According to Machiavelli, ideal prince is a risk-taker who puts a military on action, as the people respect the warrior. An ideal prince thinks for himself rather than relying on others, knows how to read characters, and does not surround himself with flatterers. He lives in reality, not fantasy. He works hard, utilizes his own mind, and makes survival of his guide. The ideal leader is neither loved nor hated, but respected. He cannot be too generous, because that increases people 's expectations of him and it is impossible to keep buying the people 's love as the price gets too high. Yet, the prince should not be hated due to his violent nature, because that rises up. The prince should act in ways that keep him in power and maintain his own power. He should be able to read the character and motives of others in order to use them for his own ends. A good prince is able to
Probably one of the most infamous and controversial ideologies of the 16th century, the prince by Machiavelli has been a reference for many great leaders and academicians since it was published. The book provides historically tested and proven principles of leadership. The prince has been described as a manual for those who want to win and retain power.
Being a prince is not as easy as it may seem. There are good and bad decisions a prince can make. Machiavelli has his own standards on how a prince should behave. According to Machiavelli, a prince could be considered a lion, a fox, or a wolf. The lion is fierce but doesn’t have the smarts, while a fox has the smarts but isn 't fierce. A wolf has a little bit of smarts and can be fierce when they are in packs. Machiavelli considered a good prince to be a mixture of a fox and a lion. Also, he wanted a prince that would honors his own words and to be generally praised by others.
In Machiavelli’s book, The Prince, he maintains a harsh perspective on reality. His advice on how to maintain power leaves no room for compassion or generousity. While some may believe that these are qualities of a good person, Machiavelli believes these qualities lead to the downfall of rulers. He acknowledges that, in reality, it is impossible for someone to have qualities of a good person and simultaneously a good ruler. Machiavelli’s realistic outlook causes him to emphasize that it is better to maintain power through fear, rather than compassion. Despite this, he notes that a ruler must avoid his people hating him. A hated ruler possesses no power since the people hold the power. Therefore, a ruler can be miserly, unfaithful, and ruthless, but they must appear to be the opposite. Machiavelli concludes that it is important for a ruler to balance his reputation and his actions, which I agree with, however others may argue that a ruler can posses both qualities.
There are many different views regarding how a prince should rule, but in The Prince by Niccolo Machiavelli, he advises Lorenzo de' Medici to rule with absolute power and to take extreme measures when necessary to maintain his power. Machiavelli wrote The Prince in 1513 with the intent of convincing Lorenzo de’ Medici to give him an advising position within the Florentine government. Niccolo Machiavelli was an Italian writer and politician who lived from 1469 to 1527. In the dedication of his book, which was written in 1513, he explains that his writing is the most valuable thing that he has to offer. Through his detailed accounts of history and his ruthless approach to ruling Machiavelli explains why he tends to favor the ancients and has
I. Machiavelli In his famous work the Prince Niccolo Machiavelli exposes what it takes to be a good prince and how only this good price and keep control over his state. There are many different qualities that make a man a good ruler but there are some that are more essential than others. In this work Machiavelli stresses the importance of being a warrior prince, a wise prince, and knowing how to navigate the duality of virtù and vices. Without these attributes there was no way that a prince could hold together their state and their people.
Both of these highly influential authors had different opinions on ruling that would shape how people would rule during their time and for rulers to come. One of Machiavelli’s major points in The Prince was that it was better to be feared than to be loved. He said this was because while both ways can be useful tools to help one rule, men are less likely to turn a ruler if they were afraid of punishment. Machiavelli had little faith in the common man and had this to say about them, “They are ungrateful, fickle, deceptive and deceiving, avoiders of dangers, eager to gain”(pg.353).
Then for Machiavelli he talks about how a prince should show no fear instead for him to show that he is the one with power. That a prince's people should fear him. Both authors go on to talk on how their people react based on the prince and princesse act. The authors then go on to explain how they should view and run their people. Both authors also reflect the fact that the way their people are going to act towards them is mainly based off of how they treat them.
Machiavelli argues the perfect prince will be both feared and loved by his people, and if unable to be both he will make himself feared and not hated. Machiavelli believes it is much safer to be feared than to be loved because people are less likely to offend and stand up against strong characters, also people are less concerned in offending a prince who has made himself loved. Accordingly, Machiavelli believes generosity is harmful to your reputation and the choice between being generous or stingy, merciful or cruel, honest or deceitful, should only be important if it aids the prince in political power. All in all, Machiavelli believes the ruler must be a great deceiver and do what is essential to uphold power over the
In Niccolo Machiavelli's book, The Prince (1513), he evaluates on how a prince can be a successful leader. Machiavelli’s purpose of this guidebook was to construct his argument to the rising ruler Giuliano de Medici for when he comes to power in Florence. He adopts a casual but authoritative tone in order to convince the prince that Machiavelli’s evaluation on how to be the best prince, is the right thing for the prince to do without coming off as he knows more than the prince or is trying to intimidate him.. Machiavelli’s reference to previous rulers and whether their tactics failed or succeeded helps to benefit his credibility along with his allusion to historic text. He appeals to our logic by simply stating a prince can only do what is within his power to control, and his use of an analogy furthers his argument.
Machiavelli wrote about a fictitious prince, describing how he is a terrible being who has no respect for people who have a lower status than him. He is described as being selfish and untrustworthy. His writing about this prince was supposed to replicate princes and kings that were ruling and open he reader’s eyes to real issues occuring. In Document 1 there is an excerpt from The Prince, written by Machiavelli, telling about how terrible the Prince of England. Document 1 states, “For all men in general this observation may be made: they are ungrateful, fickle, and deceitful, eager to avoid dangers, and avid for gain, and while you are useful to them they are all with you, but when it [danger] approaches they turn on you”.
Renaissance means rebirth. The Renaissance was a time of renewal as well as of chaos in Europe since it was still recovering. More and more ideas of the ideal prince emerged, as there are many different city-states. One of the most noteworthy political philosophers of the sixteenth century was Niccólo Machiavelli whose book, The Prince, a political handbook for rulers, has brought him recognition. It can be seen that his ideas on politics and overall inspiration for the book mainly came from his views of the political problems that were taking place. However, three years later, in 1516, Erasmus wrote The Education of a Christian Prince, a less popular yet conveys another aspect to the genres of the princes. The Education of a Christian Prince
Having an open mind is another characteristic people turn to when contemplating what an ideal person is. It shows that one is open to new ideas, suggestions and can see the opposing side of an argument. Appreciation is given to those with this trait because it is easier to reach agreements on important matters by both sides of the argument compromising. Machiavelli, on the other hand, prefers to be in control and tells people this in The Prince. Once again, he has a pessimistic outlook on what the optimal person is. “Nevertheless I believe, if we are to keep our free will, that it may be true that fortune controls half of our actions indeed but allows us the direction of the other half, or almost half” (Machiavelli, ❡8). Such a contrarian view
Through all these conflicting characteristics, a side of Hamlet is seen in a new light; a Machiavellian prince. This aspect of Hamlet is the ruthless and cunning tactician who is open to using deceit for his own ends. Machiavelli, in his book 'The Prince ', shows a set of guidelines and philosophical arguments for a ruler to embody. He states that a ruler cannot always be virtuous and good as different situations could lead him to evil and inhumane acts as shown in his statement "learn how not to be good"(Machiavelli, Ch. XV). Machiavelli also stakes his point on a ruler been versatile with his analogy of the fox and lion.
According to him, rulers should know their respective limits when it comes to the force and violence they inflict. Machiavelli believes that maximizing betrayal, deception and other cruel acts aren’t considered talents. Although these methods are effective in gaining empire, these don’t help in getting glory. Therefore, using violence and cruelty may be necessary but should have limits. The prince must know up to what extent his violence should be inflicted upon and he must do it all at once to avoid the hatred and resentment from his