Machiavelli makes differentiate between the cruelty and the kind of clever ruthlessness. He gives two examples: the first is ancient, the second is modern.
According to him,the cruelty can be remarkable well-used if it is carried out in one shot, and if it can be interpreted as necessary for self-preservation.
Bennett, In 9. Chapter, Machiavelli guides princes who gain power not only through cruelty or other kinds of violence, but also the consent of his fellow citizens. He named this type of principalities as the civil principalities where after prince situation can be determined either by the will of people or by the will of the nobles. However if the people feel that they are oppressed by the nobles, they would try to make one of their own a prince and then this person becomes their shield against the nobles.
The second type has no option but to fortify his city and lay in supplies. The final type of principality is the ecclesiastical state. Although this type of principality is gained through ability or luck, their princes stay in power no matter how they act Summary and Analysis. He puts forward kinds of arguments related to the Papal States in this part.
For Machiavelli, religious bodies in politics are generally east to hold onto, because religion itself helps politics to be sustainable. In addition, how the Papacy is much powerful to frighten the French rulers, and has the capacity to even chase the French out of Italy and crush the Venetians at the same time.
Related to this, he tells about the successful story of the Pope Alexander IV. Analytical Evaluation of the Text In the begining of chapter, Machiavelli uses so many scientific methodology. He designs systems, threats and principalities with diffirent style. He also tries to prove every claims of him by giving historical examples and telling stories. He makes differentiation between different kind of states and diffirent kind of governing.
He shows us the world by using simple terms and drawing clear-cut examples. But in this book, the examples of him are from Italian history, most of them.
He uses Italy and cardinal rules to build a scene that based on historical specificity. When he writes about princes and principalities as is they were variables in a mathematical formula. He does not absolutely rely on theory, abstract or ideology. Cabal, At the same time he makes his examples harmony and details explanations to show a scientific mixture on human condition.
He considers human to show free will and significant determinant of power. According to him, what causes princes to succeed or to fail is about the question of human nature. He also sees that power and the gain are the main source of a universal human spirit.
But Machiavelli describes the ordinary citizen as a simple minded. According to him, such people could either love or hate their ruler depending on if they are damaged or not. The main purpose of government is the stability of the state and the maintenance of the control established by the ruler, not creating welfare for the people.
Thanaw, Another analysis is the cruelity. He make a separation between ethics and politics. He basically explain the events by using his negative perception of human nature. He lived during the Italian Renaissance from May to This period in time that Machiavelli lived was the "rebirth" of art in Italy and rediscovery of ancient philosophy, literature and science.
It is easy to find textual support for claims that appear to presuppose or be equivalent to some version of psychological egoism. Machiavelli saw the conventional thought of the time as a fantasy and only applicable in a utopian society.
His work The Prince shatters all previous political thought by stating that a ruler must not only use the traditionally accepted means of maintaining power but also be able to use brute force, deceit and even cruelty as the situation requires There are innumerable detractors to any possible stance or strategy a leader might adopt. But this has not always been the case. In this work, The Qualities of a Prince, we are given a point-by-point description of what a leader should do to effectively lead his country Their ideas were radical at the time and remain influential in government today.
Their views on human nature and government had some common points and some ideas that differed. He strongly promoted a secular society and felt morality was not necessary but stood in the way of a successfully governed state At least, this appears to be true according to Niccolo Machiavelli's works.
Machiavelli's idea of the virtuous republican citizen may be compared to Hobbes' idea of a person who properly understands the nature and basis of sovereign political power. Hobbes' ideas seem to suggest that most anyone can claim rightful authority as there is a belief in God, and one can under Hobbes, claim legitimate authority rather easily Indeed it is a work of art, a literary masterpiece of sorts.
Yet this work has been vehemently debated over the centuries and remains one of the most controversial pieces of writing today. Sir Thomas More, a "man of the greatest virtue this kingdom has ever produced" Dean Swift , is famous for choosing to suffer death rather than swearing to an oath that would counter his principles.
Sir More had acquired a high position of Lord Chancellery under the reign of King Henry VIII, but stepped down since he could not do what the king had asked of him since this action would conflict with his beliefs and conscience 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 He also illustrates to us how by not following this system can lead to death or becoming overthrown.
I was amazed at how well his compositional skills were and in my attempt to show you how skillful of a writer and persuader he is we will look at chapter XVIII. By introducing the chapter with politics, coming up with clear and logical main points, and laying out all possibilities and consequences of those points I believed that this chapter made a very impressive persuasive argument That it marks a turning point in our collective history, the origin of the study of politics as a science Pollock 43 , is alone enough to warrant its classification as a "Great Book.
Its author, Niccolo Machiavelli, a contemporary of Copernicus, is generally accepted as an early contributor to the scientific revolution, because he looked at power and the nature of sovereignty through the eyes of a scientist, focused completely on the goal without regard for religion and morals and ethics His work is a summation of all the qualities a prince must have in order to remain in his position.
Machiavelli supports the idea that a prince use his power for the ultimate benefit of all, but he also does not condemn the use of any unpleasant means in order for the prince to maintain his power. His ideas both compare and contrast to the methods used by Prince Hamlet of Denmark in Shakespeare's Hamlet 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. I believe that man, by nature, is neither good nor evil.
When a child comes out of its mother, one cannot tell whether or not that child will be a serial killer or win the Nobel Peace prize Hobbes was born in in England, when absolutism was taking hold in Europe. His most famous work was 'Leviathan', written in Hobbes discussed the ideal state and innate laws of man and nature, among other things. Machiavelli was born in Italy in , a time when his home country was ruled mostly by foreign powers. His hometown, Florence, was still independent The goals behind the two works, however, differ considerably.
On the surface these two goals may seem similar but the difference lies in the way the authors handle the subject of power He doesn't turn to God or to some sort of common good for his political morality. Instead, he turns to the individual? It is the job of the leader to make the fiction work for the good of all. The quote above evokes the overall feeling about kingship held by both Prince Hal and his father in Shakespeare's Henry plays.
Being a leader is perhaps the most difficult position one can ever attain. It didn't really matter what the issue was or what sort of implications it carried.
All that mattered was knowing the right person, having the right information, making the right introductions, and going to the right parties. The most valuable information was not necessarily something you knew about an enemy but something you knew about a friend. Staff and "advisors" were, in many ways, far more powerful than the aristocrat holding office Machiavelli, writing during a period of dramatic change known as the Italian Renaissance, displayed attitudes towards many issues, mostly political, which supported his belief that strong government was the most important element in society Each took a different approach to the topic.
Through Utopia, Thomas More attempted to change man? Niccolo Machiavelli, through The Prince, attempted to teach man how to deal with human nature. When Florence went back to a monarch system, the Medici family return to power and exiled Machiavelli for his past criticisms that he made towards the family.
People have been trying to develop a system of how to rule effectively while acting ethically and morally to avoid chaos and destruction.
However, these two styles of humanism provided… Machiavelli and Weber: Comparing Political Philosophies Philosophy is referred to as a set of beliefs, concepts and attitudes held by an individual or a group of people. It is the study of problems in general and the prescription of solutions to problems based on critical and systemic analyses and the employment of rational argument.
Mohandas Gandhi used Ahimsa as the means to an end and therefore, ultimately rejected Machiavelli's advice on the qualities a prince must possess to retain his title. They both spoke similarly on how people should feel about their leader. The Prince was published in , creating great controversy with other political thinkers of the time. A different interpretation sees the text as a offer of bad advice, or at the very least ambiguous advice, written with the intention of bringing down the Medici family that had left Machiavelli banished from the city he loved and destitute.
So it is necessary for a ruler, if he wants to hold onto power, to learn how not to be good, and to know when it is and when it is not necessary to use this knowledge. The ethics found within Machiavelli is entirely based upon a realistic outlook upon the political world and caters to political convenience. His ideas both compare and contrast to the methods used by Prince Hamlet of Denmark in Shakespeare's Hamlet He focuses on the factors that led the Catholic Church to gain control over Italian principalities as like the examples of successful princes that he mentions.
He gives two examples: the first is ancient, the second is modern.