Machiavelli and Ethics
He who lets himself in for politics, that is, for power and force as means, contracts with diabolical powers and for his action it is not true that good can follow only from good and evil only from evil, but that often the opposite is true. Anyone who fails to see this is, indeed, a political infant.
- Max Weber, “Politics as a Vocation” (1946: 122-123)
Even if, and precisely if we are forced to grant that his (Machiavelli’s) teaching is diabolical and he himself a devil, we are forced to remember the profound theological truth that the devil himself is a fallen angel.
- Leo Strauss, “Thoughts on Machiavelli” (1958: 13)
The sheer infamy Niccolo Machiavelli has drawn to himself in the five centuries since he wrote The Prince underscores the fact that he was no political infant. On the contrary, he has been called, amongst other things, a ‘great sinner’ (Dostoevsky, cited in Frank 2003:13), a ‘teacher of evil’ (Strauss 1958: 11), a ‘quintessential tactician’ (Lukes 2001: 562) and a ‘utilitarian moralist’ (Wilde 1928: 222). After all, against the ecclesiastical backdrop of the post-Augustinian Christianity of his time, Machiavelli boldly challenges religious morality in politics, lambasts older traditions of political thought, exposes the harshest truths of political life and extols a realistic understanding of the intractable nature of mankind (Major 2007: 171). Though they are all intricately interconnected, it is the first that this paper aims to explore; in light of the entirety of his life and works, does Machiavelli justify departures from canons of morality in politics, and if so, to what extent and in what circumstances?
In the following, I will argue that in politics, far from being the devil’s literal advocate for immorality, Machiavelli was an apostle for a superior morality of prudence that trumps all other conceptions of morality.[1] In turn, I will delimit the pertinent scope of ‘morality’ and demonstrate how this thesis
- Max Weber, “Politics as a Vocation” (1946: 122-123)
Even if, and precisely if we are forced to grant that his (Machiavelli’s) teaching is diabolical and he himself a devil, we are forced to remember the profound theological truth that the devil himself is a fallen angel.
- Leo Strauss, “Thoughts on Machiavelli” (1958: 13)
The sheer infamy Niccolo Machiavelli has drawn to himself in the five centuries since he wrote The Prince underscores the fact that he was no political infant. On the contrary, he has been called, amongst other things, a ‘great sinner’ (Dostoevsky, cited in Frank 2003:13), a ‘teacher of evil’ (Strauss 1958: 11), a ‘quintessential tactician’ (Lukes 2001: 562) and a ‘utilitarian moralist’ (Wilde 1928: 222). After all, against the ecclesiastical backdrop of the post-Augustinian Christianity of his time, Machiavelli boldly challenges religious morality in politics, lambasts older traditions of political thought, exposes the harshest truths of political life and extols a realistic understanding of the intractable nature of mankind (Major 2007: 171). Though they are all intricately interconnected, it is the first that this paper aims to explore; in light of the entirety of his life and works, does Machiavelli justify departures from canons of morality in politics, and if so, to what extent and in what circumstances?
In the following, I will argue that in politics, far from being the devil’s literal advocate for immorality, Machiavelli was an apostle for a superior morality of prudence that trumps all other conceptions of morality.[1] In turn, I will delimit the pertinent scope of ‘morality’ and demonstrate how this thesis
Bibliography: Aristotle. 1926. Nichomachean Ethics. Trans. H. Rackham. Ed. G. P. Goold.Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversity Press, Loeb Classical Library. Bergson, Henri. 2002. ‘The Two Sources of Morality and Religion’. In Henri Bergson: Key Writings.New York: Continuum. Cassirer, Ernst. 1944. ‘The Myth of the State’. Fortune 29(6): 165-206. Chabod, Federico. 1980. Scritti su Machiavelli. Torina: Einaudi. Cicero. 1913. De Officiis. Trans. Walter Miller.Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversity Press, Loeb Classical Library. Accessed 10 May 2010. Available at http://www.constitution.org/rom/ de_officiis.htm. Croce, Benedetto. 1945. Politics and Morals. Trans. Salvatore J. Castiglione.New York: Philosophical Library. de Sanctis, Francesco. 1956. Storia della letteratura italiana. 2 vols. Ed. Maria Teresa Lanza.Milan: Feltrinelli. Derla, Luigi. 1980. ‘Machiavelli moralista (II)’. Italianistica 10(1) 21-35. Dietz, Mary G. 1986. ‘Trapping the Prince: Machiavelli and the Politics of Deception’. American Political Science Review 80(3): 777-799. Dotti, Ugo. 1979. Niccolo Machiavelli: La fenomenologia del potere. Milano: Feltrinelli. Foscolo, Ugo. 1972. Edizione nationale delle opera di Ugo Foscolo, vol 8: Prose politiche e letterarie dal 1811 al 1816. Ed. Luigi Fasso.Florence: Le Monnier. Frank, Joseph. 2003. Dostoevsky: The Mantle of the Prophet, 1871-1881. Princeton :PrincetonUniversity Press. Geerken, John H. 1976. ‘Machiavelli Studies since 1969’. Journal of the History of Ideas 37(2): 351-368. Gentile, Giovanni. 1968. Studi sul Rinascimento. Vol 15 of Opere Complete.Florence: Sansoni. Hulliung, Mark. 1983. Citizen Machiavelli.Princeton,NJ:PrincetonUniversity Press. Kahn, Victoria. 1986. ‘Virtu and the Example of Agathocles in Machiavelli’s Prince’. Representations 13(4): 63-83. Lukes, Timothy J. 2001. ‘Lionizing Machiavelli’. The American Political Science Review 95(3): 561-575. Machiavelli, Niccolo. 1883. Discourses on The First Decade of Titus Livius. Trans. Ninian Hill Thomson.London: Kegan Paul, Trench & Co. Accessed 10 May 2010. Available at http://www.gutenberg.org/files/10827/10827-8.txt. Machiavelli, Niccolo. 2009. Mandragola. Trans. Nerida Newbigin. Accessed 18 May 2010. Available at http://www-personal.usyd.edu.au/~nnew4107/Texts/Sixteenth-century_Florence_files/Mandragola_ Translation.pdf Machiavelli, Niccolo Machiavelli, Niccolo. 1992. ‘On Occasion’. In The Prince, 2nd ed. Ed., Trans. Robert M. Adams.New York: Norton. Machiavelli, Niccolo. 1992. The Prince. Trans. W. K. Marriott.London: Everyman’s Library. Accessed 10 May 2010. Available at http://www.gutenberg.org/files/1232/1232-h/1232-h.htm. Machiavelli, Niccolo. 1992. ‘To Francesco Vettori’. 10 December 1513. In The Prince, 2nd ed. Ed., Trans. Robert M. Adams.New York: Norton. Major, Rafael. 2007. ‘A New Argument for Morality: Machiavelli and the Ancients’. Political Research Quarterly 60(2): 171-179. Mansfield, Harvey C. 1985. ‘An Introduction to The Prince’. In Niccolo Machiavelli, The Prince, trans. Harvey C. Mansfield.Chicago:University ofChicago Press. Maritain, Jacques. 1964. Moral Philosophy.London: Sheed and Ward. McIntosh, Donald. 1984. ‘The Modernity of Machiavelli’. Political Theory 12(2): 184-203. McShea, Robert J. 1963. ‘Leo Strauss on Machiavelli’. The Western Political Quarterly 16(4): 782-797. Meinecke, Freidrich. 1965. Machiavellism: The Doctrine of Raison d’Etat and Its Place in Modern History.New York: Praeger. Mukherjee, Souvik. 2002. ‘The Devil’s Morals: Ethics in Machiavelli’s The Prince’. Accessed 18 May 2010. Available at http://www.literature-study-online.com/essays/machiavelli.html. Russo, Luigi. 1980. Machiavelli.Bari: Laterza. Sasso, Gennaro. 1980. Niccolo Machiavelli: Storia del suo pensiero politico.Bologna: Il Mulino. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 2008. Accessed 18 May 2010. Available at http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/morality-definition/. Strauss, Leo. 1958. Thoughts on Machiavelli.Chicago:University ofChicago Press. Struever, Nancy S. 1992. Theory as Practice: Ethical Inquiry in the Renaissance.Chicago:University ofChicago Press. Sumberg, Theodore A. 1961. ‘La Mandragola: An Interpretation’. The Journal of Politics 23(2): 320-340. Thoreau, Henry David. 1989. Walden. Princeton:PrincetonUniversity Press. Villari, Pasquale. 1892. The Life and Times of Niccolo Machiavelli.London: T. F. Unwin. Weber, Max. 1946. ‘Politics as a Vocation’. In From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology, ed. and trans. H. H. Gerth and C. Wright Mills.New York:OxfordUniversity Press. Wilde, Norman. 1928. ‘Machiavelli’. International Journal of Ethics 28(2): 212-225. Wolin, Sheldon. 1960. Politics and Vision: Continuity and Innovation in Western Political Thought.Boston: Little, Brown. Zanini, Adelino. 1984. ‘Machiavelli, l’etica contro il politico’. Belfalgor 39(1): 31-40. Zmora, Hillay. 2005. ‘Machiavelli’s Morals’. Azure 19(1): 122-148.