Machiavellian

morality which guided Socrates were an end all, be all for him. He did not wish to live without his search for truth. Socrates would see a Machiavellian Prince as self-centered, and void of morals. A Machiavellian prince would not appreciate the way Socrates carried himself and would see him as a challenge to his authority. Socrates would not support a Machiavellian society because most likely he would not be free to philosophize as he wished to and would not approve of the methods used by the prince

Ribner highlights Machiavelli’s influence on Elizabethan England, especially in the theatre. Ribner begins by stating that many critics have noted the Machiavellian influences in Shakespearean characters, such as Othello’s Iago and King Lear’s Edmund. Another critic also argued that Thomas Cromwell’s political career closely resembles Machiavellian philosophy. In this article, Ribner provides several parallels between Richard II’s Bolingbroke and the philosophy within Machiavelli’s The Prince. Ribner

Shakespeare explores the Machiavellian nature of deception during the Elizabethan era via the relation of political idealism in the tragic form to reveal the disrupted hierarchy. While the antagonist of the play, Iago, deceives his inferior, Cassio, to help him on his revenge scheme on the protagonist, Othello, he states “Our bodies are our gardens, to the which our will are gardeners” (A1S3 Line 362-363). Shakespeare’s use of metaphor effectively portrays the Machiavellian form of deceit, as it embodies

From describing world leaders to political antiheroes in television dramas, characterizing someone as a “Machiavellian figure” is perceived more as derisive description than an accurate representation of that person’s philosophical views of power. This popular depiction is due to Niccolo Machiavelli’s harsh portrayal of the interlaced relationship between power and politics in his treatise, The Prince. Machiavelli begins his work by contending that it is “more effective” to reveal the “practical

Scar, like Machiavellian did not like the conservative nature of his older brother. He believed in a more forward way of holding the power. “Scar resents the conservative traditions that prevent the smartest, most capable from rising to power” (8 greatest). The best rulers

not the only work of literature that manifests Machiavellian techniques. William Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar utilizes similar methods. As shown in Julius Caesar and The Prince, a leader who follows Machiavelli’s advice will accomplish their goals; if the leader does not adhere to Machiavelli’s recommendations, then the leader will not fulfill his aspiration. A

references Italy and their political situations as an example to their downfall to make his points and the idea of a Machiavellian leader. Machiavellian is common in leaders who are “cunning, scheming, and unscrupulous, especially in politics or in advancing one's career.” (Oxford Dictionary) To be a Machiavellian you must be a leader who can manipulate to get one’s achievements. A Machiavellian can be successful

He is often described as a Machiavellian character due to his cunning, narcissistic personality. However, he does not display all of the characteristics required of a Machiavellian ruler. Richard is unable to retain his power, being killed by Richmond soon after his own coronation. The fatal flaws that leads to Richards demise is that he retains his religious beliefs, lacks the fear of his peer/followers, and fails to use his deputies properly, unlike a true Machiavellian. Richard’s religious beliefs

both the Stanford experiment and prince we can say that the guards are not truly Machiavellian. This conclusion can be made after analyzing the set rules written in Machiavelli’s prince. In the prince, he clearly says to avoid hatred at all costs, to Desire to be clement, not cruel, and in turn, try to become both loved and feared. These rules though not easy to lead by are what set the standard of truly being Machiavellian. The Stanford experiment was a study conducted to show how average people would

marketers sometimes have the same traits as Machiavellians and narcissists. To test that statement Shelby Hunt and Lawrence Chonko gave a group of professional marketers the Machiavellian scale to see how many of the same traits they shared with con artists. Results of the scale, showed that over ten percent scored in the highest possible range. Then, Richard Christie and Florence Geis, Machiavellian researchers, concluded that the highest Machiavellian scale scorers were psychiatrists. Psychiatry’s