Response to the Prince by Machiavelli Essay Sample
Your friend insists that Machiavelli believed that deriving power was the ultimate end. regardless of human morality. Analyze the undermentioned transition from The Prince and utilize this transition to assist your friend understand Machiavelli in a different visible radiation: “
Yet it can non be called art to kill fellow citizens. to bewray friends. to be unreliable. pitiless. irreligious. These ways can win a prince power but non glory”
( The Prince. 29 ) . While you must establish your rebuttal to your friend’s place on the above transition. you may cite one secondary illustration from The Prince ( non the talk ) to back up your point.
Therefore. when a prince decides to prehend a province. he must find how much hurt to bring down. He needs to strike all at one time and so forbear from farther atrociousnesss. In this manner. his topics will finally bury the force and inhuman treatment. Gradually. bitterness will melt.
Only $13.90 / page
and the people will come to appreciate the ensuing benefits of the prince’s regulation. Most of import. a prince should be consistent in the manner he treats his topics. The other manner a prince can come to power is through the favour of his fellow citizens. Princes who rise through this path are caputs of what Machiavelli calls constitutional princedoms.
A prince created by the people must retain the people’s friendly relationship. a reasonably easy undertaking. A prince created by the Lords must still seek to win over the people’s fondness. because they can function as protection from hostile Lords. Benevolence is the best manner to keep the authorization of the people. If people expect ill will from a prince but alternatively receive kindness and favours. they feel a great duty to their prince.
hese chapters describe how different types of princes should set up power. within a state’s environment of fluctuating power kineticss. Machiavelli makes an facile statement for the importance of a domestic power base. He does non waver to admit the necessity of inhuman treatment and offense in set uping this power and even explains how to utilize inhuman treatment most efficaciously. He does non rede moderateness in the grade of inhuman treatment used. but instead a bound on how long extreme inhuman treatment is to be employed. That is. Machiavelli does non state that princes must be barbarous but non highly barbarous. Alternatively. he argues that barbarous Acts of the Apostless must be committed as necessary. but all at one time and so ceased. so that the public will bury them. This sort of statement is highly matter-of-fact and ignores all inquiries of right and incorrect. Taking historical illustrations as the footing for his statement. Machiavelli merely describes how power has efficaciously been deployed and consolidated in the yesteryear. and does non presume that human nature will take a bend for the better in the hereafter.
While any prince can accomplish and keep power. glorification remains a more elusive end. Although Machiavelli is chiefly concerned with how princes perform as swayers. he besides gives an appraisal of the different sorts of princes. Machiavelli’s position is that the prince who rises and survives by agencies of perfidy and the prince who succeeds by his innate art are both technically princes. But he besides admits that the two are non equal in award or glorification. and. possibly. even moral worth.
1. At this point one may observe that work forces must be either pampered or annihilated. They avenge light discourtesies ; they can non revenge terrible 1s ; hence. the injury 1 does to a adult male must be such as to rid of any fright of retaliation. Explanation for Quotation 1 & gt ; & gt ;
This transition from Chapter III is an illustration of logical concluding conspicuously devoid of ethical considerations. A prince must recognize that he has two options: benevolence and devastation. Because the latter option will do bitterness among the people. he should take it merely if he is perfectly certain there will be no ailment consequences—that the devastation he incurs will extinguish or disenable any parties that might seek to avenge themselves against him. Feelingss of commiseration or compassion are nonmeaningful. Self-interest and self-defense are in this instance the motivation factors and are to be pursued ruthlessly.
Borgia would make the most to determine Maciavelli’s sentiments about leading.
Borgia was a craft. cruel. and barbarous politician and many people despised him. Machieavelli believed Borgia has the traits necessary for any leader who would seek to unite Italy.
The Prince was written as a practical usher to assist Lorenzo de’ Medici stay in power during a clip of political convulsion but became a book that was criticized as being immoral. immorality. and wicked.
Sir Niccolo Machiavelli.
I personally understand your desire to return to political relations and I appreciate your desire for a place within my authorities. However. the desire of an ordinary citizen to rede. instruct. and act upon the heads of swayers like myself is unacceptable and will non be tolerated. When you use the metaphor. “a individual standing on a mountain is best positioned to study the landscape below. and a individual standing below is best positioned to study the mountain. ( Dedication. 1 ) you attempt to convert me you know more about the art of governing than myself.
Your dealingss with the craft. cruel and barbarous politician Cesare Borgia assist me to farther understand your sentiments on leading. You hold the beliefs that Borgia had the traits necessary for any leader who would seek to unite Italy. and believe I should follow in those footfalls. I do non wish to be associated with such a swayer.
Touching on your ideas of virtuousness when you quote. “of all the things he must guard against. hatred and contempt come foremost. and liberalness leads to both” ( XVI. 2 ) . I am confused by your advice to ignore the rules of virtuousness. The letters I receive on a regular basis from members of the church talk about the importance of a prince to move morally. with the ethical premiss that 1 who acts good. will regulate good. I respect my church. and happen it disturbing for you to give me advice against what they believe.
My people will get down to see this book as a usher to unbelieving dictatorship. which I can see now. This work is a irreverent publicity of immorality. and I can see your purposes of self-seeking use. It is a unsafe game to play being anti-Christian. and your disdain for the pontificate and political aspirations of the Catholic Church is apparent.
To reason. I will non be directing an invitation to function as an functionary in my authorities. and inquire you no longer prosecute these ideas. Work force will be geting to your place shortly after you receive this missive to take you to where you belong.
Good twenty-four hours.
Essay Question # 1: You are a Medici prince and you are returning the manuscript of The Prince to Machiavelli with a missive explicating why you will non engage him as your political advisor. As you will remember from Unit 4. the Medici were a powerful Florentine household. Remember to include a chief thought that guides your rejection missive and to include specific citations from The Prince ( non the talk ) that support your statement.