| Papers [1-16] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "MACHIAVELLI": |
|
|
"The Prince' by Niccolo Machiavelli, 2005.
This paper reviews "The Prince' by Niccolo Machiavelli, which christened Machiavelli as the father of modern politics and his writings as the hallmark of power politics.
1,420 words (approx. 5.7 pages), 0 sources, AU$ 51.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that, using a twist of a literary genre of the era--cloaking and imparting his beliefs based on current events of the time, "The Prince' by Niccolo Machiavelli is an illustration of Machiavelli's duplicity of hiding an alternative belief and motive beneath its rhetoric of monarchical rights, privileges and purposes. The author relates that, in "The Prince", Machiavelli details the life a ruling prince, who was purportedly Lorenzo d'Medici, should lead by integrating his knowledge of common society and human behavior. The paper reports that Machiavelli emphasizes certain character traits in a ruler, which must be served in order to gain an even greater advantage: A man must feed his ambition, match the abilities of previous men of greatness, and be ready to seize any opportunity just as Moses, Romulus, and Cyrus did.
From the Paper
"Machiavelli's supposed objective in "The Prince" is to illustrate how political principles can be implemented and manipulated to gain and maintain political power. He is not concerned about the suffering, death, or financial ruin his course of actions metes out on the social classes lower than the royal line. "The Prince" is a grand example of "the end justifies the means". Whatever means are necessary for a prince to rise and maintain political power must be accomplished. In the game of "power politics", there is no room for the faint of heart, justice for all, or lack of aggression. Power will be gained through the advantages of boldness, audacity, genocide if need be, and annihilation of opposing rulers and their familial lines."
| |
|
Machiavelli the Religious Humanist, 2006.
This paper examines the life and accomplishments of philosopher Niccolo Machiavelli while also defining the true meaning of humanism and its relevance to Machiavelli's view on religion and the world in general.
2,516 words (approx. 10.1 pages), 6 sources, MLA, AU$ 82.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper presents clear and specific examples and lessons learned by Machiavelli which greatly impacted his views on life and religion which garnered him a reputation as a brilliant and well respected philosopher. The writer of this paper contends and proves that Machiavelli was also a religious humanist by focusing on his impact and involvement in both the political and religious arenas. This paper examines the early roots of humanism and religious humanism which have been traced back to the Renaissance era. This paper defines humanism as a naturalistic view that rejects the supernatural or ideas that cannot be proven by logic or science. This paper examines the views and opinions of Machiavelli who clearly thought things through very much in style associated with the humanistic philosophy which promotes self thought and reflection, while urging others to think for themselves.
Table of Contents:
Introduction
Niccolo Machiavelli
Humanist
Machiavelli as a Humanist
Conclusion
Works Cited
From the Paper
"Machiavelli would certainly concur with the notion that religion creates distortions and ironies. But Humanists as a group also have underlying problems within their own ranks because they do not agree on certain facts. For example, Modern Humanism splits into two sub-categories, secular and religious. The dispute is between these factions. "The fact is that many Protestants, Catholics, and Jews--along with secular humanists--believe in and teach the theory of evolution in biology courses." Ironically, Secular and Religious Humanists seem to share similar worldviews and therefore follow similar principles which was confirmed when each factions created and signed the Humanist Manifesto I in 1933 and the revision in 1973. Religious Humanists who are secular have an understanding that human beings do have personal and social needs."
| |
|
Machiavelli and Foreign Policy, 2005.
This paper discusses Machiavelli and the foreign policy as presented in Niccolo Machiavelli's "The Prince".
1,915 words (approx. 7.7 pages), 1 source, MLA, AU$ 66.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that Machiavelli in his book "The Prince" believed that a prince who dealt with a territory which was not his own principality, should imitate the methods of others that have been successful at ruling conquered peoples but aim at higher goals. The author points out that Machiavelli believed it was much harder to maintain a principality based on alliances with nobles rather than with the people. The paper relates that Machiavelli noted that a prince is respected when he is either a true friend or a downright enemy; therefore, a prince should declare himself in favor of one party or against another but never standing neutral.
Table of Contents
How a Prince Should Deal with Territories He has Conquered
With Whom Should a Prince Form Alliances
The Prince, the Military and War
On Arming the People
How a Prince May Use Foreign Conflicts to Enhance His Status
From the Paper
"According to Machiavelli's definition, auxiliaries were armed forces lent to a prince by a stronger force to accomplish a particular task. He wrote that these arms may be useful and good in themselves, but for him who calls them in they are always disadvantageous; for losing, one is undone and winning, one is their captive. Machiavelli notes that wise men believe that nothing was as uncertain as fame or power not founded on its own strength. A wise prince could find a way to ready his own troops, controlling auxiliaries or mercenaries was futile.
For a prince to have access to the strength of his own troops, Machiavelli believed that a Prince should have "no other aim or thought, nor select anything else for his study, than war and its rules and discipline"."
| |
|
Machiavelli and Rousseau on the Roman Constitution, 2004.
A comparison of political philosophers Machiavelli's and Rousseau's views of the Roman constitution.
2,826 words (approx. 11.3 pages), 2 sources, MLA, AU$ 91.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The Roman constitution allowed for a great empire to develop and conquer the known world, and this great empire of vast regions was founded as a republic before its rule by emperors. It is that republic that Niccolo Machiavelli explores in his book, "Discourses on Livy". The paper shows that, in this book, Machiavelli discusses his view of the Roman republic based on Livy's history. According to Machiavelli, the book is a critique of Livy's history, but it is much more than just a critique; it presents Machiavelli's view of government. In the "Discourse on Livy", Machiavelli demonstrates his view on the formation of governments, mainly republics, along with some discussion of principalities. In this discussion, he displays and articulates the modern views of government. The paper shows that the evolution in modern political thought starts during this time period, and many claim it begins with Machiavelli. The paper explains that, several centuries later, Jean-Jacques Rousseau continues the evolution of modern political thought with his essay, "On Social Contract." In the essay, Rousseau displays a continuation of Machiavelli's political ideas through his description of the Roman constitution. This paper shows that the ideas of both authors are evident in their views on the importance of the founders of republics, those individuals that further republics, the qualities of republics, and the institution of the Tribunal.
From the Paper
"This seems to establish that Rousseau supported the control of the government by a wealthy few and did not support conflict, but he also favors the way this power was kept in check. The two ways the voting majority was kept in check was by the "tribunes as well as a consistently large number of plebeians usually belonged the class of the rich, their influence countered balanced that of the patricians in this first class" (159). The second check on power was that "one century was chosen by lot, and it alone proceeded to carry out the elections" (159). That is, the assembly's composition was always changing because the Century Assembly members were chosen not by wealth but simply by chance, so the possibility arose that on important issues, the Assembly was constituted of more members from the other classes than from the wealthy first class."
| |
|
Machiavelli's Virtue, 2007.
This paper studies "Machiavelli's Virtue", making use of the views of scholars.
1,518 words (approx. 6.1 pages), 4 sources, MLA, AU$ 54.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this essay the writer discusses that when hearing the name "Machiavelli," many people automatically think of negative words such as "corrupt," "evil," and "valueless." The writer notes that the controversy about the truth of this continues. In fact, the writer maintains that many historians better recall Machiavelli for his political philosophy and diplomacy during the Renaissance. The writer points out that in the numerous essays contained in the book, "Machiavelli's Virtue", Harvey Mansfield confirms that he strongly recognizes Machiavelli as ranking along with Plato, Aristotle, Descartes, to achieve his goal of "modernity." The writer concludes that Machiavelli's beliefs as well as the book 'Machiavelli's Virtue' provide a great deal to consider when looking at the political situation today across the world.
From the Paper
"Mansfield's following of Strauss is well recognized, so it seemed helpful to first start reading the section about Strauss in the book first. This would provide a foundation on how Mansfield derived his basic direction of thought regarding Machiavelli. It is confusing that the chapters are not in chronological order and this information on Strauss does not come until the middle of the book in chapter nine. In fact, it is easier reading the chapters in a different order and using the index to follow up on certain themes that are used throughout the essays."
"Mansfield admits his strong following for Strauss throughout his essays in Machiavelli's Virtue."
| |
|
Machiavelli's Singular Political Philosophy, 2005.
A comparison of Machiavelli's "Discourses on Livy" and "The Prince".
1,612 words (approx. 6.4 pages), 3 sources, APA, AU$ 56.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Machiavelli's "The Prince" is by far his most famous, or to some, infamous of his works. Widely read for centuries, the "end justifies the means" mantra has been the inspiration for tyrants and the antithesis of the moral. Upon reading his lesser known "Discourses," one may first be surprised at the tome's staunch republican stature and sometimes impassioned defense of the cause of liberty. This diversion from the cold absolutism of the "Prince" might lead many to even think that Machiavelli's works contradict one another, that there are, in essence, "two Machiavellis". Although this may seem to be true, with careful reading of both works one can begin to see that Machiavelli holds a singular personal political philosophy to which the words of both works offer their full support. This paper examines Machiavelli's thoughts from both works on ideals, morals, and most importantly, power and glory. Finally, the paper engenders some speculation on the man himself and his likely motives for writing these two works, which seem, superficially at least, to point in opposite directions.
From the Paper
"For Machiavelli, what is truly good is that which is benefits the state, not what is good for individuals, except in the case of a prince where his individuality is inseparable from the state. He seems to suggest that morals that refine the behavior of individuals can not apply to behavior of states and princes, rejecting "a politics that is subservient to moral codes and is therefore itself a threat to the very conditions that allow morality to exist." Machiavelli believes that it is only through the unfettered power of the state that a society gains the luxury of being able to live moral lives, and the leaders of that society are therefore exempt from the moral standards of the common men."
| |
|
Machiavelli, 2002.
This paper examines the external influences on Niccolo Machiavelli's writings.
3,895 words (approx. 15.6 pages), 17 sources, AU$ 115.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In four of Machiavelli's best known works, "Discourses on Livy", "The Art of War", "The History of Florence", and "The Prince", we can see a clear influence from such Machiavellian contemporizes as Cesare Borgia, Francesco Vettori, the Medici Family, and general public opinion, which should be a cause for caution in relaying on Machiavelli's writings as an accurate discussion of history or an ethical discussion of politics. The author discusses how the ideas that Machiavelli placed on paper over five hundred years ago still have meaning in the 21st Century.
From the paper:
"While Machiavelli's works lack the modern day standards of documentations, he was ahead of his time in historical philosophy and approach. He was the first historian to acknowledge that the need to explain events leading up a specific event to understand why that event occurred and to understand the results of that event. As for is external influences, they need to be taken into consideration, so we can accurately understand his writings, the period in which he was writing, and the periods in which he was writing about. He may contradict himself in his political belief, but considering the pressures that he was under he manages to give a pretty good analysis of events and history. Machiavelli's works has managed to sustain its ideas from the 1500's to the 21st Century and will continue to be a source of knowledge and debate for centuries to come."
| |
|
Niccolo Machiavelli, 2005.
A overview of Niccolo Machiavelli's style of leadership as defined in "The Prince".
736 words (approx. 2.9 pages), 4 sources, MLA, AU$ 28.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines how Machiavelli's beliefs are very different from that of his contemporaries and relates that part of the reason Machiavelli wrote "The Prince" was to shock those around him so that he could hopefully earn the approval of the powerful Medici family. The paper discusses how Machiavelli's ruthless style of leadership contradicts the Bible, because the Bible teaches that leadership is earned by serving; whereas Machiavelli's views are obvioulsy very different. The writer is of the opinion that Machiavelli's beliefs are not realistic in today's world because people want to have a say in the way their government is run and, under the guidelines set forth in The Prince, this political influence is not tolerated.
From the Paper
"One such deep thinker and leader was Machiavelli. Machiavelli was a Florentine diplomat and political thinker that began his political career in 1498. He served for more than a decade as an ambassador on diplomatic missions through France, Germany, and Italy. When the Italian republic collapsed he was forced from his post and was left with nowhere to serve. He repeatedly tried to regain the approval and confidence of the new regime in Italy but his attempts were unsuccessful. Since he was no longer able to lead an active political life, Machiavelli wrote The Prince, where he wrote down his major concerns about politics. "
| |
|
Machiavelli Compared To Hitler & Napoleon, 1989.
Examines Machiavelli's political career & concepts in [The Prince] & analyzes these German & French leaders' careers as examples of Machiavelli's principles.
2,925 words (approx. 11.7 pages), 7 sources, AU$ 112.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
" Niccolo Machiavelli was a great thinker of the Renaissance who traveled all over Europe studying the political systems of governments. By working for people such as de Medici, Machiavelli developed a science of politics, which he felt should be implemented by the ruling class. In "The Prince," Machiavelli gives a clear and concise analysis of how a political leader might achieve power and maintain it. To succeed in both these areas, leaders must deal with reality pragmatically, even if it conflicts with their morality. Two political leaders who followed Machiavelli's ways to a large extent were Napoleon Bonaparte and Adolf Hitler. Through these two examples one can evaluate how well Machiavelli's methodology works in the real world.
Machiavelli was loyal to the state and not to the Republic."
| |
|
Machiavelli's, 'Necessita' and 'Fortuna', 2001.
What roles do "necessita" and "fortuna" play in Machiavelli's politics, and how are the two related to eachother.
2,040 words (approx. 8.2 pages), 6 sources, APA, AU$ 69.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses Machiavelli's political outlooks and specifically the roles of chance and necessity in politics. While necessity is paramount in Machiavelli's political ideology, his life and writings are consistently troubled by the presence of the 'supernatural' force of 'Fortuna'. Although in his writings, especially 'The Prince' he attempts to instruct would-be rulers on how to prepare for, accommodate and tame fortune in order to turn it to their advantage, he concedes that the will of the goddess is sometimes unavoidable. However, Machiavelli's works were written during violent times. Times of conflict and instability. His work principally concedes that the world and society is inherently flawed, and he attempts to devise measures and procedures to somewhat remedy the ills that they experienced.Machiavelli received lots of critisicm and stigma because of his profound ideals with with the author agrees.
From the Paper
" Almost all commentators on Machiavelli say that his principal innovation, and the essence of this method, was to 'divorce politics from ethics'. Thereby he broke sharply with the Aristotelian tradition, which had dominated medieval political thought. His method, they grant, freed politics to become more scientific and objective in its study of human behavior; but it was most dangerous because, through it, politics was released from 'control' by ethical conceptions of what is right and good."
| |
|
Boccaccio, Machiavelli and De Pizan, 2006.
This paper compares and contrasts Niccolo Machiavelli's "The Prince" and Giovanni Boccaccio's "Decameron."
2,375 words (approx. 9.5 pages), 0 sources, AU$ 78.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this paper, Machiavelli's "The Prince" and Boccaccio's "Decameron" are compared and contrasted on several different levels. Both works are considered in terms of their historical contexts. Questions of leadership and social change are also analyzed in terms of the authors' works. The paper also compares Machiavelli's philosophy to that of Christine de Pizan. Finally, the author examines both works in terms of their gender roles.
Morality and Virtue in the Society: Social and Political Perspectives from Niccolo Machiavelli and Christine de Pizan
Machiavelli and De Pizan on Gender Role Differences
From the Paper
"De Pizan, on the other hand, offered a different way of looking into a political issue, especially if this issue involves an important sector in the society: women. In her discourse, "The Treasure of the City of Ladies," De Pizan contemplated how human society had developed the psyche and perception that females are inherently inferior to males. This issue was borne out of the author's observation how literary and scholarly works portray a common stereotype of women as subversive to men, depicted as uneducated and not able to create decisions for themselves. In the words of Pizan, "learned men" tend depict women through 'wicked insults" about their behavior. This drove her to investigate and know the origin of this perception and wrong portrayal of women in Western societies."
| |
|
Comparing Machiavelli to Hitler, 2002.
This paper discusses how Machiavelli would have evaluated the leadership qualities of Adolph Hitler and what, if anything, he would have criticized, endorsed, or refined about Hitler's leadership.
2,226 words (approx. 8.9 pages), 5 sources, MLA, AU$ 75.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The following paper summarizes Machiavelli's theory of politics, what Machiavelli's thoughts might have been on being compared to Hitler and whether or not the writer agrees with Machiavelli's assessment of Hitler's leadership and politics. In addition, the writer looks at how Machiavelli may have advised Hitler on his leadership skills.
From the Paper
"Machiavelli would say Hitler certainly appeared to possess these qualities that is why a large percentage of the German people supported his Nazi regime. As far as attempting to do good Hitler believed that what he was doing, by exterminating the Jews and other so-called lower races, was good and moreover that the German race was superior. According to his writings in Mein Kampf, Germany was "the mother of all life" (Hitler,459). According to an Encarta article," he hoped to conquer the entire world, and for a point in time his Nazi regime dominated most of Europe and much of North Africa. He instituted sterilization and euthanasia measures to enforce his idea of racial purity among German people and caused the slaughter of millions of Jews, Sinti and Roma (Gypsies), Slavic peoples, and many others, all of whom he considered inferior."
| |
|
Virtue According to Niccolo Machiavelli, 2004.
Compares Machiavelli's notion of virtue to Thomas Hobbes's notion of virtue.
1,703 words (approx. 6.8 pages), 3 sources, MLA, AU$ 60.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper compares and contrasts the different political concepts of virtue as put forth in Machiavelli's "The Prince" and Hobbes's "Leviathan". The paper also explains Machiavelli's belief that power can only be attained by the use of force verses Hobbes's belief that political power is achieved through the obligation and liberty of those being ruled. Furthermore, this paper discusses the differing ideas Machiavelli and Hobbes held concerning the goals of government. Finally, the paper looks at the film about the Salem witch trials, "The Crucible", and explains how the tenets posited by both Machiavelli and Hobbes can be seen in the social atmosphere portrayed in the film.
From the Paper
"Virtue is a word often connected with the circumstance of immorality or lack of morality. Niccollo Machiavelli defined 'virtue' as a concept that attempts to convey in one English word the two senses of 'virtu' in the Italian of the Renaissance. There is within the definition provided by Machiavelli the connotation of ruthlessness as well as resourcefulness. Machiavelli appears to be influenced by the contention that one should give more emphasis to an amoralist view allows the structure to determine the essence of the form of 'virtue'."
| |
|
Plato and Machiavelli, 2002.
A paper which compares and shows the similarities and differences between the theories of the ideal state as put forth by philosophers Plato and Machiavelli.
2,738 words (approx. 11.0 pages), 2 sources, APA, AU$ 88.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper explains that on one level, Plato and Machiavelli can be considered theorists of the ideal state and each gives a high position to the military and military arts in achieving and maintaining order in society. It shows, however, they do have different views of the ultimate place and purpose of the military. What each has to say about the military reflects on the nature of the rest of their philosophies as expressed by Plato in "The Republic" and by Machiavelli in "The Prince". The paper shows that both Plato and Machiavelli analyze history and come to conclusions about the state, its relationship to the citizen, the art of war and the role of the military. Machiavelli wants to determine what works best for the ruler, while Plato seeks an ideal and finds it by linking the individual and the state.
From the Paper
Socrates speaks of the relationship between the individual human soul and the society of which the individual is a part, intending to make a moral statement about the nature of the state and its relationship to the individual. Socrates says at the outset that it is necessary to admit that the elements that make up the state have to exist in the individuals who compose that state, for they have to come from somewhere, and the human population is the only possible source. Socrates has already noted that the state has three natural constituents, wisdom, courage, and self-discipline, and he then shows that these same three forces are to be found in the human soul. Thus the three parts of the mind identified by Socrates are shown to correspond exactly to the three classes of the state. Socrates shows that the state is just when its three components are in harmony and when each of its classes performs its assigned tasks without interfering with the other classes, just as in the individual, the same thing would be true of the soul. The goal for Plato is harmony, and a professional army class assures the maintenance of that harmony.
| |
|
Sun Tsu and Machiavelli, 2006.
This paper analyzes how the historic views and opinions of Italian philosopher Niccolo Machiavelli and Chinese author Sun Tsu are both relevant and necessary in today's business world.
1,202 words (approx. 4.8 pages), 3 sources, MLA, AU$ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The writer of this paper details how the necessity of strategy has made Sun Tsu and Machiavelli extremely popular subjects in business classes around the country. This paper examines the principles and strategic views of both Sun Tsu and Machiavelli while discussing their relevance in today's business world. This paper explores the various reasons both Machiavelli and Sun Tsu have been criticized for their ruthlessness. The writer delves into the issue of ethics and morality as a tactical strategy as detailed in Machiavelli's "The Prince" which is often read as a purely strategic text. The writer contends and explains why business is war and that the tactics of warfare and diplomacy make good business. This paper details the five governing factors that must be taken into account in both warfare and business as dictated in Sun Tsu's "The Art of War." This paper analyzes how the Coca Cola Corporation successfully applied Sun Tsu's "Stratagem of Sowing Discord" in a campaign to outsell Pepsi Corp.
From the Paper
"This stress on morality as well as tactical strategy may seem antithetical to Machiavelli's advice to The Prince, which is often read as a purely strategic text. But both leaders counsel not higher aims, but what is tactically practical, and having a rallying cause is necessary to inspire the troops, ad well as to know one's enemy. Both leaders also give advice as to how to win over different nations, and stress the need to stay in power, as well as to purely acquire power. And Machiavelli notes, it "cannot be called talent to slay fellow-citizens, to deceive friends, to be without faith, without mercy, without religion; such methods may gain empire," in the short run, "but not glory," and long-lasting security for the ruler."
| |
|
Hobbes, Machiavelli and Political Failure, 2008.
An analysis of the causes and consequences of political failure in Niccolo Machiavelli's "The Prince" and Thomas Hobbes's "The Leviathan".
3,468 words (approx. 13.9 pages), 2 sources, MLA, AU$ 105.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines how Niccolo Machiavelli (1469-1527) and Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) can be assessed as theorists influenced by direct exposure to political failure and its resulting chaos. It looks as how Machiavelli suggested that the prince was a person who knew he could not have something for nothing, whereas Hobbes was inclined to place the citizen in similar shoes, needing to adjust to a directed social order aware that without small compromises, he would lose the order so needed and wanted to achieve his ambitions. The paper concludes that in the early 21st century, there is much in international political life to remind us of Machiavelli's "The Prince" and Hobbes' "The Leviathan" in different demonstrations of both leadership and political failure and how war, anarchy, alienation and social chaos do seem the prices of poor leadership approaches and the failure to provide what is needed.
Outline:
Introduction
Machiavelli on Political Failure
Hobbes on Political Failure
Lessons of being a Bad Leader, or a Bad Subject
Concluding Remarks
From the Paper
"Both Machiavelli and Hobbes had few illusions about human nature and the difficulties of governance. Machiavelli saw political failure as owing directly to the nature of the leader and whether or not he was a prince, in a person astute and evolved enough to wield power, and as Hobbes agreed in places but also expected subjects to understand that beyond a symbolic leader they needed to see their own culpability when political systems fell to pieces, that they were merely parts of the same organic social machine. Political failure meant that one party of another was not complying as necessary to make the machine function and that this should be recognized. In other words, whatever kind of leader or ruler was produced, human unwillingness to put cooperation ahead of competition and greed, or a failure to respect the law towards other anarchy would bring political failure's result in the anarchy of which human beings were also much afraid. "
|
|
|
