For centuries, philosophers have provided us with a greater understanding of the world around us, providing suggestions as to how we might reflect upon, criticise, or improve the societies in which we live. This has allowed us to speculate on many topics, such as politics, ethics, and morality. Among many others, two of the most influential thinkers to this day are Nicolo Machiavelli and Immanuel Kant. Their writings, The Prince and An Answer to the Question “What is Enlightenment?” provide insight as to how societies should be ruled and set up in order for all people within them to be content. Their views on the matter, however, differ significantly. While Machiavelli argues that a great society requires a great ruler capable of controlling …show more content…
He suggests that a great society is an enlightened one – one in which people have achieved “emergence from … self-incurred immaturity” (Kant, [1784] 2013, p. 25). He argues that one should avoid being controlled by institutions and rulers and that a great society requires perhaps not a great leader, but a sense of civil and intellectual freedom among the people (Kant, [1784] 2013). This freedom, however, is very difficult to achieve – hence why Kant states that we live in not an enlightened age, but one of enlightenment – as no matter how free a society is, and how many people think for themselves, “guardians” will always emerge (Kant, [1784] 2013). These guardians will blind the public – and possibly even themselves – from the truth (Kant, [1784] 2013), and will always find a way to somehow “serve as a leash to control the great unthinking mass” (Kant, [1784] 2013, p. 25) unless true enlightenment is achieved through a revolution (Kant, [1784] 2013). Kant suggests that if this is achieved, and all people think independently, a society will govern itself, create its own laws – or, at least, proposals for them, which would be sent to the crown – and naturally fall into a state of order (Kant, [1784] 2013). Therefore, social order can be achieved without a “Machiavellian” leader, that being one who exercises absolute control over citizens. Oppositely to Machiavelli, Kant’s ideal ruler is one who “considers it his duty … not to prescribe anything to his people, but to allow them complete freedom.” (Kant, [1784] 2013, p.
Machiavelli’s book also suggests that a ruler should be feared by everyone that dares to face him. At this time, one ruler appeared to be more daunting than a chain of command. Another major idea spread during this time period was the idea of a social contract, from “Leviathan” by Thomas Hobbes. He explains that if two people desire the same thing which they cannot both enjoy, they will end up destroying each other. Two people should be able to lay down their right to all things and be contempt with having as much as another person has, instead of trying to fight with them in order to gain more.
The Primary objective of all leaders should be to control citizens. A society that allows authority to be challenged will never succeed. This source depicts an authoritarian or totalitarian view of what a governing body should look like. The author suggests that the primary objective of government should be the “control of the citizens”, and therefore that the individuals should entirely obey said government.
Despite their different opinions on the role fear should play in preserving a political order Niccolo Machiavelli and Thomas Hobbes both assert that fear is an important element of functional societies. Machiavelli’s The Prince primarily focuses on preserving and expanding a ruler’s position, while Hobbes’s Leviathan primary focus is on constructing an ideal commonwealth to escape the “state of nature”. Machiavelli believes that a ruler should use fear as a tool to maintain his position of power, while Hobbes believes that the use of fear should be to ensure the sanctity of contracts in a Commonwealth, the most important contractual obligations being the obligation between sovereigns and their subjects. Hobbes’s belief that fear should be used
In terms of Machiavelli’s principles, the leader of the country rules the nation by employing its “old conditions, and not being unlike in customs, [people] will live quietly together” (Machiavelli 6). The United States is an example of such a place, where every new rulers have different policies, but exhaust every
The Enlightenment was a period of time that stressed the importance of reason and individual ideas. Many philosophers published works criticizing a country’s monarch or divulging the flaws they saw in a system within the government, such as the justice system. The Enlightenment also stressed the importance of education, and as a result of this, literacy rates experienced a major upward trend. Now able to read the philosopher’s works, a larger sum of people now were educated on the corruptions within their government. This caused a questioning of traditional practices, and people began to believe they could revise their government.
Castiglione’s The Courtier and Machiavelli’s The Prince both had great philosophies in which could still be used in the 21st century. However, their beliefs differ based on the audience Castiglione believe in peace and calmness. Castiglione believe men and women should be able to rule themselves if only they knew how.
The Enlightenment began in Europe during the late 1600’s after the restore from the dark ages. This was a time of reason when philosophers gathered in salons to discuss ways of learning and challenging new ideas. Philosophers, like Voltaire,created the idea of freedom of speech and Baron de Montesquieu developed the idea of separation of powers in governments. It was the philosophers goals to improve to society by creating new concepts and solutions to solve problems and influence future generations. John Locke introduced the Idea of “Natural Rights”, giving everyone life.
Thomas Paine essentially wrote Common Sense for the common man. Being a pamphlet, its structure and simplicity made reading easy for those who were literate. Its minimalism enabled citizens in the colonies to unite under one common cause — independence against Britain. He was inspired by both John Locke’s The Second Treatise of Government as well as Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s
Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Thomas Hobbes, two titans of the Enlightenment, work within similar intellectual frameworks in their seminal writings. Hobbes, in Leviathan, postulates a “state of nature” before society developed, using it as a tool to analyze the emergence of governing institutions. Rousseau borrows this conceit in Discourse on Inequality, tracing the development of man from a primitive state to modern society. Hobbes contends that man is equal in conflict during the state of nature and then remains equal under government due to the ruler’s monopoly on authority. Rousseau, meanwhile, believes that man is equal in harmony in the state of nature and then unequal in developed society.
Machiavelli has the most correct ideas on both controlling the people as a ruler and on being remembered as a great one. These two viewpoints had great influence during their time and for centuries to come, both with modern ideas and correct ideas even though they had a lot of contrast. Machiavelli’s The Prince may be thought of the more recognizable of the two in the present, but people in the present day have many of the same ideas that
The philosophy of Enlightenment has been most famously summarised in Immanuel Kant's essay, “An Answer to the Question: What is Enlightenment?” Kant's answer in 1784 to the question what is Enlightenment? Is that it is a “human being's emergence from his self-incurred tutelage” which is the inability to use one's own understanding without direction from another.” The immaturity is self-incurred when it is caused not by lack of mental capacity but by the lack of resolution. Kant urges each of us to refuse to remain under tutelage of others. In Kant's opinion, we must think and decide for ourselves.
He believes anyone can rule a polis if they have virtu. Once a ruler, a simple rule to follow to maintain power and not to be hated by the people, is to “not take away a man’s possession or woman”, Machiavelli believes the people will not feel threaten by following this rule, thus maintaining a stable polis. He expresses how “human nature never changes”, and that people are self-interested and they can turn against you once you are not profiting them. A good ruler must have the strength to do whatever it takes to obtain and maintain power, which essentially means that even if they have to hurt some of the people for the benefit of the popular mass, then they shall do so for the greater cause. Both Plato and Machiavelli believe that there must be a government in order for human kind to survive.
Only those who are born with true philosophical understanding can rule. In the Second Treatise by John Locke, Locke addresses the state of nature, which is essentially equality and freedom. Even though people have liberty, they still need to obey natural laws. On the contrary of Plato’s just city, Locke believes that absolute authority is not a civil government. A civil society is where the majority rules.
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.
In his novel, the prince, nicolo machiavelli guides us to be a fruitful ruler. He clarifies the best routes for any ruler or sovereign to govern a region, bring prosper to the society, and keep up their position. This book can be read by anyone to get a few pointers on political issues. Most of the thoughts held by machivelli were linked to mercilessness and evil, hence they raised a considerable number of eyebrows. He maintains that the ruler 's primary goal should be conquering, staying in control of the general public and to always have the idea of war in mind.