A Critical Analysis Of Machiavellis The Prince Philosophy Essay

A Critical Analysis Of Machiavellis The Prince Philosophy EssayYou entertain got to be cruel to be kind. Would this be an adequate summary of Machiavellis advice on cruelty? If so, why? If non, why? How does his advice on cruelty reflect his beliefs intimately politics?In the Prince, Machiavelli explores the world of tellments and principles and comes up with revolutionary themes for a prince to lease the leading position in the government and harbour his authority and leadership. However, the philosopher does non teach the convention to be full and just he buzz off is to provide the governor with practical applications of organism a great prince exactly non a good integrity. Machiavelli foc engages on cruel features more because they would dish to advance the power of the prince. In his book, it does not seem that an evil or cruel behavior is an unacceptable one and only(a), as he alters the moral style about vice and good. In the book, Machiavelli starts with his dedication to Lorenzo de Medici and finishes it with an assertion that Italy must(prenominal) exalt and gain considerable power. Therefore, it is hard for me to judge if the philosopher was cin one caserned with acquiring a better vocation or with genuine patriotic feelings that were expressed in his attempt to call for dramatic action. Yet, I will argue that in terms of Machiavelli a potential ruler has to pretend to be an aging prince-the one that is familiar with the experiences of his predecessors-and act as if he is kind. This pretence makes a cruel prince a kind one and preserves his laurels and successfulness of a commonwealth, which are supposed to be the aims of the ruler.In chapter 15, Machiavelli states that Many receive imagined republics and principalities that own never been seen or known to exist in truth. For it is furthest from how one lives to how one should live. That he who lets go of what is through for what should be done encounters his ruin rather t han his preservation (p. 54). The transit hints to the Platos Republic, in which the he reports that the philosopher kings should govern society. The governors have to be good and just and they must help their subjects to go on the purity of their souls and also be good. In the Prince, a ruler should take away historical works, especielly for the light they shed on the actions of eminent men to result some eminent man, worthy of praise and glory (p. 51). However, Machiavelli is interested an echt truth of the matter and not the utopia of it. He compares a prince to a prophet, which does not necessarily mean that the he has divine knowledge instead it gives them prodigious responsibilities like law making and shaping opinions that govern our lives. Thereby, Machiavellis prophetic prince has philosophers features as he tries to reform human opinion over the justice and evil he acts as if he is good, but does not have to be good. To back up his conclusions, Machiavelli comes up w ith extreme examples such as Romulus and Cains murders of Remus and Abel respectfully. These murders were the fundaments of the societies and, therefore, the philosopher asserts that no good is possible without evil. Thus he redefines Platos ideas of the philosopher kings who approach comminuted earth to be good and just instead, Machiavelli gives examples of extraordinary situations and draws the moral philosophy that would perfectly jib the situation. Also, he reforms the meaning of the word virt a prince can act in an evil fashion, as fortune and circumstances would dictate (p. 23) in the chapter thirteen, he gives an example of the biblical story of David and Goliath. In the initial story, David is armed with a sling only but, the philosopher also gives him a poke. This detail hints that the Gods promise is not enough and David would be safer with an additional secret weapon. This additional detail is a metaphor, which implies that the prince has to propagandize proper(ip) religious views on the other(a) hand, he has to use a certain extent of cruelty and be utterly autonomous to achieve desirable outcomes. Self-realization, courage, and ruthlessness are the qualities that contribute to the effective employ of power, which is a touchstone of policy-making success. As Machiavelli puts it all the armed prophets conquered and the divest were ruined (p. 20).To describe the genuine prince, Machiavelli comes up with a metaphor of a tool. In chapter eighteen, he writes that there are two ways of contesting, the one by the law, the other by force the first method is proper to men, the second to beasts but because the first is frequently not sufficient, it is necessary to have recourse to the second it is necessary for a prince to understand how to avail himself of the beast and the man (p.62) Since in the Machiavellian theory the princes goal is to seek glory, the ruler has to be lucky. The luck or Fortuna is opposite to reason it favors those who act or the brave. The Fortuna has to be mastered and, therefore, it requires a reservoir of force to master. Also, the deceit is, as Machiavelli puts it, a good quality. He exemplifies this with an Italian proverb Alexander never did what he said, Cesare never said what he did (p. 35). Following the winds of fortune, power, and deception, one would be conferred with glory. The philosopher is a pure consequentialist, as he justifies anything that is necessary to preserve the glory of his state and his own fame. The Machiavellian virtue is not the same with the Christian value.Thus, the duplicity of the prince and his behaviors are praised throughout the book and are perfectly venial for the eventual purposes.To underline an exemplary behavior of the prince, Machiavelli gives an example of Cesares policies in chapter seven. When the duke had interpreted over the Romana, he found it had been commanded by impotent lords who had been readier to despoil their subjects than to ameliorate the m and had given their subjects matter for disunion, not union (p. 23). Cesare sends a lieutenant to that heavens who reduced it to peace and unity with the very greatest reputation for himself (p.23 ). However, Cesare did not want to have strong local government. Thus he nock up court with wise civil authority that would judge and aid each citizen from the lawlessness of his minister. And having seized this opportunity, he had emplaced one morning in the berth in two pieces, with a piece of wood and a cover knife beside him. He had him cut in two the bloody knife and piece of wood beside him. Machiavelli concludes that the ferocity of this spectacle left the people at once satisfied and stupefied (p.23). The princely virt leaves people content and fooled.In chapter fifteen on the things for which man, and especially rulers, are praised or blamed, Machiavelli reflects on the very introductory assertions of morality and virtues. He states that a ruler who wishes to have his pow er must be prepared to act immorally when this becomes necessary (p. 55). Thus the prince has to do what is generally done and not what he ought to do (p. 54). In other words, the chapter teaches the ways of not being good (in Platos meaning of the word). To affects the norms of everyday life, the prince had to learn how to manipulate the piety skillfully. In chapter eighteen, the philosopher states that the ruler has to be utterly religious. The prince should start all mercy, all faith, all honesty, all humanity and all theology (p. 62) the pretence to be a genuine Christian is helpful for creating an provide public image however, the actual practice of its values is evidently dangerous. In the Republic, Socrates states that it is better to be just then to seem just. The princes morale goes against the passage in the book, which teaches how to be good, as one cannot be good without being just. Considering the metaphor of the prince who reconciles a man and a beast, the man is a necrose and submissive Christian, the beast in its turn is capable of performing venturesome and bold actions.In Machiavellian opinion, Christianity should not constrain any political activity. The matters of government should be solely secular. The philosopher strives to create a unfermented typeface of republic, which would deal only with practical issues and without asserting any transcendental moral law. As a scholar Steven Smith asserts, not only did Machiavelli scram a new worldliness to politics, he also introduced a new kind of populism as Plato and Aristotle imagined aristocratic republics that would invest power in an grandeur of education and virtue, Machiavelli deliberately seeks to enlist the power of the people against aristocracies of education and virtue. To maintain this kind of state, the republic has to have imperialistic ambitions and consequently be aggressive.Interestingly, the Machiavellian republic concerns only with practical worldly affairs however, its the philosophers imaginary purpose or theoretical suggestion of his form of government. The new type of morality is a foundation for this reign. Thus, Machiavellian prince forever and a day has to pretend to be a man, but be a beast if needed. Altering the hypostasis, the brave ruler masters the fortune and gains glory for himself and his state. The philosophers morality asserts that the prince does not have to be good instead he has to manage to be religious and pure on the public eye, but reasonably cruel and not always trustful in the reality. He justifies the actions of the ruler with the privileges one gets from the princes constant actions to maintain the prosperous state and peaceful sleep of the citizens. Thus the prince mixes his love for the good with the skillful cruelty. Machiavellian morale highlights that the good is only possible in the context of moral evil. This a clear break with Plato and the Christian values and, moreover, the philosopher seeks to set free the real politics from the ecclesiastical patronage. Thereby the prince uses religion for his benefit but does not allow himself to be used by it. One can see that Machiavellian authority is self-bestowed and not given by ethereal forces. Machiavelli grants the rule with the knife he gives to David in one of his passages, signifying that the prince has to be more self-reliant then hoping for the otherworldliness help. In the Prince, a reader can access information that used to be not available to everyone. The philosopher gives the reader a chance to come to terms with the idea that the good in politics cannot exist without a certain keep on of cruelty. Moreover, when this cruelty is adequately used, it becomes a virtue that sustains the well being of the state and makes the ruler glorious.Work citedMachiavelli, Niccolo. The Prince. Cambridge Cambridge University Press, 1988.PrintPlato. Republic. New York Oxford Press, 1994. PrintSmith, Steven. Machiavelli, the Prince. Yale Univer sity.2006. Open Yale Courses. Web. 26 Feb. 2010. political-science/introduction-to-political-philosophy/content/sessions/lecture10.html.