Moreover, for the full understanding of our analysis, it is really important to focus also on Dante 's political treaty titled 'de Monarchia ', which suggested the division of the temporal power from the spiritual one, whose theory was seen as extremely innovative for Dante 's time. In addition, Dante 's universal Monarchy became a very controversial topic during the Middle Ages, as he theorised that the Communes had the need to keep their own autonomy from Pope 's political interference.
Dante 's political thought came out from his own political experiences, as he was personally involved in the politics and administration of his Florence (Dante was named prior of Florence on 15th of Jun 1300), whose conflictual political background followed
…show more content…
In particular, according to Dante, the spiritual power had the duty to help the temporal power, ensuring to the man peace on the earth (thanks to the fulfillment of the temporal power) and beatitude in the contemplative life (thanks to the fulfillment of the spiritual one). Many scholars assert that Dante 's idea of a Universal Monarch grew up in his mind after his political experience about the consequences to live in a society built on the fragmentation of the Communes. In fact, if the author of the 'de Monarchia ', before his exile, defended firmly the autonomy of the Communes, subsequently, his political thought rejected the idea of their fragmentation, theorising a new universal model of monarchy with the full legitimacy of the imperial …show more content…
Obviously, this particular status assured to all men the use of all material and spiritual goods. Consequently to the original sin (that had corrupted both, human body and soul) for the human society became necessary the birth of various political and repressive forms of organizations, whose main purpose was to help all men to reach their two ultimate ends. In summary, subsequently to men 's imperfection, the human society needed the help of a universal monarchy as 'remedium sins ' and from this point of view, Nardi sees in the universal empire an institution that possess only a relative naturalness and not the absolute
Machiavelli’s, “The Prince” is the ideal book for individuals intending to both govern and maintain a strong nation. Filled with practical advice, he includes numerous religious references to support his claims. He devotes a chapter within the book to speak about the ancient founders of states. In the chapter called, “On new principalities that are acquired by one’s own arms and by virtue”, Machiavelli discussed the importance of a prince to have their own talent in governing a nation, rather than having relied on fortune to rule. The latter is a risk no leader should take and he cited past leaders as a guide for both the current and future princes.
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, when a state is in need of its citizens, there are few to be found.” In his writings in The Prince, he constantly questioned the citizens’ loyalty and warned for the leaders to be wary in trusting citizens. His radical and distrusting thoughts on human nature were derived out of concern for Italy’s then unstable government. Machiavelli also had a s...
Ideally, all through Occidental account, lawless types of administration, for instance totalitarianism, have been deemed as tainted by description. Therefore, in case the government essence is described as justice, and in case it is appreciated that regulations are the calming energies in the public matters of men (as certainly it at all times has been from the time of Plato called upon Zeus, the boundaries god), at that moment, the trouble of the body politic movement along with the acts of its residents occurs (Arendt 366-7). Actually, this dehumanizes them to some degree. This is for the fact that as a consequence of constitutional government ‘Lawfulness’ remains a unconstructive decisive factor in to the extent that it sets the boundaries to other than not capable of explaining the human’s actions’ intention force: the enormity, except as well the confound of rules in sovereign communities is that they merely notify what one is not supposed to, other than by no means what one is supposed to do (Arendt 367). For that reason, Arendt puts downs an immense store by Montesquieu breakthrough of the code of act ruling the deeds of both administration and the individuals under it: in a democracy-virtue, in monarchy-honor, and in totalitarian government-fear (Arendt
The government within the monarchical society was populated by the aristocracy. It was they who were depended upon for directing the course of governmental affairs. The controls of all co...
It has been shown again and again throughout history and literature that if there is a perfect human he is not also the perfect ruler. Those traits which we hold as good, such as the following of some sort of moral code, interfere with the necessity of detachment in a ruler. In both Henry IV and Richard II, Shakespeare explores what properties must be present in a good ruler. Those who are imperfect morally, who take into account only self-interest and not honor or what is appropriate, rise to rule, and stay in power.
In an earlier century, Niccoló Machiavelli, wrote a document called, “The Prince.” This book was about what it takes to be a successful ruler, and the number one rule of course was: “Power is Everything.” How you acquire the power made no difference as long as you had it. Many people repulsed Machiavelli’s idea of power at all costs, but it would soon be the basis of the government in some countries.
Niccolò Machiavelli was known during much his life as a part of the republican government in Florence until 1512. At that time, the Medici family took over the city and ruled under a more monarchical system. From that point until his death in 1527, Machiavelli was always just on the outside of Florentine politics. He would occasionally get work from the Medici but his tasks were never as important as they had been under the republican government of the past. As he was trying to find his way back into a major role in Florentine government, Machiavelli wrote The Prince, a manual of sorts that explained how a monarch should rule his state and why. While Machiavelli had been a strong proponent of republican ideals in the past, in The Prince, his ideas are far from adhering to republicanism. The book seems to promote the ideal monarch as a cold, heartless person whose only goal in life should be to retain power, regardless of who or what he destroys. This includes killing enemies of the state, personal enemies of the Prince, and even, in some cases, friends or family. While The Prince was not the first book of this kind, it was the first to suggest a government that rules with no regard for religion or morality. Machiavelli did not particularly pay heed to religious law in the way he lived his life, but he also did not particularly care for the Catholic Church of the time because of the lack of morality demonstrated by the Pope's and other supposedly "religious men's" actions at the time. There are other works that Machiavelli wrote both before and after The Prince that survive today, as well as letters he wrote to his friends that demonstrate a different set of ideals than th...
The theme of power manifest itself in several texts in both Mosaic I and II, whether it is through an institution such as religion, science and politics or even on an individual level. In regards to these institutions, power has the ability to establish or demolish a society and this is portrayed throughout these texts. One is also able to see that it is not power itself, but a legitimation of the lust or love of power, that corrupts an individual and an example of this is seen the text Antigone.
Throughout The Prince and The Discourses of Livy, Niccolo Machiavelli demonstrates multiple theories and advocacies as to why popular rule is important to the success of a state. Popular rule is a term that will be used to define an indirect way to govern the people of a state. In order to rule the masses, a leader must please the people or revolts will occur, causing mayhem and a lack of stability in one’s state. During both written works, Machiavelli stresses the importance of obedience and order needed for a state, and especially for a leader to be successful. Machiavelli thoroughly states that anything and everything must be done to keep the peace of the masses, even if acts of immorality are used. However, instead of advocating immorality, Machiavelli is saying that to serve the people and the state well, a ruler must not restrict himself to conventional standards of morality. His use of immoral tactics in leadership would appear to be unpopular; however the acts of immorality have limitations and are done solely to avoid displeasing the masses or creating disorder. Therefore it is acceptable to practice immorality if it is done only to a small number of constituents, if it is not repeated, and if it is performed to please and benefit the public. It is these limitations that prove Machiavelli is arguing that the use of immoral tactics, to rule the people and in turn be ruled by the people, is needed. He suggests that if the majority of the population is unhappy with a leader, that particular leader’s rule would be in jeopardy, thus falling victim to popular rule.
A longstanding debate in human history is what to do with power and what is the best way to rule. Who should have power, how should one rule, and what its purpose should government serve have always been questions at the fore in civilization, and more than once have sparked controversy and conflict. The essential elements of rule have placed the human need for order and structure against the human desire for freedom, and compromising between the two has never been easy. It is a question that is still considered and argued to this day. However, the argument has not rested solely with military powers or politicians, but philosophers as well. Two prominent voices in this debate are Plato and Machiavelli, both of whom had very different ideas of government's role in the lives of its people. For Plato, the essential service of government is to allow its citizens to live in their proper places and to do the things that they are best at. In short, Plato's government reinforces the need for order while giving the illusion of freedom. On the other hand, Machiavelli proposes that government's primary concern is to remain intact, thereby preserving stability for the people who live under it. The feature that both philosophers share is that they attempt to compromise between stability and freedom, and in the process admit that neither can be totally had.
“If you would not be forgotten as soon as you are dead and rotten, either write things worth reading or do things worth writing.” This maxim applies to the poet Dante Alighieri, writer of The Inferno in the 1300s, because it asserts the need to establish oneself as a contributor to society. Indeed, Dante’s work contributes much to Renaissance Italy as his work is the first of its scope and size to be written in the vernacular. Due to its readability and availability, The Inferno is a nationalistic symbol. With this widespread availability also comes a certain social responsibility; even though Dante’s audience would have been familiar with the religious dogma, he assumes the didactic role of illustrating his own version of Christian justice and emphasizes the need for a personal understanding of divine wisdom and contrapasso, the idea of the perfect punishment for the crime. Dante acts as both author and narrator, completing a physical and spiritual journey into the underworld with Virgil as his guide and mentor. The journey from darkness into light is an allegory full of symbolism, much like that of Plato’s Allegory of the Cave, which shows a philosopher’s journey towards truth. Therefore, Dante would also agree with the maxim, “Wise men learn by others’ harms; fools scarcely by their own,” because on the road to gaining knowledge and spiritual enlightenment, characters who learn valuable lessons from the misfortunes of others strengthen their own paradigms. Nonetheless, the only true way to gain knowledge is to experience it first hand. Dante’s character finds truth by way of his own personal quest.
Dante was one of the most influential individuals in early European literature, language, and politics. He influenced Italian society and culture through his poetry and his prose (Dante Internet). His writings helped to unify the Italian language. His opinions on politics were new and many of his ideas are seen in today’s politics (Holmes 23). These are the three key ar...
At first glance it may not appear that Dante’s Purgatorio has a central theme of liberty. However, the majority of its premise all relates to that of liberty and free will. Free will is the dictionary form of liberty; thus, they can be interchangeable. As humans, God has given us all the choice to do as we wish whether it be good or bad, and this ability to choice is that of free will. Dante’s journey through the afterlife is ultimately a quest for freedom, and this essay will address how the theme of free will is presented.
Out of ever perplexity Dante faces throughout his journeys in Inferno, Purgatorio, and Paradiso, this one of merit and grace is the most significant one. This thought entails what the whole Comedia is about by essentially determining the principal matter of his revolutionary work – each one’s merit produced by God’s grace. His use of “merit” and “grace” brings the reader’s attention to focus on how this determines the measurement of understanding. The tension between merit and grace plays one of the most important roles in the Divine Comedy because it is seen everywhere especially when Dante finally learns to understand each step of his journey. Dante is enlightened on the judgment of souls and he devotes himself to reach grace and, ultimately, sanctity.
It is commonly believed by both lay people and political philosophers alike that an authoritative figure is good and just so long as he or she acts in accordance with various virtues. If the actions of a ruler are tailored toward the common good of the people rather than himself, then that ruler is worthy of occupying the status of authority. By acting in accordance with social and ethical norms, the ruler is deemed worthy of respect and authority. Niccolò Machiavelli challenges our moral intuitions about moral authority in his work, the Prince, by ruthlessly defending the actions made by the state in an effort to preserve power. In particular, all actions made by the state are done in order to preserve its power, and preserving the state’s power preservers its people. In doing so, whatever actions the state exercises are justified with this end goal in mind. Although such reasoning may seem radical, it is practice more readily that most people are inclined to believe. Machiavelli's moral philosophy is deeply embedded in the present day justice administration. Due to this, Machiavelli’s political thought can serve as a reference for illustrating how today’s administrators can benefit from following the examples of other great leaders, such as on matters of global warming.