Machiavelli Is A Humanist

1990 Words4 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Machiavelli's intention in the prince

Machiavelli is a humanist based on my readings but there are few points which I will mention saying that he isn’t a humanist and few other imperative points to suggest has a humanist and in conclusion to support all the aspects , I will state whether or not he is a humanist .The Prince was mainly dedicated to Lorenzo de Medici as part of Machiavelli’s attempt to regain power in the government but another benefit of the book is that the extracts in the reading suggest a conspicuous advice on the characteristics and attributes a prince should or might have and Machiavelli made it seem in a way that it is an advice towards the prince and this particular piece of information conceives of detailed information from having virtues , on religion and …show more content…

56) . Based on this , it clearly shows that the prince possesses high qualities and is virtue enough and a honest ruler for the government but move down the passage a little, and Machiavelli expresses his view where a prince shall only keep his word where it benefits him and at the same time deceive the people so his image wont be brought down when necessary “A prudent ruler cannot, and should not, keep his promise when it places him at a disadvantage and when the reasons for which he made his promise no longer exist” (Machiavelli The prince ex. 56) . It is also said that certain princes who didn’t abide the rules and were famously known for their cunning ability achieved much more greater things than those who actually stayed by the law and this led to many princes questioning honesty. . Machiavelli says that it fair for us to lie or not keep our promises because of two factors . One, because the promises no longer means anything to us and in this case Machiavelli doesn’t regard the concern for the people but just the prince himself and secondly, to someone who lied to us. This appeared to be a common occurrence because in a period of corruption and deceitful …show more content…

Even though there are two aspects that doesn’t regard him as a humanist due to his lack of moral attributes and uncaring and senseless ruling of the government , the aspects which makes him a humanist outscore the counterpoints due to the effect it had on Italy and even until today . “Machiavelli doesn’t combine politics with morals” (Berlin 1997, p.288) .Those were the words about Machiavelli’s writing and this shows in order to make ends meet which is to maintain a stable government by ruling it properly , Machiavelli decided to do it by hook or crook and even though it was again moral values like lying or cheating , in people eyes they saw him as a leader and person with stringent yet radical mind . “A prince, therefore, need not necessarily have all the good qualities I mentioned above, but he should certainly appear to have them” (Machiavelli The prince ex. 57) . Based on that quote , it seems that Machiavelli wants his prince to protect the state even though he may be the most diabolical person out there and this shows he’s less concern about religion because truthfully morally all his actions are all sinful but that’s how the humanist thinks and because he possess these qualities too , Machiavelli in my point is a humanist

Show More
Related

  • Machiavelli vs. Lao-Tzu

    284 Words  | 1 Pages

    Machiavelli believes that a government should be very structured, controlled, and powerful. He makes it known that the only priorities of a prince are war, the institutions, and discipline. His writings describes how it is more important for a prince to be practical than moral. This is shown where he writes, "in order to maintain the state he is often obliged to act against his promise, against charity, against humanity, and against religion" (47). In addition, Machiavelli argues that a prince may have to be cunning and deceitful in order to maintain political power. He takes the stance that it is better for the prince to be feared than loved. His view of how a government should run and his unethical conduct are both early signs of dictatorship.

    Read More

  • Machiavelli and Rousseau's Views on Human Nature and Government

    558 Words  | 2 Pages

    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...

    Read More

  • The Qualities Of A Prince Rhetorical Analysis

    740 Words  | 2 Pages

    Niccolò Machiavelli was a man who lived during the fourteen and fifteen hundreds in Florence, Italy, and spent part of his life imprisoned after the Medici princes returned to power. He believed that he should express his feelings on how a prince should be through writing and became the author of “The Qualities of a Prince.” In his essay, he discusses many points on how a prince should act based on military matters, reputation, giving back to the people, punishment, and keeping promises. When writing his essay, he follows his points with examples to back up his beliefs. In summary, Machiavelli’s “The Qualities of a Prince,” provides us with what actions and behaviors that a prince should have in order to maintain power and respect.

    Read More

  • The Tao-te Ching by Lao-Tzu and The Prince by Machiavelli

    1754 Words  | 4 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Comparing The Prince By Machiavelli And Utopia By Thomas More

    1377 Words  | 3 Pages

    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. With this in mind, Machiavelli?s concept is much more realistic than More?s; therefore Machiavelli better represents human nature. Machiavelli?s view of human nature in The Prince, presents, on the surface, a view of governing a state drastically different for his time. Machaivelli believed that the ruling Prince should be the sole authority determining every aspect of the state and put into effect a policy which would serve his best interests. With this, Machiavelli uses the prince as man, and the state as the man?s life. These interests were gaining, maintaining, and expanding his political power. Though in some cases Machiavelli may seem harsh and immoral, one must remember that his views were derived from concern of Italy?s unstable political condition in the 1500s. Machiavelli seems to be teaching the common man how to live his life so that their life is good and prosperous. Machiavelli generally distrusted citizens, stating that ??since men are a sorry lot and will not keep their promises to you, you likewise need not keep yours to them? (Machiavelli 651). Furthermore, ? a prince never lacks legitimate reasons to break his promises? when, ?such an observance of faith would be to his disadvantage; and when the reasons which made him promise are removed? (651). Machiavelli did not feel that a Prince should mistreat the citizens. This suggestion once again to serve the Prince?s best interests. If a Prince can not be both feared and loved, Machiavelli suggests, it would be better for him to be feared by the citizens within his own dogma. He makes the generalization that men are, ?? ungrateful, fickle, simulators and deceivers, avoiders of danger, greedy for gain; and while you work for their good they are yours? (649). He characterizes men as being self-centered and not willing to act in the best interest of the state,? and when it (danger) comes nearer to you they turn away? (649). Machiavelli reinforces the Prince?s need to be feared by stating: ??men are less hesitant about harming someone who makes himself loved than one who makes himself feared?

    Read More

  • The Morals of The Prince by Niccolo Machiavelli

    435 Words  | 1 Pages

    Although Machiavelli gives numerous points on what it takes to excel as a prince, he also shows some raw examples of how he feels a prince should act in order to achieve maximum supremacy. First, when he says, "ought to hold of little account a reputation for being mean, for it is one of those vices which will enable him to govern" proves Machiavelli feels mighty adamant about his view that being mean will help a prince achieve success (332). It is absurd to imagine the meanest prince as the most successful. Also, when Machiavelli states, "our experience has been that those princes who have done great things have held good faith of little account, and have known how to circumvent the intellect of men by craft" revealing his attitude to manipulate people into fearing and respecting the prince (335). Also, Machiavelli shows that for a prince to be successful, he must not think about good faith.

    Read More

  • Comparing Machiavelli's The Prince and Plato's The Republic

    1784 Words  | 4 Pages

    Machiavelli?s model for his ideal prince was Cesare Borgia, also known as Duke Valentino and son of Pope Alexander VI.  He believed Cesare Borgia possessed all the qualities of a prince destined to rule and maintain power in his state. He believed that politics has a morality of its own.  There is no regard of justness or unjustness, of cruelty or  mercy, of  approval  or  humiliation, which   should   interfere   with  the  decision  of defending the state and preserving its freedom.  Therefore, the ruler/prince's single responsibilit...

    Read More

  • George Bush as a Machiavellian Leader

    1442 Words  | 3 Pages

    The most astounding aspect of The Prince is Machiavelli’s view that princes may indeed, be cruel and dishonest if their ultimate aim is for the good of the state. It is not only acceptable but necessary to lie, to use torture, and to walk over other states and cities. Machiavellianism is defined as “A political doctrine of Machiavelli, which denies the relevance of morality in political affairs and holds that craft and deceit are justified in pursuing and maintaining political power (Def.)” This implies that in the conquest for power, the ends justify the means. This is the basis of Machiavellianism. The priority for the power holder is to keep the security of the state regardless of the morality of the means. He accepts that these things are in and of themselves morally wrong, but he points out that the consequences of failure, the ruin of states and the destruction of cities, can be far worse. Machiavelli strongly emphasizes that princes should not hesitate to use immoral methods to achieve power, if power is necessary for security and survival.

    Read More

  • Humanist Ideals In Machiavelli's The Prince

    947 Words  | 2 Pages

    For instance, he states that “it is necessary for a prince, who wishes to maintain himself to learn how not to be good, and to use his knowledge and not use it, according to the necessity of the case” and that “he must not mind incurring the scandal of those vices without which it would be difficult to save the state” because “it will be found that some things which seems virtues would lead to one’s ruin” and some that seem to be vices result in greater security and wellbeing (Machiavelli, pg. 15). Machiavelli doesn't define virtue as other humanist might he believes that virtues are qualities that others praise, like generosity and honesty. He argues that a prince should

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast John Locke And Machiavelli

    1447 Words  | 3 Pages

    Machiavelli believed that, ethics and morality were considered in other categories than those generally known. He does not deny the existence of, but did not see how they can be useful in its traditional sense as in politics and in the government of the people. According to Machiavelli, a man is by nature a political angry and fearful. Machiavelli had no high opinion of the people. It is assumed that a person is forced to be good and can get into the number of positive features, such as prudence and courage. The prince can only proceed gently and with love, because that would undermine the naivety of his rule, and hence and the well-being of the state. He thought that, the Lord must act morally as far as possible, immorally to the extent to

    Read More

  • The Prince Controversy

    1883 Words  | 4 Pages

    Additionally, The Prince states that secular forms of government are more realistic than pious ones because a pious government would be bound by morals. In the Prince, Machiavelli tries to convey that the end justifies the means, which means any thing goes. He claims that it would be ideal for a prince to possess all the qualities that are deemed good by other men, but states that no leader can accomplish that. He also states that the security of the state should be the prince’s first priority and it must be protected by any means necessary. Although, this can be true in certain cases, Machiavelli uses it as an excuse to use evil and cruel tactics.

    Read More

  • Human Nature In Plato's The Prince By Niccolo Machiavelli

    1365 Words  | 3 Pages

    Niccolo Machiavelli was a political philosopher from Florence, Italy. The period that Machiavelli lived in was the "rebirth" of art in Italy and rediscovery of ancient philosophy, literature and science. He wrote The Prince, in which he discusses the proper way of living as a prince. His ideas, which were not viewed as beneficial at the time, were incredibly cynical and took time for the rest of the population to really catch onto the ideas. Machiavelli’s view of human nature was that humans are born evil, and while they can show good traits, and the common man is not to be trusted. Unlike Confucius, Machiavelli believes that human nature cannot be changed, and unlike Plato, where Plato believes in humans as social beings. Each respected view

    Read More

  • Machiavelli's Views On Generosity And Evil

    738 Words  | 2 Pages

    Under the circumstances Machiavelli found it necessary for the prince to use force to obtain what he wanted. Unlike Marx and Locke, it was justified to harm another man and take his possessions, “hence all armed religious leaders have conquered and the unarmed ones have been destroyed,” (Machiavelli 9). In due time the citizens would learn to follow the prince’s ways, even if they were deceitful. The prince will use tricks to gain the loyalty of the citizens. He will try his best not to upset the citizens as he has already taken over their land. All though a prince may have wicked ways it is also important for him to, “live amongst his people in such a way that no unexpected circumstance, whether good or evil shall make him change,” (Machiavelli

    Read More

  • Machiavelli And Plato

    1559 Words  | 4 Pages

    Niccolio Machiavelli (Born May 3rd, 1469 – 1527 Florence, Italy.) His writings have been the source of dispute amongst scholars due to the ambiguity of his analogy of the ‘Nature of Politics'; and the implication of morality. The Prince, has been criticised due to it’s seemingly amoral political suggestiveness, however after further scrutiny of other works such as The Discourses, one can argue that it was Machiavelli’s intention to infact imply a positive political morality. Therefore the question needs to be posed. Is Machiavelli a political amoralist? To successfully answer this it is essential to analyse his version of political structure to establish a possible bias. It would also be beneficial to discuss and compare another philosopher’s account to the nature of politics, and in this instance I have chosen the works of Plato in particular The Republic, establishing a comparison to define whom has the more convincing argument and why?

    Read More

  • Machiavelli: The Father of Modern Political Science

    1046 Words  | 3 Pages

    The book The Prince was a book of advice to politicians regarding how gain power and keep that power. The title The Prince is not about someone who has inherited land and a decedent to a king. In Machiavelli’s perspective a prince was a man of the citizens....

    Read More

More about Machiavelli Is A Humanist

Open Document