Ignorance In Machiavelli's The Prince

Her definition of egoism is best summed up in a speech made by the protagonist in another of her novels, The Fountainhead: “The egoist in the absolute sense is not the man who sacrifices others. He is the man who stands above the need of using others in any manner. He does not function through them. He is not concerned with them in any primary manner.” Equality is, of course, an egoist in this manner. He is an egoist because is independent and acts regarding only himself.

Or can we still call it monstrous at all? Ethics and moral are the fundamental pillars that keep the house of civilization from falling apart. But as long as we are living in the house, we are in no position to judge the people in The Lottery and Omelas. Just like we are in no position to judge Chamberlain’s selfishness when we are not sitting in his chair. Just like we are no one to judge the Royalists and the Bonapartists in The Count of Monte Cristo when we are not living in their time.

Referring to the works of Niccolo Machiavelli and Lao-Tzu in succession highlight how truly at opposition the messages are. In spite of the fact that both works aim to create a model of a good leadership , «Tao-te Ching» by Lao-Tzu discusses peace, straightforwardness, and giving the universe a chance to work its will, while «The Qualities of the Prince» by Machiavelli emphasizes the significance of war, and the common depravity of men. There are no specific reasons that these two methods of reasoning ought to be in agreement, one written in the sixth century, and the other the sixteenth, however they are comparable in that they are very honored among society and the quotes taken from the content are frequently cited and considered insightful,

“You just don’t see him in the way I do.” (1.5.30. p67) This quote stated by Orgon shows how much he cares for him and will not allow any other person to see him as a hypocrite since that is not what he is to Orgon. Claiming that Heaven spoke to him, Orgon proceeds to bring Tartuffe home with him to claim a house that is free of sin being that he will not let any sin in.

One of the biggest points is that the King never showed Hop-Frog the respect that he deserved. Another point would be that Hop-Frog was sent to the King as a present. The last point would be that Hop-Frog simply had nothing to lose anymore. Throughout the story Hop-Frog, Poe is really trying to highlight the King’s personality. His personality is very dreadful toward Hop-Frog.

War stories with meaning have to sugarcoat war to make it more appealing to the readers. Tim O’Brien writes about how this sugarcoating of is not a true war story. He explains, “A true war story is never moral. It does not instruct, nor encourage virtue, nor suggest models of proper human behavior, nor restrain men from doing the things men have always done” (O’Brien 316). The war stories with morals and deeper meaning gives war character which it does not have.

In the novel, Grant’s selflessness reveals itself unconditionally. He puts all his desires aside to help Jefferson become a man. His goal requires him to set aside his plans and other goals to benefit someone else. Grant does not believe that he is heroic or selfless, which can be seen when he tells Jefferson “A hero is someone who does something for other people.” (191), nevertheless, he contradicts himself by alleviating Jefferson’s bleak future, doing this requires him to abstain from being inconsiderate. Without being as magnanimous as he is, Grant could not have helped Jefferson as he

Dr. King says “anyone who lives inside the United States can never be considered outsiders” (4). He fought the issue against “injustice” because he believes every state is considered mutual. Nevertheless, King then refutes the difference upon just and unjust laws. King would concur with St. Augustine that “an unjust law is no law at all” (12). An unjust law considered to King is a law that “degrade human personality”.

Haimon’s loyalty is broken between obeying his father and his lover. Creon is obsessed with his loyalty to the state; he is too stubborn and proud to listen to the people of said state. This leads to his misconception that he as king is the entirety of the state.”I’ll have no dealings with law-breakers, critics of the government: Whoever is chosen to govern should be obeyed-- Must be obeyed, in all things, great or small, Just or Unjust!” (Sophocles, Lines 525-529). Creon does not hold democratic ideals, and thus the state that which he is loyal to is solely the government, which he is the embodiment of. Creon, oblivious to his own self-centered ideologies, does not believe that his loyalty is directed incorrectly.

First argument that Paine has made was about distinction between society and government. Paine made it clear that he mainly did not love government, whose individual value he thought lies in "restraining our vices" (Paine, 1776). For Paine, the natural state of man is to live without government, and government's existence is needed only to solve its problems created by this usual, revolutionary way of life. If a government is unsuccessful in improving society or, even worse, it is actively initiates other troubles so it is not essential to be ruled by that government.