In The Prince and Discourses on Livy, Machiavelli breaks from the precedent set by early political thinkers. Machiavelli unleashes a critical attack on the Church both as an institution and also as a belief system. Machiavelli blames the institution of the Church for interfering in politics which ends regimes. He treats the popes as though they are secular leaders who serve as examples of what a ruler should do to maintain power. He calls it corrupt. He then criticizes the religion of Christianity for contributing to these problems and dividing Italy. Machiavelli first targets the Church as an institution in The Prince. Throughout his The Prince, Machiavelli treats the Church as a state and the popes as rulers of that state. One of the first …show more content…
Machiavelli has two areas of criticism. The first area indicating Machiavelli’s criticism of the papacy revolves around the expansion of the territory under control of the pope. He argues that, “Alexander VI, who, more than all the other popes there have been, demonstrated how much a pope, using both money and arms, could get his own way” (11, p. 37). Machiavelli depicts Pope Alexander VI almost despotically since Machiavelli sees the pope as being able to get whatever he wants by force or fortune. Machiavelli sees this as a trend in popes to follow such as Julius II who, “had opportunities to accumulate money of a sort that had not existed before Alexander” (11, p. 37). Machiavelli places a focus on the accumulation of wealth by the popes subtly implying that wealth was important for popes at that time. Machiavelli concludes his criticism of this procession of the popes by commenting that he hopes the new pope, Leo X, will increase that power but also make the Church worth of respect (11, p. 37-38). Machiavelli, like before, makes an implication about the Church, this time that it is currently not
The Renaissance was a time of classical revival and a turning point from the Middle Ages to the Early Modern period in the course of history. Ancient texts and artifacts became sources of inspiration for intellectuals and artists alike, and the desire to emulate—or even surpass the achievements of the past prompted them to study antiquities closely and saw them as models and guidance. People were consciously distinguishing themselves from the medieval thoughts and using history to make something new for their own era. In the field of political philosophy there’s no exception. Niccolo Machiavelli is perhaps the most representative and groundbreaking figure of this trend in political philosophy. With his erudition in ancient literature, histories and political thoughts, Machiavelli draws various sources from antiquity to critic and response to the political environment of histime. While one may find seemingly discrepancies in The Prince and The Discourse on the First Ten Books of Tius Livy, the use of histories as guide to demonstrate or propose ideal rules is apparent in both works. We should note that synthesizing ancient philosophy or thoughts with contemporary thoughts is nothing new. Thomas Aquinas, for example, reconciled Aristotelianism and Christianity in his work Summa Theologica, using ancient antiquity to back up his Christian beliefs. What is so noteworthy in Machiavelli is his emphasis and
Machiavelli’s interpretation of human nature was greatly shaped by his belief in God. In his writings, Machiavelli conceives that humans were given free will by God, and the choices made with such freedom established the innate flaws in humans. Based on that, he attributes the successes and failure of princes to their intrinsic weaknesses, and directs his writing towards those faults. His works are rooted in how personal attributes tend to affect the decisions one makes and focuses on the singular commanding force of power. Fixating on how the prince needs to draw people’s support, Machiavelli emphasizes the importance of doing what is best for the greater good. He proposed that working toward a selfish goal, instead of striving towards a better state, should warrant punishment. Machiavelli is a practical person and always thought of pragmatic ways to approach situations, applying to his notions regarding politics and
Through King Louis XII’s failure to acquire, Machiavelli teaches that one’s moral restraint to keep faith leads to the Prince’s ruin. Machiavelli teaches that in order to keep one’s state, one must do what is necessary. That is, if breaking faith, even with the pope, is necessary, then that is virtue. Throughout Machiavelli’s analysis of King Louis’s failure to acquire states in Italy, he investigates why Louis felt obligated to keep his promises. This obligation leads to the issue of staying faithful to Christian ideals of what virtue is and connects to Machiavelli’s claim that one can not be wholly Christian and preserve their state simultaneously.
Niccolò Machiavelli was an activist of analyzing power. He believed firmly in his theories and he wanted to persuade everyone else of them as well. To comment on the common relationship that was seen between moral goodness and legitimate authority of those who held power, Machiavelli said that authority and power were essentially coequal.9 He believed that whomever had power obtained the right to command; but goodness does not ensure power. This implied that the only genuine apprehension of the administrative power was the attainment and preservation of powers which indirectly guided the maintenance of the state. That, to him, should have been the objective of all leaders. Machiavelli believed that one should do whatever it took, during the given circumstance, to keep his people in favor of him and to maintain the state. Thus, all leaders should have both a sly fox and ravenous wolf inside of him prepared to release when necessary.10
He gives praise to the strong and brave Italian national spirit and criticizes the leaders who failed to make use of the great power of the people. As poetry was Machiavelli’s interest, he also uses poetry to communicate nationalistic dedication. We can see The Prince is a strong expression of Machiavelli’s wish to see a strong strengthen Italy with good leaders. It is clear The Prince has definitely spread a lot more than it was addressed to as still today we are reading to Machiavelli’s piece. This chapter gives an insight into Machiavelli’s mind telling us his motives to write this book. The bitterness of Italy being rules by foreign powers is clearly stated in the last chapter and Machiavelli’s main concern is for the liberation of Italy from the barbarians and to be unified, peaceful and prosperous
While some other great political thinkers sat around and dreamed about their perfect little utopias in the clouds, notably Socrates and Plato, Machiavelli was analyzing the most powerful men of his day. He observed and recorded how men flocked the sheep to exactly where they were wanted by their shepherd. He watched as the wolves preyed on the sheep and noticed that there was no philosopher king around to prevent it. He accepted that we as humans are corrupt and that we can’t all be Marcus Aurelius, king of
Niccolo Machiavelli is a very pragmatic political theorist. His political theories are directly related to the current bad state of affairs in Italy that is in dire need of a new ruler to help bring order to the country. Some of his philosophies may sound extreme and many people may call him evil, but the truth is that Niccolo Machiavelli’s writings are only aimed at fixing the current corruptions and cruelties that filled the Italian community, and has written what he believed to be the most practical and efficient way to deal with it. Three points that Machiavelli illustrates in his book The Prince is first, that “it is better to be feared then loved,”# the second
In the first few chapter, Machiavelli writes about political and military strategy, and gives extended advice to secure a country’s security, on the outside as well as on the inside. Cruelty and religious beliefs, his most controversial tools, are however the most powerful ones to maintain political order as explained previously: by using both those tools, a ruler maintains respect and order throughout the state. Therefore, Machiavelli’s advice should not be judged by its means by rather by its result: from this perspective he does not teach wickedness in The Prince but solely political
"Machiavelli identifies the interests of the prince with the interests of the state." He felt that it was human nature to be selfish, opportunistic, cynical, dishonest, and gullible, which in essence, can be true. The state of nature was one of conflict; but conflict, Machiavelli reasoned, could be beneficial under the organization of a ruler. Machiavelli did not see all men as equal. He felt that some men were better suited to rule than others. I believe that this is true in almost any government. However, man in general, was corrupt -- always in search of more power. He felt that because of this corruptness, an absolute monarch was necessary to insure stability. Machiavelli outlined what characteristics this absolute ruler should have in The Prince. One example of this can be seen in his writings concerning morality. He saw the Judeo-Christian values as faulty in the state's success. "Such visionary expectations, he held, bring the state to ruin, for we do not live in the world of the "ought," the fanciful utopia, but in the world of "is". The prince's role was not to promote virtue, but to insure security. He reasoned that the Judeo-Christian values would make a ruler week if he actually possessed them, but that they could be useful in dealing with the citizens if the prince seemed to have these qualities. Another example of Machiavelli's ideal characteristics of a prince
The political situation that prompted Machiavelli to write The Prince was that Italy wasn’t a unified country yet. It was a bunch of city states.
The Prince is Machiavelli’s guide for ruling and conquering states. Machiavelli elaborates on various ways to acquire principalities and provides the reader with a straightforward guide on how to successfully conquer and maintain control over states. Machiavelli analyses the strengths and flaws of certain paths to conquest, how to maintain a hold on power and the importance of strong arms. Machiavelli sees humans as easily persuaded and simple minded. He believes that all people want to be controlled and guided and those who control do so because their intellect is much greater than the average person. In chapter eleven, Ecclesiastical Principalities, Machiavelli elaborates on the strength and weaknesses
During Machiavelli’s time, society was much different than it had been for previous philosophers. Instead of storing up good works, so as to enjoy paradise, as the medieval man did, the Renaissance man was interested in all things, enjoyed life, strove for worldly acclaim and wealth, and had a deep interest in classical civilizations. He was born at a time of conflict within Florence, Italy, between the republican leaders and the family of the Medici’s, of which the Machiavelli’s, especially, had a history of opposition towards. After years of conflict between powers, Machiavelli was exiled from his country.
Niccolò Machiavelli thoroughly discusses the importance of religion in the formation and maintenance of political authority in his famous works, The Prince and The Discourses. In his writing on religion, he states that religion is beneficiary in the formation of political authority and political leaders must support and endorse religion in order to maintain power. However, Machiavelli also critiques corrupt religious institutions that become involved in politics and in turn, cause corruption in the citizenry and divisions among the state. In the following essay, I will examine Machiavelli’s analysis of religion and discuss the relationship between religion and politics in Machiavelli’s thought.
In The Morals of the Prince Machiavelli expresses his presumption on how a prince should act. He expresses that a prince should be feared, merciful, stingy, etc. He is right because if a prince is loved and too generous then people will take advantage of him and that will lead to his down fall. A prince must act appropriately to remain in power. Machiavelli gives his best ideas to keep a prince in power.
Niccolò Machiavelli thoroughly discusses the importance of religion in the formation and maintenance of political authority in his famous works, The Prince and The Discourses. In his writing on religion, he states that religion is beneficiary in the formation of political authority and political leaders must support and endorse religion in order to maintain power. However, Machiavelli also critiques corrupt religious institutions that become involved in politics and in turn, cause corruption in the citizenry and divisions among the state. In the following essay, I will examine Machiavelli's analysis of religion and discuss the relationship between religion and politics in Machiavelli's thought.