Defining Virtue : Machiavelli 's New Representation Of Lucrezia Vs. Lucretia

This extensive perception of virtue may include such precise virtue as courage, wisdom, or moderation, but it should be possible to offer a perfectly general description of virtue as a whole, the skill or ability to be fully human. It is impossible for each human being to have the same virtue because everyone created unequally.

Virtue is a quality that one possesses. But how can virtue be attained? Does someone simply decide they want to be virtuous? The question I am focusing on is as follows: Is avoiding evil sufficient to make one virtuous or must virtue be an active choice? Upon hearing this question I immediately thought “of course just avoiding evil alone doesn't make one virtuous”, but as I began to think more deeply about the question and to analyze examples from “Out Of The Silent Planet” by C.S. Lewis, it started to change what I thought. I do think that virtue is an active choice, however I also think avoiding evil is active choice.

In The Prince, Machiavelli begins by defining virtue as being able to lead with fear and not invoking hate. As evidence he conjures a situation where a prince will give his citizens “hope that the evil will not be for long” (73) which in turn makes his subjects keener toward him. However, virtue is more than this initial definition. In Chapter 3 Machiavelli suggests that a prince needs to be able to see into the future of his people and should live on their land so they are able to understand the needs of their people. (44) By living with his people Machiavelli implies that they the prince will be more understanding of the issues and will be able to overcome them before it turns into something catastrophic. A prince must form strong bonds with their citizens, and not become hated.

Virtù is the human energy or action that is contrary to the idea of luck. Although Machiavelli did not exclude the idea of goodness or virtuous behavior in the word, it does not necessarily include it, either. Virtù is the skill, talent, or ability administered toward the achievement of certain goals, and according to Machiavelli, the most significant quality for a prince. Even villains such as Agathocles or barbaric rulers like Severus can possess virtù. It can be inferred from Machiavelli’s work that virtù could defeat fortuna if it was done correctly. A prince would always be successful if he could modify his virtù to the current circumstances. But then again, his works imply that there is a connection between virtu and fortuna. He stated that virtù is wasted if there is no fortuna, and vice versa, which means that there is some sort of collaboration between the two forces. The two forces are dependent on each other.It is difficult and nearly impossible to completely avoid or change the effects of Fortuna, but it could be prepared for and decrease its negative effects.

definition of virtue says it is a point between a deficiency and an excess of trait, and the point of

In The Morals of the Prince Machiavelli expresses his presumption on how a prince should act. He expresses that a prince should be feared, merciful, stingy, etc. He is right because if a prince is loved and too generous then people will take advantage of him and that will lead to his down fall. A prince must act appropriately to remain in power. Machiavelli gives his best ideas to keep a prince in power.

In his Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle explores virtues as necessary conditions for being happy. A virtuous person is a person with a disposition toward virtuous actions and who derives pleasure from behaving virtuously. Aristotle distinguishes between two types of human virtue: virtues of thought and virtues of character. Virtues of thought are acquired through learning and include virtues like wisdom and prudence; virtues of character include bravery and charity, which are acquired by habituation and require external goods to develop. As a consequence, not all people can acquire virtues of character because not all people have the external goods and resources required to develop that disposition.

The Republic and The Laws was a long book, and of course I read through it, however I didn’t necessarily note as much as I should of nor immerse myself into the book. I was busy with reading Machiavelli and other courses for school, because of that I didn’t have any sources to cite. Not only that, the book was confusing and it was much easier for me to get help from sources online that better explained his political stances.

Do you love stories? Well if you love it I’m pretty sure that every story you read have virtues or values. Thus, every single story has a virtue in life that we can use to live. Virtue is a quality of moral goodness or excellence. When we speak of individual virtues, we are talking about qualities that we aspire to. A virtue must be cultivated for it to become a habitual way of living in the world around us.

When reading Niccolo Machiavelli's The Prince, one can't help but grasp Machiavelli's argument that morality and politics can not exist in the same forum. However, when examining Machiavelli's various concepts in depth, one can conclude that perhaps his suggested violence and evil is fueled by a moral end of sorts. First and foremost, one must have the understanding that this book is aimed solely at the Prince or Emperor with the express purpose of aiding him in maintaining power. Therefore, it is essential to grasp his concepts of fortune and virtue. These two contrary concepts reflect the manner in which a Prince should govern while minimizing all chance and uncertainty. This kind of governing demands violence to be taken, however

When reading Niccolo Machiavelli’s The Prince, one can’t help but grasp Machiavelli’s argument that morality and politics can not exist in the same forum. However, when examining Machiavelli’s various concepts in depth, one can conclude that perhaps his suggested violence and evil is fueled by a moral end of sorts. First and foremost, one must have the understanding that this book is aimed solely at the Prince or Emperor with the express purpose of aiding him in maintaining power. Therefore, it is essential to grasp his concepts of fortune and virtue. These two contrary concepts reflect the manner in which a Prince should govern while minimizing all chance and uncertainty. This kind of governing demands violence to be taken, however this

Machiavelli opens his Discourses on Livy by declaring that what will follow will be entirely revolutionary—“a path yet untrodden by anyone”—but then quickly backs down from such assertions, shifting his focus away from his own efforts to the modern views of the ancients, and leaving the nature of this revolutionary undertaking ambiguous (Discourses, 5) . Indeed, the purpose of the whole work is repeatedly skirted in the preface. Machiavelli instead focuses on the distinction between the moderns and the ancients, mourning the superficial modern adoption of ancient ideas in art and law that lacks a deeper understanding of the philosophical underpinnings of ancient thought. He

Relying on the needs of the society of that time, Machiavelli comes to the conclusion that the most important task is the formation of a single Italian state (Machiavelli 15). Developing his thoughts, the author comes to the following inference: only a prince can become a leader capable of leading people and building a unified state. It is not a concrete historical personality but someone abstract, symbolic, possessing such qualities that in the aggregate are inaccessible to any living ruler. That is why Machiavelli devotes most of his research to the issue of what qualities should the prince possess to fulfill the historical task of developing a new state. The written work is constructed strictly logically and objectively. Even though the image of an ideal prince is abstract, Machiavelli argues that he should be ruthless, deceiving, and selfish.

This idea of goodness and virtue goes anything beyond worldly values and ideals. "A good man cannot be harmed either in life or in death"(41d), says Socrates further explaining that no matter what, "a better man [cannot] be harmed by a worse"(30d). Having virtue gives you a certain happiness that is well beyond life or death or worldly values and goods.

It is fundamentally important to preface the discussion hosted in this essay by addressing ourselves to the most mundane question-why consider Machiavelli in the context of philosophy, least of all, political philosophy? This question dominates any philosophical inquiries of the Machiavelli’s political ideologies. Put differently, do the contributions by Niccolò Machiavelli to the various salient discourses in the Western thought, most notably political theory, meet the requisite standard models of academic philosophy? Machiavelli essentially seems not to consider himself a philosopher. In fact, he overtly disapproved of any philosophical inquiries into his works. In addition, his credentials do not qualify him to be properly admitted within the realm of philosophy (NeDermAN, 2002).