Human Nature

In the era that both Machiavelli and Rousseau, the way that they were brought up had many similarities (e.g. the way they were governed), but it also became apparent that they had very diverse ways of thinking and analyzing many of the social problems that plagued their respective nations. At the time that Machiavelli was writing his prized piece, “The Prince”, Italy was under high scrutiny for engaging in various war to expand their nation; nonetheless, to make matters worse their kings both suddenly died and someone inexperienced came into power that ultimately forced Italy to give up its Northern estates. “The Prince” was not meant to be a piece that illustrates how a prince should behave, but instead it was more a blueprint for individuals to maintain their power for as long as they desired.

Machiavelli states that human nature is inherently flawed in his work The Prince. People are selfish, easily deceived, and are never satisfied. Humans act in their own self interest, believe what their eyes tell them and are never truly happy no matter how many riches they acquire. These are traits which everyone possesses, but some choose to not take ownership of. While these traits do not make human nature evil, but rather easier to take advantage of. Machiavelli argues throughout the book that if a ruler understand how manipulate these fatal flaws they can rule them without getting over thrown.

In other words Machiavelli says that human nature praises certain qualities and blame others, but there is no way that humans can do all the good things while avoiding the bad things. What makes a "good prince" in the eyes of Machiavelli is one that figures out how to not take so much blame when he does wrong, and tries to do as many good things as he can. For example regarding generosity and miserliness, Machiavelli says to be considered truly generous, one must be miserly at times:"A prince, therefore, being unable to use his virtue of generosity in a manner which will not harm himself... should, if he is wise, not worry about being called a miser; for with time, he will come to be considered more generous..." (53) In one final contrast, according to Machiavelli in regards to courage and cowardice, mercy and treachery he says "That every prince must desire to be considered merciful and not cruel; never the less, he must take care not to misuse this mercy...Therefore, a prince must not worry about the reproach of cruelty, when it is a matter of keeping his subjects united and loyal" (55). According to Machiavelli,

In Genesis the word of God leads humanity in the direction of self preservation, urging them to procreate, to ”Be fruitful and multiply” (Genesis 9:1), and to minimize hostility and violence among people. As Freud asserted, “Besides the instinct to preserve living substance and join it into ever larger units, there must exist another, contrary instinct seeking to dissolve those units and bring them back to their primeval, inorganic state” (Freud 77). Genesis exemplifies the struggle between the two opposing human instincts, with God acting as a moderator between them. Forms of justice are put into place in an attempt to control these drives, one example being the proclamation that “Whoever sheds the blood of a human, by a human shall that person’s blood be shed” (Genesis 9:6). The ethics and laws that develop throughout Genesis seek to “prevent the crudest excesses of brutal violence” but are unable to control “the more cautious and refined manifestations of human aggressiveness” (Freud 70). Since they cannot be completely eradicated, the scriptures instead play into the more negative aspects of human nature, especially narcissism, and manipulate them into a force for conservation rather than annihilation.

Machiavelli’s interpretation of human nature was greatly shaped by his belief in God. In his writings, Machiavelli conceives that humans were given free will by God, and the choices made with such freedom established the innate flaws in humans. Based on that, he attributes the successes and failure of princes to their intrinsic weaknesses, and directs his writing towards those faults. His works are rooted in how personal attributes tend to affect the decisions one makes and focuses on the singular commanding force of power. Fixating on how the prince needs to draw people’s support, Machiavelli emphasizes the importance of doing what is best for the greater good. He proposed that working toward a selfish goal, instead of striving towards a better state, should warrant punishment. Machiavelli is a practical person and always thought of pragmatic ways to approach situations, applying to his notions regarding politics and

Prompt 1: Machiavelli quite simply has a pessimistic view on humanity. As he mentions in, The Prince, “…it is necessary for anyone who organizes a republic and institutes laws to take for granted that all men are evil and that they always express the sickness of their spirit whenever they have the opportunity..(181-182).” I don't believe that Machiavelli thought that man was completely evil, but rather, they will do as they need to get what they want. He believed that man is quite fickle in nature, and whenever an opportunity in self gain presents itself, that man will take it. Man is weak, selfish, and corruptible. Rousseau on the other hand, didn’t share the less than ideal outlook at man.He said,

4. '84: Compare and contrast the views of Machiavelli and Rousseau on human nature and

In The Prince, Machiavelli explains what a good and successful prince should be like. He advocates a strong, cutthroat authority figure and encourages the winning of power by any means necessary. The main theme in The Prince is that mob rule is dangerous, for people know only what is good for themselves and not what is good for the whole. The common people, in Machiavelli’s view, “are ungrateful, fickle, liars, and deceivers, they shun danger and are greedy for profit; while you treat them well, they are yours”. He believes that these commoners should be

Machiavelli’s views were drastically different from other humanists at his time. He strongly promoted a secular society and felt morality was not necessary but stood in the way of a successfully governed state. He stated that people generally tended to work for their own best interests and gave little thought to the well being of the state. He distrusted citizens saying, “In time of adversity,

Machiavelli considers society an immoral place. According to Machiavelli as stated in The Discourses on Livy, “for as men are, by nature, more prone to evil than to good”. The Prince is a manual for being a successful ruler in an immoral society. Often times that success is met by committing immoral acts. Machiavelli, an outsider to the inner workings of government gives what he thinks are the critical tools to being a successful ruler in modern society. “Sometimes you have to play hardball” is a saying from today that I relate to his philosophies.

Human nature can be defined and perceived in many ways as both Machiavelli and More had different viewpoints on this subject. During the sixteenth century being in a position of having power over a country or Kingdom came with much respect to the people living within your community. Machiavelli expressed power as an essential attribute to have when governing a country. Except Machiavelli truly believed that it would be best for a Prince to be the main person in authority when is comes to governing a country. He believed that, “A Prince must have no other object or thought, nor acquire skill in anything, except war, its organization, and its discipline” (Machiavelli, 36).

The attitude presented in The Prince brings up an interesting paradox: although Machiavelli champions the free will and cunning of the elite prince, he seems to hold the autonomy of the masses in low esteem, assuming throughout his book that mankind in general is selfish, simple, and unreliable—the opposite of the cool, calculating prince that Machiavelli idealizes. In fact, almost all his advice to the aspiring leader seems to be based on a completely pessimistic view of human nature, perhaps because Machiavelli thinks it safest to assume the worst. For example, on page 59, he writes, “For this may be said of men generally: they are ungrateful, fickle,

When examining Machiavelli political ideals, it is hard to look at it without saying this is cruel and not ideal in any sense. Machiavelli is a prime example for a strong leader that pursues justice through unification and has shown to be very open-minded. Justice doesn’t just come through cruelty and strength, it also requires intelligence with careful studies. As exhibited in the prior quote, he takes in historical mistakes and success to shape his ideal. To have a culture with justice, Machiavelli pushes that “It is necessary for a prince who wish to maintain his position to learn how not to be good, and to use this knowledge or not to use it accordingly” (224). It is quite evident that Machiavelli is willing to use the full extent of his power without fear. Through his willingness and open-mindedness, he examines both side, good and the bad, for the benefit of his country. He believes only those that can utilize both knowledge is fit for the position of being a prince. When he says knowledge, it goes deep into the studies of history and past experiences. It is shown time and time again throughout his

He sees no purpose in restraining and controlling oneself for the society because the society will not prosper if the ruler does not. Ruthlessness, maliciousness, and deviousness are all hailed as being acceptable, in fact encouraged, as means of securing position of power. Through his prioritizing, Machiavelli does not seem to be as concerned with the society and the individual as the previous philosophers in history have been. Rather, he sees power as the one and only goal in life, regardless of the individual or the state. Again, though, he is a reflection of his times. The men of the Renaissance era wanted many things--money, power, enjoyment in life--regardless of the moral cost. Others would argue that these superfluities either meant nothing or would not occur without restraining the desires of both ones self and ones state. One needs balance of everything in order to reach the ideals of perfection, but Machiavelli would argue that perfection is not real and so is not worth striving for. Instead, one must live for ones self. He makes the generalization of men that:

On the contrary, Machiavelli believes that man should look out for himself and no one else; he believes that men are only concerned with their own self-interest anyways. Human nature is a concept that Machiavelli really mocks in a sense in that he sets guidelines in exactly what a prince needs to be in order to be successful. He states that the prince should be the one and only sole authority, and he must be trustworthy and cause fear in order to have