The Prince: A Decidedly unMedieval Piece of Work The Prince, written by Niccolo Machiavelli, was a secular handbook that dealt with modern statecraft and leadership. In fact, this was the first modern book that discussed political science. This book has influenced many well-known leaders, such as Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler. This essay will discuss the past behaviours of Machiavelli to prove that this book, The Prince, is a decidedly unMedieval piece of work which does not follow the idea of living life so that it is worthy of respect and honour, as stated in the Medieval Code of Chivalry.
In addition, Machiavelli didn 't take the traditional route for supporting his argument of advice. He didn 't bother using any ethical or philosophical principles as the base for his advice he was trying to give. Instead, he used his own political program on real-life examples as his foundation to his treatise. Which is probably one of the reasons why "The Prince" got so much negative criticism. Machiavelli is practically stepping out of line by explaining what a prince should or should not do in pursuit of his
Several humanists were widely appreciated for their shared knowledge during the time, constantly writing about everything in the Renaissance. One famous humanist, Niccolò Machiavelli, published one of his most famous pieces, The Prince, which was a short composition to Lorenzo de’ Medici about the secrets of becoming a good ruler. The controversy around this was Machiavelli was known for loving his Republican government, but developed a plan to have Lorenzo reign in an unjust manner. This specific piece of literature describes a twisted ex diplomat using writing as a way to infiltrate the Florentine government to gain position back in the government. The pope Clement VII described the book to be unethical, but allowed its publication about twenty years after it was accused of being crafted of the hands of Satan due to immorality theme of the treatise.
Then for Machiavelli he talks about how a prince should show no fear instead for him to show that he is the one with power. That a prince's people should fear him. Both authors go on to talk on how their people react based on the prince and princesse act. The authors then go on to explain how they should view and run their people. Both authors also reflect the fact that the way their people are going to act towards them is mainly based off of how they treat them.
In Niccolo Machiavelli's book, The Prince (1513), he evaluates on how a prince can be a successful leader. Machiavelli’s purpose of this guidebook was to construct his argument to the rising ruler Giuliano de Medici for when he comes to power in Florence. He adopts a casual but authoritative tone in order to convince the prince that Machiavelli’s evaluation on how to be the best prince, is the right thing for the prince to do without coming off as he knows more than the prince or is trying to intimidate him.. Machiavelli’s reference to previous rulers and whether their tactics failed or succeeded helps to benefit his credibility along with his allusion to historic text. He appeals to our logic by simply stating a prince can only do what is within his power to control, and his use of an analogy furthers his argument.
Machiavelli wrote about a fictitious prince, describing how he is a terrible being who has no respect for people who have a lower status than him. He is described as being selfish and untrustworthy. His writing about this prince was supposed to replicate princes and kings that were ruling and open he reader’s eyes to real issues occuring. In Document 1 there is an excerpt from The Prince, written by Machiavelli, telling about how terrible the Prince of England. Document 1 states, “For all men in general this observation may be made: they are ungrateful, fickle, and deceitful, eager to avoid dangers, and avid for gain, and while you are useful to them they are all with you, but when it [danger] approaches they turn on you”.
The first half of his life was spent in the Golden Age of Florence, the heyday of the Renaissance, and the second half in a period of war between France and Spain and other powers competing in Italy. 《 The prince》was written during the period of Machiavelli's dismissal from office, and he makes it clear that his purpose in writing the book was to offer it to the Florentine authorities for reappointment. In this book, he strives to demonstrate the political wisdom he has acquired through his long political practice, limiting his subject matter to the analysis of the monarchy, which is central to his discussion of how monarchs can retain their states. Machiavelli’s political ideology was shaped by his belief in the importance of power and the need for a strong, centralized government.
The Prince wrote by Machiavelli also instruct on how to gain and use the political power. He mentioned that a ruler must do to ensure his own survival and it is better to be feared than loved, as long as one is hated. It shows that politics has completely transformed during the renaissance compare to the Middle Ages. Machiavelli believed that a ruler must know how to gain and use his power and as long as people don’t hate their ruler its better for both the ruler and his followers.
Machiavelli wrote The Prince under house arrest, as a gift to Medici to regain the position in politics, with the attempt failing. This reiterates the theme of desire for power as, Machiavelli, too wants power whilst writing a “handbook” on how to maintain it, allowing his actions to be considered contradictory. The Prince, being written in pragmatic prose, with simple syntax is another example where context prompts the composer to consider the language forms and features that are utilised. This is primarily because of the intended purpose of the text. After being given amnesty by Medici, Machiavelli considered writing The Prince as a favour to him, to appreciate his act of kindness and restate the concern for his position; this being the historical
The Prince, written by Machiavelli, is a candid outline of how he believes leaders gain and keep power. Machiavelli uses examples of past leaders to determine traits that are necessary to rule successfully. Leaders such as the King of Naples and the Duke of Milan lacked military power, made their subjects hate them, or did not know how to protect themselves from the elite, causing them to lose power. He says that these rulers should blame laziness, not luck, for their failures. By looking at these historical successes and failures, Machiavelli is able to develop his own thoughts on how politics and leaders should be in the future.
One aspect of Machiavelli’s theory which significantly contributes to his reputation as the “philosopher of evil,” is his advice to the prince on keeping their word to the public. In chapter eighteen, Machiavelli states, “a wise ruler cannot, and should not, keep his word when doing so is to his disadvantage, and when the reasons that led him to promise to do so no longer apply” (pg. 37). To simplify, Machiavelli says princes are obligated to lie in certain circumstances. He also states that while it is unnecessary for the prince to have positive qualities, such as honesty, trustworthiness, sympathy, compassion, or be religious, it is essential for the prince to be viewed so by the public (pg. 37). While many people argue that Machiavelli’s legitimization of lying and deception in politics is immoral, I argue the opposite.
During the course of the semester we learned about group theory, creating videos explaining the basics of group theory. We stated the four axioms of group theory and gave examples of group theory in the real world. Now what if I told you that group theory originated in the heavens, mainly from the big guy himself. Have I gotten your attention yet? Well, before I go into my explanation of God and group theory, I feel that it would be a good idea to look back and review what groups consist of.
In Machiavelli’s book, The Prince, he maintains a harsh perspective on reality. His advice on how to maintain power leaves no room for compassion or generousity. While some may believe that these are qualities of a good person, Machiavelli believes these qualities lead to the downfall of rulers. He acknowledges that, in reality, it is impossible for someone to have qualities of a good person and simultaneously a good ruler. Machiavelli’s realistic outlook causes him to emphasize that it is better to maintain power through fear, rather than compassion.
Machiavelli's Political Views Niccolo Machiavelli is treated as “one of the founders of philosophy of history and one of the first to create a political science based on the studying of historical actions” (“Machiavelli's The Prince”). The man lived in 15th and 16th centuries, but his political views are still appropriate for today, despite the fact his ideas were called dishonest, sinister and cunning. The Prince is one of the most famous Machiavelli's political works. It was written in 1513 and was dedicated to Lorenzo de' Medici. The book is unique “not because it explains how to take control of other lands and how to control them, but because it gives advice that often disregards all moral and ethical rules” (“Machiavelli's The Prince”).
Both of these highly influential authors had different opinions on ruling that would shape how people would rule during their time and for rulers to come. One of Machiavelli’s major points in The Prince was that it was better to be feared than to be loved. He said this was because while both ways can be useful tools to help one rule, men are less likely to turn a ruler if they were afraid of punishment. Machiavelli had little faith in the common man and had this to say about them, “They are ungrateful, fickle, deceptive and deceiving, avoiders of dangers, eager to gain”(pg.353).
