More handpicked essays just for you.
Machiavelli modern political science
Shakespeares presentation of prospero
Machiavelli modern political science
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Machiavelli modern political science
Prospero can be used to exemplify the Prince’s principles of how a ruler should not conduct his business. Prospero was an unfit ruler of Milan because he did not invest his time in politics but instead in “the liberal arts” (Shakespeare I.ii.91). Machiavelli states that a ruler should be invested in the well being of his people. Even though Prospero inherited the power to rule over Milan, Machiavelli would argue that Antonio rightfully acquired this power through prowess (Machiavelli 20). Machiavelli would justify Antonio’s action when he overthrows Prospero for power over Milan. Machiavelli would state that Antonio did what needed to be done in order to attain power. Prospero was not acting as a rightful ruler, so Antonio had the opportunity
This compare and contrast essay will focus on the views of leadership between Mirandolla and Machiavelli. Mirandolla believes that leadership should not be false and that it should follow the rule of reason. He believes that leaders should strive for the heavens and beyond. On the other hand, Machiavelli believed that leadership comes to those who are crafty and forceful. He believed that leaders do not need to be merciful, humane, faithful or religious; they only need to pretend to have all these qualities. Despite both of them being philosophers, they have drastically different views on leadership, partially because of their views on religion are different. Mirandolla was very religious, and Machiavelli was a pragmatist, which means that he was not interested in religion.
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.
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.
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.
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...
“The Prince”, by Niccolo Machiavelli, is a series of letters written to the current ruler of Italy, Lorenzo de’ Medici. These letters are a “how-to” guide on what to do and what not to do. He uses examples to further express his views on the subject. The main purpose was to inform the reader how to effectively rule and be an acceptable Prince. Any ruler who wishes to keep absolute control of his principality must use not only wisdom and skill, but cunning and cruelness through fear rather than love. Machiavelli writes this book as his summary of all the deeds of great men.
This key paragraph of advice is given by Machiavelli to all aspiring rulers who are contemplating the act of obtaining a principality through the use of criminal methods. Macbeth is an example of someone who obtains his kingdom in a criminal manner, as he and his wife conspire together to kill the present king and blame his murder on his drunken guards, but in order for Macbeth to be considered completely Machiavellian, he would have to partake in all of the characteristics that Machiavelli urges for leaders of his sort to display. While Macbeth exhibits certain Machiavellian characteristics, he does not heed Machiavelli's advice regarding rulers who desire to obtain their principalities through crime, and through either the ignorance of, or disregard for, this advice, Macbeth cannot be considered Machiavellian.
The events that take place in the play are all made possible by the original usurpation against Prospero, the right Duke of Milan by Antonio, his brother, the usurping Duke of Milan. The usurpation itself is made possible initially because Prospero has become increasingly more spellbound by his library of books, the same books which he later uses to exact his revenge. This is to say that not only are these books primarily the sole cause of Prospero's loss of power, but they are also entirely responsible for Prospero's dukedom being reinstated, because the magic they grant him gave him the power to do just that. This is one example of how power will always end up back in its rightful place.
One must understand the limitations in Prospero 's personality to understand his government. Firstly, Prospero is consumed by a desire for knowledge, a bookworm in the truest sense of the word. He spent hours reading, perfecting his magic, and studying "the liberal arts." (1.2.73) He explains that while he was "transported and rapt in secret studies," he had to direct his rule to his brother, Antonio temporarily. (1.2.76-7) A ruler 's primary responsibility is to his people, and while advancing his knowledge of the world, Prospero neglected his duties as the duke. He makes it clear that he is not concerned with his people when he explains how Gonzalo "furnished [him] … with volumes that / [He] prize[s] above [his] dukedom." (1.2.166-8) Prospero values his mind more than his state, reflected by his love of books, and this curiosity prevents him from keeping a watchful eye over his dukedom. In fact, it was because of Prospero’s “neglecting worldly ends” that Antonio slowly gained power. (1.2.89) From a ruler’s perspective, government serves no purpose without a population of citizens, where Prospero would much rather be alone studying, but he was not disconnected completely from his people. His subjects remained loyal to him, and when it came time, murder was not an option for the usurpers: “They durst not kill [him], / So dear the
Niccoló Machiavelli claims in “The Qualities of the Prince” that a prince must have certain qualities that will allow him to seize and maintain his power as a ruler. Machiavelli asserts that these qualities will guarantee the ruler to be able to govern his subjects effectively. According to him, a prince must study the art of war, must understand generosity and to what extent he must be generous to be effective, must choose to either be loved or feared, and be able to keep his word to his citizens according to the situation. These qualities can still apply in today’s politics, and will be useful for a modern time politician as long as they are used carefully.
Machiavelli uses classical sources to advise a prince on the best way to maintain power. He alludes to Plato’ Republic to illustrate how many men have attempted to advice princes “ A great many men have imagined states and princedoms such as nobody ever saw or knew in the real word, and there’s such a difference between the way we really live and the way we ought to live that the man who neglects the real to study the ideal will learn how to accomplish his ruin, not his salvation.” Machiavelli also makes various references to classical figures to demonstrate examples of princely leadership. Machiavelli’s classical allusions are indicative of the Renaissance as the renewed study of the ancient classics was an important element of the Renaissance. Machiavelli adopted classical ideas in the hopes that these examples could inspire improvements within Italy. Rafael Major supports this idea in “ A New Argument for Morality: Machiavelli and the Ancients.” He argues, “ Even a cursory survey of classical literature reveals that very little of The Prince can properly be called original.” More also reflects the Renaissance through his classical allusions. He uses his classical sources to criticize certain practices within Europe, while also offering solutions to these problems through the example of the classics. For example, he also alludes to
Through his literary wonder of the Renaissance, The Prince (1513), Niccoló Machiavelli’s ideal aspirations of government hold his skepticism and duplicit views of humankind. In this work machiavelli simply shares his observations of necessities of a successful Prince compared to those of an unsuccessful one; he hoped the successful Princes would fulfill his goal of unity and expulsion of invaders in Italy. He was not so much advising these Princes, but providing his observations as to what could create their rise or downfall. To be machiavellian is to favor expediency over ethics or morality.
The Prince by Nicolo Machiavelli was among the first humanist pieces of Renaissance. It is complete explanation of how to obtain and sustain power in political platform. Yet this work has been an issue over debates since centuries. Nicolo Machiavelli’s work is seen to be significant effort to lay the pillar of the reunification of Italy. This paper talks about the authors’ notion that prince should use various ways to practice his power where for the author ends are more important than the means.
Machiavelli’s The Prince was written more than 500 years ago and it is “one of the most influential and controversial books published in Western literature.” (Article A) It was about Machiavelli’s political philosophies and the basic principles of what he believes a politician or “prince” should be. The three main ideas of the Prince were “Liberality and Stinginess”, “Cruelty and Mercy: Is It Better to Be Loved Than Feared, or the Reverse?”, and “How a Prince Should Keep Their Promises” and for the most part many of his concepts should or are already instilled in our government.
When reading Niccolo Machiavelli’s The Prince, one can’t help but grasp Machiavelli’s argument that morality and politics can not exist in the same forum. However, when examining Machiavelli’s various concepts in depth, one can conclude that perhaps his suggested violence and evil is fueled by a moral end of sorts. First and foremost, one must have the understanding that this book is aimed solely at the Prince or Emperor with the express purpose of aiding him in maintaining power. Therefore, it is essential to grasp his concepts of fortune and virtue. These two contrary concepts reflect the manner in which a Prince should govern while minimizing all chance and uncertainty. This kind of governing demands violence to be taken, however this is only done for the strict purpose of maintaining his throne, and generating both fear and admiration from his people. In all cases of violence, Machiavelli limits the amount of violence that needs to be taken down to the minimum, and most cases the victims of these acts are enemies of the people. Behind the violence, the prince is essentially taking the role of the villain and assuming all “bad” acts so that his people do not have to suffer and commit the acts themselves. In addition, all the Prince asks for is to not threaten his power and to respect it. In the 16th Century, this request is feeble compared to those of other hierarchical Monarchies. In the end, Machiavelli’s Prince assumes all the burden of violence while leaving his noble people to act as they feel accordingly without worry of their lively hood. This is Machiavelli’s ultimate stroke of morality.