always be prepared. He must continuously be training, mentally and physically, and know the terrain around him. Machiavelli believes that a prince who does not attain these military related qualities will fail as a leader. In addition, during times of war, a successful prince should always question all outcomes of possible battles and prepare himself for the future by studying past wars. Studying the
Frankly speaking, a rather illogical viewpoint as given by Machiavelli can not be called as philosophy at any cost. Historically, Machiavelli was an Italian political theorist whose book The Prince (1513) describes the achievement and maintenance of power by a determined ruler indifferent to moral considerations. Niccolo Machiavelli (1469-1527), Italian author and statesman, is one of the outstanding figures of the Renaissance, b. Florence. Machiavelli's best-known work, Il principe [the prince] (1532), describes the means by which a prince may gain and maintain his power. His “ideal” prince (seemingly modeled on Cesare Borgia) is an amoral and calculating tyrant who would be able to establish a unified Italian state. The last chapter of the work pleads for the eventual liberation of Italy from foreign rule. Interpretations of The Prince...
Niccolo Machiavelli lived in Florence, Italy in the 1400’s. The country of Italy was divided into city-states that had their own leaders, but all pledged alliance to their king. In time in which great leaders were needed in order to help the development of a city-state and country, Machiavelli had a theory that man needed a leader to control them. In his book The Prince, he speaks of the perfect leader.
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.
To begin with, Machiavelli’s “The Prince” laid out the foundation of what absolute rulers should be. Machiavelli thought that princes should be well educated in war since he would then have the power to stop uprisings. “The quickest way to lose a state is to neglect this art [war]; the quickest way to get one is to study it. Thus a prince who knows noth...
Machiavelli's revolutionary philosophy begins with the opposition of the First Commandment: "Thou shalt not have strange gods before me." This Commandment is the basis for the entire Judaeo-Christian worldview, and is in essence the foundation of any monotheistic religion. Machiavelli instructs the prince to attempt to appear religious (135), (since such an appearance is useful to manipulate the populace), but there is no instruction for an actual observance of faith. Furthermore, a prince is instructed to consider one thing over all others: "A prince, therefore, must not have any other object nor any other thought, nor must he take anything as his profession but war, its institutions and its discipline;" (124). These thoughts of war override piety and prayer, and thus undermine and attack the First Commandment.
Niccolò Machiavelli thoroughly discusses the importance of religion in the formation and maintenance of political authority in his famous works, The Prince and The Discourses. In his writing on religion, he states that religion is beneficiary in the formation of political authority and political leaders must support and endorse religion in order to maintain power. However, Machiavelli also critiques corrupt religious institutions that become involved in politics and in turn, cause corruption in the citizenry and divisions among the state. In the following essay, I will examine Machiavelli’s analysis of religion and discuss the relationship between religion and politics in Machiavelli’s thought.
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.
The Bible teaches love, compassion and generosity. Niccolo Machiavelli found the Bible’s lessons idealistic and unrealistic for leaders. Machiavelli wrote his book, The Prince, to show the ruling Meddici family that the world is not a fairy tale. Prior to Machiavelli writing The Prince, the majority of books depicted people as virtuous and ethical. However, The Prince is not the only work of literature that manifests Machiavellian techniques. William Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar utilizes similar methods. As shown in Julius Caesar and The Prince, a leader who follows Machiavelli’s advice will accomplish their goals; if the leader does not adhere to Machiavelli’s recommendations, then the leader will not fulfill his aspiration.
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.
Niccoló Machiavelli claims in “The Qualities of the Prince” that a prince must have certain qualities that will allow him to seize and maintain his power as a ruler. Machiavelli asserts that these qualities will guarantee the ruler to be able to govern his subjects effectively. According to him, a prince must study the art of war, must understand generosity and to what extent he must be generous to be effective, must choose to either be loved or feared, and be able to keep his word to his citizens according to the situation. These qualities can still apply in today’s politics, and will be useful for a modern time politician as long as they are used carefully.
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
Niccolò Machiavelli in his work, The Prince, claims that in order for princes to be successful and effective leaders they must ‘learn how to not be good’, this can then help when faced with challenges and how they should go about approaching these challenges. The idea of ‘learning how not to be good’ is instituted through the idea that being feared by people is better and safer than being loved by them, following this is the idea of Fortuna and Virtù, both which influence the other. This fortuna is a set of conditions or circumstances that are not created by the person whom is affected by them, whereas possessing princely virtù will allow for fortuna to be endured, allowing for success and and maintaining power as a prince. Machiavelli’s claim
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.
Niccolo Machiavelli was a political philosopher from Florence, Italy. The period that Machiavelli lived in was the "rebirth" of art in Italy and rediscovery of ancient philosophy, literature and science. He wrote The Prince, in which he discusses the proper way of living as a prince. His ideas, which were not viewed as beneficial at the time, were incredibly cynical and took time for the rest of the population to really catch onto the ideas. Machiavelli’s view of human nature was that humans are born evil, and while they can show good traits, and the common man is not to be trusted. Unlike Confucius, Machiavelli believes that human nature cannot be changed, and unlike Plato, where Plato believes in humans as social beings. Each respected view