Who Is Livy On Promoting A Common Good

He placed emphasis on how a prince should do anything to maintain and increase their own powers – it was apparent that he felt the individual needs of a prince in terms of the power and authority was important and that a prince should do whatever he felt necessary to protect the state and as a result it would mean a prince’s position as a ruler was also prodected. [Wheeler, 2011] Machiavelli placed a large amount on the emphasis on the fact that a prince must be seen to be a moral - but he is able act un-morally if it contributes to the good of the state or provides him with more power. He must be loved by the people and he must also be feared in order to maintain his role as a ruler of a state. Machiavelli argued that if a prince cannot be both loved and feared - it is better for him to be feared as more people would be scared to question him and afraid of the consequences that may follow. This results in more power and authority for the prince but at the same time it means that the prince is less accountable. This is a benefit for the prince but no for the people living within the state that Machiavelli is suggesting (Macmillian, 2006)

Machiavelli wrote The Prince in 16th-century. His methods of acquiring and maintaining rule over people are not relevant in today’s modern American society. There are many principles that are still true in politics today, but the methods of ruling can no longer be used in American society today.

In the article written by Vincent Barnett, he explains the different reasons that Machiavelli might have written “The Prince”. He also mentions the lasting effects of” The prince” and also mentioned how Machiavelli was ridiculed and judged for his brutally honest writing. Barnett mentioned that Machiavelli had lost his job as the secretary to the chancery in Florence. After losing his job he was arrested, tortured, and became extremely bitter. One of the possible motives for writing “The Prince” was that Machiavelli was trying to get reinstated back into his old job. Machiavelli could have also intended” The Prince” to hit the audience as satirical. Possibly to poke fun at all the failures of the political leaders and to make them look unintelligent.

The main rhetorical device in “The Prince” is logos. Nearly every sentence from the passage could be considered logical. Machiavelli achieves this through his formal and straightforward narration, which helps him maintain objectivity. His use of logos helps achieve his propose by delivering concise facts about the proper way to rule during this period of time. By employing logic, Machiavelli manages to deliver his purpose consistently

Niccoló Machiavelli’s The Prince is very harsh and opinionated. It is chalk full of information regarding multiple empires and leaders and their ways of governing their subjects. He bases his ideas off of their rulers and adds to their thought processes as well. Another one of his tactics when presenting this information is using analogies and thinking of theoretical circumstances such as, “ A prince being thus obliged to know well how to act as a beast must imitate the fox and the lion, for the lion cannot protect himself from traps, and the fox cannot defend himself from wolves” (72-73). This is why The Prince leans more towards a persuasive argument rather than an informative essay. However, because Machiavelli did not write this specifically

In The Prince and the Discourses, Machiavelli asserts his views of a political leader during a

Machiavelli wrote The Prince because he wanted to impress Lorenzo de Medici, who was the current ruler, and prove that he was knowledgeable and a useful advisor to him. He also wrote it as a mirror for Princes to read and understand how to be effective in power.

The Prince had no actual characters, but instead discussed and analyzed the political policies of political leaders, highlighting their faults and strengths. The setting was 1513 Europe. This is the same time when major areas were having power struggles and religious conflict was rampant. His tone is that of the ambitious leader. It conveys the thoughts of one who knows how to gain and maintain power. Though this is true, the thoughts are built upon principalities probably learned by way of many mistakes made by one who will never again be in the position to imply his theorems and strategies. Machiavelli's own ruthless mind probably served as the bases for him knowing the ways of the corrupt. The thesis seems to

Within paragraph three, under the subtitle Interpreting The Prince, Vincent Barnett explains a single theory of why Nicco Machiavelli wrote "The Prince". Vincent Barnett says Machiavelli may have written "The Prince" to impress political leaders with his sly and malicious instructions on how to lead a state, in hope that he would be accepted back into the political field. However, Vincent Barnett says this theory is doubtful because Machiavelli was never accepted back into the political field before he died.

Particularly I find the prince to be straddling our world, there is even a word after its author, which is Machiavellianism which definition revolves around his lion and fox metaphor it, is to be cunning and deceitful. Machiavelli’s the prince is a recommended text to most political leaders today. Political advisors would encourage men in power to follow his reasoning. This is because the field involving politics, political science was greatly influenced by Machiavelli. To Machiavelli, to achieve something you have to do whatever no matter how immoral, by any means necessary.

  The Prince is a celebrated and highly controversial piece of work by the Italian aristocrat Niccolo Machiavelli. His work is a summation of all the qualities a prince must have in order to remain in his position. Machiavelli supports the idea that a prince use his power for the ultimate benefit of all, but he also does not condemn the use of any unpleasant means in order for the prince to maintain his power. His ideas both compare and contrast to the methods used by Prince Hamlet of Denmark in Shakespeare's Hamlet. Hamlet, as we know, struggles mightily to maintain his position as the prince, and one must wonder if this is due to some of the highly essential qualities outlined by

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 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.

The Prince is essentially a guide book on how to acquire and maintain political power. We can think of it as a collection of rules and methods to achieve a level of superior authority. Its main focus is that the ends—no matter how immoral—justify the means for preserving political authority. While some may agree with this mindset of thinking many today dismiss Machiavelli as a cynic. The book shows rulers how it is that they should act to survive in the real world to maintain authority. While Niccolo Machiavelli’s ideas can be radical, they helped to spark a revolution in political philosophy. Although his ideas might have not been completely original, they were very different and unheard of at the time, The Prince, was published. Machiavelli uses many methods to convey his messages including biblical comparisons and of course metaphors. This character can be viewed in several manners. He is almighty and powerful, stopping at nothing to achieve his goals or have his ways. While this quality does qualify him to be a might leader it also raises the question of immorality. How far will one go to maintain order? Would you stop at nothing to achieve this task? Machiavelli shows this by saying, “it is

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.