A Comparison of Societies in Machiavelli's The Prince and More's Utopia
A perfect society has always been the goal for many; unfortunately it has only existed in books. The Prince by Niccoló Machiavelli, written in 1513, provides necessary information to become a Prince who will obtain, keep, and please his empire. Thomas More's Utopia, written in 1516, creates an ideal civilization that will live happily, comfortably, and without any problems. Both books attempted to solve problems within a society by critiquing other institutions and creating their own solutions. With the rise in cities, trade, and the economy in the 15th century, people began to realize order and structure in a society is necessary to flourish. Machiavelli and More left a modern legacy by striving for a better well being in societies and creating an ideal civilization that would prosper even in times of social, economic, and political difficulty.
In order to create structure in a society, one must ensure the care of its people. In the imaginary civilization of Utopia, the main strategy is to "get through life as comfortably and cheerfully as we can, and help other members of our species to do so too" (More 92). More focuses on the well being of its citizens to create happiness and order within the society. He does this by initiating the idea of human rights and equality. With the sense of equality in society people can help each other to live blissfully, and stop trying to become better than their neighbors.
Machiavelli writes that domination over its people is the only way to control a society. If a Prince wants to hold a city securely, the "surest way is to wipe them out" (Machiavelli 17). By devastating its people, they are forced to be dependen...
... middle of paper ...
...t upon him. Utopia will avoid war at all costs because of concern for the well being of its citizens, while a Prince must initiate war and conquer other empires to show power in his empire and avoid being conquered by enemies. While Utopia focuses on communal ownership and devalues money and material objects, Machiavelli realizes the only way to be a successful Prince is to gain fortune through money, land, and fame in his society. Although only idealistic, these books offered solutions to many problems that faced the 16th century and could help future leaders to resolve issues to create a more structured civilization. Machiavelli and More opened the door for new ideas that essentially created many societies that exist today.
Works Cited
Machiavelli, Niccoló. The Prince. New York: Penguin Classics, 1999.
More, Thomas. Utopia. New York: Penguin Classics, 1965.
...aracter is reflected in his thoughts rather than his actions (or lack thereof). Perrotta takes the ever-prevalent presence of peer pressure and writes about it in a humorous yet heartfelt way, allowing the reader to understand and empathize with Buddy, and teenagers as a whole.
Overall, Lincoln is a comprehensive study of Abraham Lincoln’s life and is a factual goldmine. Donald’s omission of summarizing paragraphs and lack of conclusion make understanding the larger picture hard if the reader is unfamiliar with the story of Abraham Lincoln, so this book is best-suited to researchers and history buffs. Even though Donald’s thesis was ill-supported, the value of his book did not lie with the argument, but with the sheer amount of information contained within the pages, making the thesis the lesser focus of the work.
Utopia has a more democratic government. Each set of households elects someone and then those elects elect others, and although there is a prince they still have the power to throw him out of office if he’s involved in any wrong doing. And although their prince doesn’t have as much power as a prince in Machiavelli’s writing the prince in Utopia serves a different purpose. The prince in Utopia is there to provide stability. With the syphogrants and tranibors changing annually the stability of a constant figure head is needed. More describes the government as follows
The beginnings of Utopia are not vivid in detail; however, they are adequate for a playground for conducive thinking. The indigenous are seen as ignorant and beast like (More, 1516). This could be defined as how he thinks the state of nature was in everyone's case. It is apparent that the natives have not killed off themselves nor the intruding militia. The reflection of this could infer that More is sharing that the state of nature is based on some form of reason and social values. Unlike the view of human nature from the Philosopher Machiavelli, where he feels that human nature is evil, More seems for think the contrary. Machiavelli thinks that humans by nature are greedy and selfish (Machiavelli, 1532). This view which is being intercepted and circulated around Europe around the same time as More could be a source of conflict. More, feeling that humans naturally have a reasonable desire for pleasure, as stated later in Book Two of Utopia, are not inherently greedy or selfish. Throughout the entirety of his work, though not explicitly, he is defending humanism. While not directly acknowledging the negatives of this human happiness More does explain that i...
Abraham Lincoln, an autodidactic early American, grew up amidst the unlikely setting of the American frontier to an impoverished and undistinguished family (Donald n.p.). Lincoln built himself up in a world built to bring him down, and rose “from [these] humble origins in Kentucky, to prominent positions in legal and political circles of Illinois, and then to the pinnacle of presidency” (Donald n.p.). Within two months of gaining presidency, in contempt of Lincoln’s noble efforts, the American Civil War broke out amongst the country, and Abraham Lincoln, undeterred by the considerable amount of stress he was under, managed to keep together and ultimately strengthen the broken nation (Gienapp). Lincoln boldly proceeded to denounce and even completely abolish slavery in America when he instituted the Emancipation Proclamation during the Civil War, and adeptly convinced the Senate to pass the Thirteenth Amendment (Hamilton). Abraham Lincoln, America’s sixteenth president, left a significant impact on the country when he left an admirable legacy for future Americans to appreciate despite his difficult upbringing and personal life, when he consolidated the Union despite a civil war, and when he led the revolutionary movement to abolish slavery despite the controversy.
Dilorenzo, Thomas J.. The Real Lincoln: a new look at Abraham Lincoln, his agenda, and an unnecessary war. Roseville, Calif: Prima, 2002
Holzer, Harold (2004). Heroes of History Lecture: Abraham Lincoln, American Hero. National Endowment for the Humanities. Retrieved from We the People.gov.
Abraham Lincoln, Letter to Salmon P. Chase (September 2, 1863), in Abraham Lincoln, Slavery, and the Civil war, Ed. Michael P. Johnson (Boston: Bedford Books, 2011)
As he begins to conclude, Machiavelli states that the prince: “should think about avoiding those things which make him hated and despised.” (Mach 48) Although these lack any withstanding moral values, they are effective in the sense that they better serve their purpose. Machiavelli was seeking to display a way to hold political power by any means possible not a utopian state. This may mean malicious acts, imprisonment, and torture, or it may mean the utilization of power to achieve a common good. Machiavelli doesn’t elaborate on this. He concentrates on a realistic approach towards government, as he remains concerned with the establishment and protection of power.
Human Nature in The Prince by Machiavelli and Utopia by Thomas More It is difficult to determine Niccolo Machiavelli?s and Thomas More?s view on human?s nature. Each took a different approach to the topic. Through Utopia, Thomas More attempted to change man?s thinking by creating an ideological society. Niccolo Machiavelli, through The Prince, attempted to teach man how to deal with human nature.
In ‘The Important of Being Earnest’, Oscar Wilde's ridiculing representation of Victorian Society comments on the ridiculous behavior of the Victorian Society’s inability to recognise the difference between important and unimportant issues. Therefore, Oscar Wilde subverts Victorian values to mock and imply triviality and superficiality. Wilde forces the audience to rethink the importance of their life and how they act while also scrutinizing the ignorance of the characters in upper class society through mocking their morals and obsessive fascinations. Wilde's uses the inversion of what isn’t serious and what is to ridicule Victorian Society. Despite this, Wilde wanted to create something beautiful and superficial. Hence, it would be more accurate to say everything in the play is presented as superficial so perhaps there isn’t a message that needs to be taken seriously.
However while this indeed does benefit society as a whole one must question whether it benefits its members and their own personal happiness. Certainly More’s Utopia benefits its people in ...
Growing up in India, I have heard much about vegan diets. Many people take on vegetarian diets due to religious beliefs, personal interest, ethical issues, and many other reasons. So what exactly is a vegetarian diet? Is it better for the body? Vegetarian diets can provide the necessary nutrients; as well, as reduce the likelihood of chronic diseases caused by unhealthful diet; however, if the food intake is not closely monitored it can lead to deficiencies. Then the question becomes, if vegetarian diets are better, then why exactly do we need meat products in our diet? In this research paper, I want explore the pro and cons of vegetarian diet and its implications.
Machiavelli's views have been misinterpreted since his book was first written, people take him in the wrong way, and are offended by what he says. Careless readers take him in a completely wrong way, such as they think that he believes that the end justifies the means, that a leader should lie to the people, and that a ruler has to rule with force. In actuality, Machiavelli means no such thing, he says that there are times when the common good outweighs the means, and the morality of a rulers actions. He also says that you cannot be loved by everyone, so try to be loved and feared at the same time, but of the two, choose to be feared. The Prince is considered to be one of the most important of nonfiction literature written in the history of mankind. It gave an accurate and truthful description of the method of governing.
Machiavelli argues in chapter 5 that the key to taking over a free state is initially to destroy it. By destroying the city, Machiavelli believes that the citizens will have no choice but to follow the direction of the new prince. He goes deeper to say that if a prince who occupies these cities does not destroy it, he risk the probable outcome of a rebellion. This rebellion is brought fourth by the tradition held by the citizens and the memories of the former way of government. The second step is to live there in person to establish loyalty and the third step is letting the people live by its own laws, but establish a small government who is loyal to you to keep it friendly. Chapter 6 gives us some insight on what Machiavelli feels leadership is. Leaders, he explains, are followers too in many ways. All leaders are imitating great rulers in history. A leader who really wants to achieve glory, does so by his own prowess, meaning by his own talent. Anyone can inherit a kingdom, but not anyone can rule it with natural leadership. This kind of leadership is what makes great leaders in history such as Moses or Cyrus. Chapter 7 explains that a leader should not try to buy his subjects. If a prince buys his subjects they will only temporarily be loyal. A prince needs to eliminate his enemies and do so all at once. Even if a prince does not succeed in ruling by his own prowess in his lifetime, he is still setting a good foundation for future princes which is just as important. Chapter 8 explains the level of evil that should be done in order to rise to power. He gives us clear insight of the pros and cons of obtaining power by evil means and how to use evil in ways of benefit. Machiavelli was a man of manipulation.