Is a just person the best choice for a ruler; many philosophers have laid out different ways in which they believe a society should be ran whether it be a single ruler such as a prince or multiple rulers like philosophy kings. Machiavelli intended for a society/principality to be ruled a strong ruler whether he be just or unjust, moral or immoral; whereas Plato believed for a society to work a just ruler such as the philosopher kings along with its other social counterparts was the perfect society. This paper intends to show how a just ruler was not something Machiavelli saw as pertinent to a society's survival whereas Plato deemed it to be at necessary for order and efficiency and for a city to work. Machiavelli's book The Prince was a letter written, with the intentions of telling the Prince of Italy on how to run the state, or to keep better control of it. Machiavelli talks about hereditary principalities, and new principalities how they are acquired, and how to keep rule, or what is the best way to keep rule in these newly acquired states. Machiavelli tells the prince what he feels is the best way to establish his rule, and keep it and he does so by providing examples from ancient times; he provides the prince with not only the successful states and rulers but also the ones that have failed and points out why those princes/emperors, their rule, and their state met their demise. Machiavelli could not have felt that a just ruler was the best ruler for a state because through out his whole book Machiavelli when talking about the ways in seizing a state he says that violence is one way in seizing a state; furthermore, in holding on to a seized state he talks about devastating them, and conquering them as well none of a just ruler. In addition, one of the main points that Machiavelli pushes through out his book is the use of force and fear. It is noted that force is a great way for a Prince to become "strong, secure, and respected"; and he links this force
Intro to Political Science
8 March 2013
Idealism vs Realism
Machiavelli says the prince only has to seem good, not be good. Plato insists that seeming is bad, being is good.
Nicolo Machiavelli is known as being an realist who accepted that fact that humans are brutal, selfish, and fickle while Plato was an idealist who believed people could be ruled by a philosopher king who ruled over the warriors and tradesmen of his ideal republic with rationality. In his view the philosopher-king….
Niccolio Machiavelli (Born May 3rd, 1469 – 1527 Florence, Italy.) His writings have been the source of dispute amongst scholars due to the ambiguity of his analogy of the ‘Nature of Politics” and the implication of morality. The Prince, has been criticised due to it’s seemingly amoral political suggestiveness, however after further scrutiny of other works such as The Discourses, one can argue that it was Machiavelli’s intention to infact imply a positive political morality….
Machiavelli in his book “The Prince” seems to sap the very foundations of morality and stops at nothing short of capsizing the entire edifice of religion. His thoughts resonate with a loathing of true virtue and propagate corrupted politics. Actually, today the term Machiavellianism is used to refer to the use of deceitfulness to advance one’s goals or desires. In ‘The Prince”, Machiavelli breaks from the classical view of virtue as represented by his philosophic predecessors Plato and Aristotle….
Of the many disparities between Plato and Machiavelli, the distinction of virtue versus virtu sticks out like a sore thumb. Virtue was the political bases for Plato: All men should behave virtuously at all times. Whereas Machiavelli believed virtu was the basis for political prowess. What was best for the state as a whole was the main concern, and the ends always justified the means.
Plato’s object was the creation of a utopian society--a civilization that abhorred war and centered itself upon….
for these differences can be found in their distinctive views regarding human nature. Once this is assessed the picture that each man paints of their ideal ruler or founder becomes much clearer. Plato promotes the concept of philosopher-kings who rule over his imagined Utopian society, while Machiavelli endorses a ruthless and at times amoral prince whose primary objective is the preservation of the state.
Plato’s view of human nature can be seen when considering his view of the soul, which….
October 16, 2011
Though often presented as two ideological opposites, personally I find there to be a lot more similarities between Plato and Machiavelli than usually acknowledged. Obviously there are some sharp contrasts. If one examines the excerpts from Machiavelli’s “The Prince” and Plato’s “The Republic”, it’s easy to conclude that Plato believed it to be essential for a government leader to be just, good, and free from corruption….
Henry V and Machiavelli are different in many ways. The main reason why they are different is because they are the leaders from different epochs. Henry V is a leader from medieval times. Machiavelli “The Prince” is a leader from renaissance times. These leaders have different thoughts of a lot of things. For example, religion and government but if you really think about they could have the same views. Let’s further on your knowledge this both incredible leaders.
To begin, Henry V is represented….
AP English Language
December 2, 2008
Machiavelli. Or not?
Niccolo Machiavelli’s ideal princely duties include “all mercy, all loyal, all sincerity, all humanity, all religion” (Rebhorn). Italian born, he carries a passionate enthusiasm for the Florentine republic. The Da Vinci of politics, Machiavelli manipulates deceit and duplicity to pursue political goals. Machiavelli presents his political ideals of princely responsibility via his legacy “The Prince”. Claimed as….
Haþim Cihan Demirköprülü, 20303433
Essay Question: Compare the Characteristics of the true guardians, as described by Plato (Republic, bk VII, pp.158 – 61, 484b – 487e) with the characteristics of the rulers, as described by Machiavelli (The Prince, ch.15, pp. 47 – 49 and ch. 18, pp.54f). What is the most important difference between the two accounts? In your view, which account is better, and why?
For centuries, every ruler created their own principles and rules and somehow….
think Plato and Machiavelli are known as two orominent philosphers.Who brought out the creativity in the political life.Both them have many simiilarites in between them.The first similarity in them is that Plato wants only the best should be the head of the etate in his view socartes are the best suitable for that job where as Machiavelli thinks that the prince should be the head of the state because he think mostly price are capaable of doing many things which other people can not.Both Plato and….