Political Philosophy and Machiavelli

Essay's Score: C

Grammar mistakes

F (57%)


A (100%)

Redundant words

F (43%)




F (57%)

Table of Content

“And if all work forces were good. this learning would non be good ; but because they are wicked and do non detect religion with you. you besides do non hold to detect it with them” ( 69 ) . Niccolo Machiavelli’s The Prince is arguably the most celebrated and controversial political scientific discipline book of all clip. Many think of Machiavelli as synonymous with immorality. The male parent of the thought that the terminals will ever warrant the agencies. the term Machiavellian has become connected with selfish. brutal. or immoral actions.

Machiavelli has long been associated with dictatorship. conquering. and tyranny. But is this label deserved? Is The Prince a book that expresses evil? Many argue that Machiavelli is non a instructor of immorality. but bases his instructions on a matter-of-fact pragmatism that has long been a portion of political relations. He would surely non be the first to hold such a position. and he is surely non the last. In advancing his realistic position of power and political relations. Machiavelli does non learn evil. alternatively. he uses necessity and practicality as the standards in which his idea is based on.

This essay could be plagiarized. Get your custom essay
“Dirty Pretty Things” Acts of Desperation: The State of Being Desperate
128 writers

ready to help you now

Get original paper

Without paying upfront

In this manner we see that he does non set the affair of good or evil as a precedence in his actions. but uses practical methods to do his pick in each case as to what is necessary and good. Through the geographic expedition of the footing for Machiavelli’s intervention of moralss and his docket for composing The Prince we see that his instructions are non evil. but based on political pragmatism and necessity. He himself makes it clear as he advises the Prince on how to be able to make what is necessary whether it is good or evil.

“And so he needs to hold a spirit to alter as the air currents of luck and fluctuations of things commanded him. and as I said supra. non depart from good. when possible. but cognize how to come in into immorality. when forced by necessity ” ( 70 ) . Machiavelli treats morality and prudence non as ushers for a Prince. but as tools to utilize for political addition. In this manner we see that Machiavelli is non prophesying immorality. which would be to promote the antonym of virtuousness and morality. but to utilize them in different ways depending on the state of affairs. Virtue is a cardinal construct when discoursing moral life and actions. and frailty is the antonym of virtuousness.

The constructs of virtuousness and frailty are antique thoughts ingrained within human society. But the traditional position of virtuousness and frailty. laid out by such minds as Aristotle and Plato. is changed to suit the chase of power in Machiavellian’s The Prince. Classic virtuousness comes from a standard based on merely and good interaction. while prosecuting an terminal. within a civil society. This interaction can affect the impact of an person on another person. a citizen and a province. or even an impact an person has upon himself.

Therefore a adult male who sacrifices his life to salvage his friend. metropolis. or beliefs is thought of every bit virtuous. On the other manus the reciprocal of this action would be frailty. a adult male who sacrifices his friend. metropolis or beliefs to continue his life may be viewed as possessing a frailty. Virtue finds its ground tackle in morality and moralss. and upholds that. it is focused on continuing qualities like justness and harmoniousness. The alteration in the Machiavellian codification of morality comes as a consequence as consequence of an full displacement in what the foundation of this morality is built on. viz. the terminals being pursued.

The Machiavellian construct of virtuousness non merely divorces virtuousness wholly from its ethical foundation. but places it on a foundation of ability to put to death what is necessary in order to accomplish what is desired. In this instance what is desired is power. which is to be purely maintained and used to accomplish glorious terminals. whatever they may be. From this foundation of the chase and care of power comes the Machiavellian mentality on everything else. and is the ground in which he is able to divide moralss from political relations.

Morality in its classical sense would merely function to acquire in the manner of power and prudence ; it creates unneeded quandary between what is politically necessary and morally right. interfering with being a wise swayer. Therefore the Prince must take the necessary actions irrespective of their moral branchings. “ ? [ If ] one considers everything good. one will happen something that appears to be virtuousness. which if pursued would be one’s ruin. and something else appears to be frailty. which if pursued consequences in one’s security and well-being” ( 62 ) .

Machiavelli removes the foundation of prudence and virtuousness from morality. and reinterprets them in respects to necessity and power. Correct policy within The Prince is based on the Machiavellian construct of virtuousness and prudence. Steming from this. Machiavelli at times refers to virtue and prudence in their classical definitions. refering to high morality. and merely actions. But at other times in The Prince. he refers to them as straight refering to the proper executing of power. For illustration he frequently compares a ruler’s success. non morality. with virtuousness.

No affair how barbarous the swayer. if he is able to keep power good so he is virtuous. Prudence is thought of as being careful. observant and logical in the classical sense. But Machiavelli uses it to depict a swayer who is really crisp. decisive. and makes the right picks. “A prudent Godhead. hence. can non detect religion. nor should he. when such observation bends against him. and causes that made him assure have been eliminated” ( 69 ) . It hence would be prudent for a swayer to slaughter a rebellion. if it meant the ultimate saving of power.

In this instance necessity calls for action. even if those actions go against classical morality. A swayer. who has right judgement and cognize what is the best class of action. would take the proper steps to halt the rebellion and pay no attending to the morality of his actions. The terminals in this instance alter the construct of the codifications in which the agencies are to be judged by ; no thirster is the terminal such universally good thoughts of peace and justness. but power and conquering. Virtue and prudence to Machiavelli keep intending merely in the sense of ability and achievement.

To Machiavelli cunning would be a virtuousness. as would decisiveness while exerting power. A frailty for a swayer would be stupidity. or ignorance of 1s ain topics. Something that is virtuous in the classical sense would merely be followed if it were deemed compatible with the state of affairs. and did non in anyhow undermine the terminals being pursued. The Machiavellian position is based on and around a pragmatism seen in political relations and history. and is amoral. The full purpose of the book was to compose a matter-of-fact and realistic attack to covering with power. non a lesson in high virtuousness and morality.

He states. “But since my purpose is to compose something utile to whoever understands it. it has appeared to me more fitting to travel straight to the effective truth of the thing than to the imaginativeness of it” ( 61 ) . He finds that necessity is what guides most actions. “ ? [ Because ] work forces will ever turn out bad for you unless they have been made good by a necessity” ( 95 ) . A military preparation manual written on the best manner to put to death killing would non travel into a argument on whether or non killing is right or incorrect.

The manual would be about amoral and non travel into the argument. those who have already settled that argument in their heads would read it. and the same follows for The Prince. One should non tie in the instructions of The Prince as something that Machiavelli himself feels is moral. merely and proper. but instead what history has shown to be the ideal and efficient manner to manage power. Survivor in the political universe creates certain necessities. and forces persons to set about certain actions in order to guarantee success.

“ ? [ for ] it is so far from how one lives to how one should populate that he who lets go of what is done for what should be done learns his ruin instead than his preservation” ( 61 ) . The intent of The Prince is non a usher to being a moral Prince. but how to stay by necessity and pragmatism. Just as a intent of the war manual would non be the moralss of killing. The manual would non debate war as a merely or unfair agencies to an terminal. but alternatively would accept it as world. and seek to near it with the same rough world.

In fact the full intent of The Prince was to function as a usher to reconstruct Italy to greatness. a way that can merely be achieved by power. He uses illustrations from throughout history of swayers who acted successfully when faced with a state of affairs. pulling from these illustrations he shows the right actions that a Prince should follow. There is no room for being a virtuous and honest swayer. as it will be at odds with the world of political life. Because he uses realistic illustrations from history. we see his true matter-of-fact nature ; his ultimate end is the accomplishment of his terminals. non the right actions.

Machiavelli uses the actions of past swayers whether or non they are merely. every bit long as they prove successful for the terminals being pursued. Machiavelli himself states that he has taken a realist attack. and outlines the ground as to why he has taken this attack. as being necessary and efficient. If one were to analyze the manner in which Machiavelli looks towards leting freedom towards his topics. or the intervention of honestness toward his topics. one would reason that Machiavelli himself was non in favour of these things.

It would be a error to make this decision. it is non so much that he is against freedom or truth. but he realizes that these things will damage and undermine 1s power – the end and focal point of The Prince. “For a adult male who wants to do a profession of good in all respects must come to destroy among so many who are non good” ( 61 ) . Machiavelli is non favoring things that we would see as ferociousness. misrepresentation and in many instances evil ; alternatively he is utilizing them as tools in an act to obtain what he desires. Machiavelli spends much clip on the behaviour that a Prince should follow in order to be successful.

Although Machiavelli goes through many different traits and patterns a swayer should follow. the two that he deems really necessary are to be loved and to be feared. Machiavelli stresses that a swayer should seek to be loved. but above all make certain that he is non hated. because if he is hated it will finally be his undoing. This follows the Machiavellian line of pragmatism and necessity ; it is non motivated by a lecherousness for immorality or fraudulence. but is something that many people who are appalled by his amorality would hold with.

If Machiavelli were a instructor of immorality he would ne’er do such a statement. A leader who is feared will finally discourage any action against him by his ability to command the actions of the people with his fright. . Morality will merely function to halter a prince’s abilities. “This has to be understood: that a prince. particularly a new prince. can non detect all those things for which a work forces are held good. since he is frequently under a necessity. to keep his province. of moving against religion. against charity. against humanity. against faith.

And so he needs to hold a spirit disposed to alter as the air currents of luck an fluctuations of things command him? ” ( 70 ) . The most efficient manner to cover with a job is normally non the moral manner. and Machiavelli clip and clip once more points to this as the ground in which he chooses the way he does. His book is non for dreamers. and as he states dreamers seldom accomplish what they want. His book is for the counsel of a Prince towards power. and the ability to keep that power. All of these things follow the rigorous Machiavellian standards of necessity for power.

Whether these things are good or evil in our eyes is non the subject of treatment for Machiavelli. therefore it does non concern him. what he seeks is the necessary actions to derive and keep power. “Hence it is necessary to a prince. if he wants to keep himself. to larn to be able non to be good. and to utilize this and non utilize it harmonizing to necessity” ( 61 ) . This philosophy of pragmatism within The Prince was non invented by Machiavelli. one can look at it as simply an look of the practical political thoughts of his clip. and possibly everlastingly.

We see that Machiavelli puts forth an moralss of political convenience. It does non keep to or let itself to be hampered by morality. virtuousness. or Christian values. but allows them merely when opportune and good. The Prince’s philosophy supports actions including slaying. fraudulence. and betrayal given that the Prince will profit from it. The moralss found within Machiavelli is wholly based upon a realistic mentality upon the political universe and caters to political convenience. To Machiavelli this moral codification of convenience and pragmatism is a political necessity.

He states that when it is politically necessary to move in conformity with a frailty so one must make so in the involvement of power. “And moreover one should non care about incurring the celebrity of those frailties without which it is hard to salvage one’s province? “ ( 62 ) . He holds that the universe will get down up dreamers. and that it is unrealistic to anticipate person to exert morality when covering with a political state of affairs. or their enemies. Through the geographic expedition of the footing for Machiavelli’s intervention of moralss and his docket for composing The Prince we see that his instructions are non evil. but based on political pragmatism and necessity.

Machiavelli treats morality and prudence non as ushers for a Prince. but as tools to utilize for political addition. By taking the foundation of prudence and virtuousness from morality. he reinterprets them in respects to necessity and power. The amoral Machiavellian position centres on a pragmatism seen in political relations and history. The full intent of The Prince is non a usher to being a morally. but a usher to necessity and pragmatism. This philosophy of pragmatism within The Prince was non invented by Machiavelli. but used masterfully by him to craft a powerful instructional book on power.

The construct of morality is non attacked or thrown off. but put aside and merely referred to or used when necessary. In the existent universe few will be honest. or moral. so it becomes necessary for one to besides put these things aside as it will conflict with 1s terminals. This is the world of political relations and Machiavelli recognizes this and refers to it many times in the book as the ground to why he chooses the way he does and non out of immorality or some wish for fallacious actions. Political world deems his method necessary. therefore it is a realistic and matter-of-fact manner to near the topic.

Cite this page

Political Philosophy and Machiavelli. (2017, Sep 05). Retrieved from


Remember! This essay was written by a student

You can get a custom paper by one of our expert writers

Order custom paper Without paying upfront