Critical Realism In The Prince Machiavelli

The Renaissance represented a new era in which values such as secularism and power became prevalent in society. Machiavelli expresses the need for politics and religion to be separated throughout his book "The Prince". Previously rulers had been restricted by Christian principals, but Machiavelli held the idea that rulers were warranted in any action so as long as it benefited the general public. Machiavelli believed that politics existed outside the realm of religion and morals. Subsequently, he approved of using any means necessary to gain and keep power, including lying, stealing, and murder. During this time Italy's city-states were in political chaos and condottieri roamed the streets. Machiavelli thought it was the ruler's duty to maintain discipline and peace in society at any cost. Despite his intentions to help Italy, Machiavelli's ideas were often seen as immoral and dishonest. The idea of a purely political action where morals were set aside is later referred to as the " Reasons of the state". In addition, Machiavelli felt a ruler must be sly

“It is much safer to be feared than loved.” This quotation was just a specimen of the harsh and very practical political annotation of the legendary historian, Niccolò Machiavelli – philosopher, patriot, diplomat, advisor and statesman. He was born as the son of a poor lawyer in 1498, but he never let boundaries restrict him. He still received an excellent humanist education from the University of Florence and was soon after appointed as the Second Chancellor of the Republic of Florence.2 His political importance to Florence would soon give him the opportunity to write what is disputed as one of the most significant works in history, The Prince.

The narrator describes the purpose of The Prince was to “shock and reeducate its reader... to challenge the political pieties of its day and explain to princes and prince-wannabes, how the game is really played”. The book tells of how princes should know how to fight, and how to be heartless, callous, and pitiless. At any time, the prince had to be willing and ready to demolish moral and religious fundamentals, to lie and be dishonest, and to break his word. But, at the same time, the prince had to appear virtuous, dedicated, honest and considerate to his subjects.

Machiavelli’s The Prince is just as applicable to the lives of leaders in the 1500’s as it is for leaders in modern times. Although any person who is in a position of authority might not say that they use Machiavellian tactics. Through their actions it is evident that the teachings of The Prince are still used on a global scale. Concepts such as safeguarding the state, and becoming wealthy, are just a few of the concepts that are beneficial to a strong government and reflected in current political situations at home and abroad.

Machiavelli’s The Prince talks about many issues of modern political philosophy, it was written to help rulers stay in power. His common themes are ruling through fear, being as powerful as a lion and as intelligent as a fox, and to maintain the state at all costs. One of the common discussions about his writings is what he means by “one must learn how to not be good.” For what reason should a ruler learn to not be good? He claims that being good and continuing to be good could only make a ruler more weak. He continues to list good and bad qualities of a ruler and claiming that every ruler will have at least one of the bad qualities but the way he conquers his unpraised attribute is most important. A ruler should hide his flaws so that he only

In Aristotle's "Nicomachean Ethics", the concept of knowledge is expressed by the author as truth of the soul which guides one to find the virtuous middle ground between excess and defect (Aristotle, Pg. 126-128). This aspiration to intellectual virtue is a political one because it is an attempt at doing the right thing and achieving the "good". Within Book VI, Aristotle identifies three different kinds of knowledge: scientific, craft and practical (Aristotle, Pg. 128). Scientific knowledge, as described by Aristotle, is comprised of necessarily eternal truths which are "ungenerated and imperishable" (Aristotle, Pg. 129). Knowledge of science, therefore, must be concerned with the unchanging truths of the natural world. Craft or the intellectual

To describe what it is to be “Machiavellian” one must first describe what it is not. It is not being cruel for the sake of cruelty, just as it is not being good for the sake of goodness. It is being deliberate in one’s actions for the success of the state, or whatever one is ruling over. Machiavellians do not concern themselves with reputation, as long as those they are trying to rule do not hate them. I would describe a Machiavellian as intelligent, motivated by power, and someone that would not hesitate to deceive or manipulate others to reach their goals. While those traits might have brought someone success in ruling as a prince during the Renaissance, disregarding morals and ethics in today’s politics would not get someone very far.

The Oxford Dictionary defines the term “Machiavellian” as someone who is cunning, scheming, and unscrupulous, especially in politics or in advancing one’s career. These principles, as well as others, were established in Niccolo Machiavelli’s book, The Prince. The Prince dwelves on what a person needs to do to obtain and maintain power in a principality. Although it was written nearly 500 years ago, it has influenced countless rulers over time. A great example of one of these rulers is Joseph Stalin, dictator of the U.S.S.R (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) from 1929 - 1953.

There have been thousands of leaders throughout time, each having their own way to run their country, province, or many other things. “The Prince” holds many contemporary ideas that can be applied to present, despite it have been written in the 16th century. It can relate to many modern ways of running a government successfully and offers many valuable lessons that leaders should take into account for. “The Prince” shares ways to make allies with other countries, good defensive and offensive tactics for military troops, and provides details for leader to consider on how to maintain their power and respect.

Machiavelli then moves to the final section of The Prince where he writes about prudence and change around Italy at that time. He starts with stating that there are many princes around Italy that simply lost their states. Machiavelli goes on to state that the reason for this is not because of bad luck or fortune but simply because their power got to their heads, they thought they were invincible, and in the end they found out that they weren’t and crumbled along with their states. Machiavelli then writes that fortune is two ways. Part of it is influenced by actions and the reactions to certain scenarios. The other part is the “sweet” part of fortune that many people believe that they have no control over where in reality they do. Basically

Machiavelli lived from the late 15th century into the early 16th century, best known for his political views in The Prince. Human beings (Man) requires and seeks order. Governments provide order to keep a certain flow in society. This order prevents chaos and allows Man to live day to day as they please under certain restriction. Government is composed of a leader or leaders. The leader is the person or government in charge, while the followers include the people under control (the masses/populace). Machiavelli’s societal ideal is of how to maintain power as a prince should. The Prince describes the nature of “cold-blooded political war.” This is where the term Machiavellian originated (Burton, 8). Machiavelli discusses how princely power is maintained, founded on an idea of human

Niccolo Machiavelli’s advice towards leaders in his book The Prince is both relevant and not relevant today in many ways. The European leader that I have chosen to prove what advice Machiavelli gave in The Prince is relevant and what is not, is Edward Heath. Some of Edwards work relates to the advice given by Machiavelli while many of it is the pure opposite of Machiavelli’s advice.

In life, it is important for us to have and abide by moral values that encourage us to be good people throughout our lives. In the New Testament and Machiavelli’s The Prince, both works express the moral values that one should live by. The New Testament expresses the morals of a Christian life, those you should follow to live a Godly life that has purpose. In The Prince, Machiavelli details a guide that one should use to gain and protect power when being a leader. These two works were written for different purposes, yet they agree on many aspects that would be considered to be good moral ideologies. The main difference is that Machiavelli is understanding in that, especially in a position of power, one cannot always act as the most

During the early 16th century, Martin Luther who was an Augustinian monk and a university lecturer, tried to tell people that the pope is not saying the right things of bible to the people. They are selling the words of bible and are not being honest about its sayings. He translated the bible into German language so that the people understand its real meaning and not fall for the false sayings by the preachers of the church. He believed the way the church was punishing the people for their sins was not right and it was not in their hands to punish them so severely. He tried to reform this system and protested against it in a vast way. He tried to make others understand by using pamphlets and other sources so that they

In my opinion, the readings of Machiavelli is concerned with both one’s actions and result. From Machiavelli reading, most of the princes were not fortune to be in line for prince hood. However, they rose from the private station to attain their height where they envision themselves and how things ought to be. We practical do this kind of act every day in our lives. Many at a time when one want to attain a goal, you tend to see the result of it in your mind and then plan how to reach that goal, by putting in place a plan of actions to execute that plan. On the other hand, some may not care how to get there, so far as they attain their goal they were ok. For instance, the actions and the genius of this man “Agathocles, the Sicilian, became