|
|
|
|
|
Machiavelli
|
|
|
Political theory is continuously changing and political writers are continuously adapting to these changes. New political writers have either added to theories previously developed or have completely contradicted these theories and created a new way of thinking. More often than not, philosophers have added to existing theories and in doing so kept them contemporary. While this is the most common kind of change that occurs, there are some who have been bold enough to question the validity of existing theories. One such person was Niccolo Machiavelli who contradicted the ideas and methodology of many well respected philosophers. Machiavelli’s bold ideas served him well as he wrote what was to become a very influential book which he called The Prince. Machiavelli’s masterpiece, The Prince, begins with a quick introduction explaining the purpose for which he initially wrote the book. He claims the purpose is to provide his prince, Lorenzo, with a guide as to how to become a successful and powerful ruler. In reality, however, Machiavelli knows that Lorenzo is not the person who will become a great Prince. In turn this book becomes a general guide which is written for someone who will one day prove to be the person who can be a great ruler. This guide insinuates that the only thing that should be considered important to a prince is the obtaining and maintaining of power. Machiavelli views the people as an inert mass that must be molded by the prince as the singular desire of people is to acquire. Machiavelli believes that a good prince must use this knowledge of the people to his advantage. The core of the book is found in Chapter 15 where Machiavelli seems to put forth the idea that God is dead. The central theme of The Prince is that power is not only one of many things that exist but, in fact, it is the only thing that exists. It is in this chapter that we find one of the most important passages in the book which states: “And many have imagined republics and principates that have never been seen or known to be in truth; because there is such a distance between how one lives and how one should live that he who lets go that which is done for that which ought to be done learns his ruin rather than his preservation – for a man who wishes to profess the good in everything needs must fall among so many who are not good.
|
|
|
|
Still Can't Find What Your Looking For? Then Try a Essay Search!
|
