| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "VIRTUE NICCOLO MACHIAVELLI": |
|
|
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, $ 55.95
»
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?."
| |
|
"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, $ 47.95
»
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."
| |
|
Niccolo Machiavelli, 2005.
A review of Niccolo Machiavelli's theories on human nature and society in his books, "The Prince" and "Discourses".
1,240 words (approx. 5.0 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 42.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses Niccolo Machiavelli's comments on government, human nature and society in his books, "The Prince" and "Discourses". It describes the most significant parallel between Machiavelli's principles on government and his principles in the humanist tradition. It then shows the points of disagreement between the humanists and Machiavelli. Finally, the paper suggests that his philosophy still applies to modern government.
From the Paper
"Niccolo Machiavelli comments on government, human nature, and society in his books, The Prince and Discourses. While many of Machiavelli's theories are in concordance with the humanist philosophical movement, many of his theories including his overall perception of the human nature diverge from humanism. In The Prince, Machiavelli examines the principles of political leaders and proposes ways in which aspiring political leaders can acquire the most political success possible. The Prince reflects Machiavelli's humanistic mentality in that he is well versed in Latin, he deliberately excludes religious content, and places high emphasis on the potential of the individual. However, his philosophy strays from the humanist tradition when he discusses the general moral depravity of most humans. Humanists typically focused on human dignity and pride in moral thought and behavior. Machiavelli on the other hand, proposed that the ends justify the means regardless of morality. Similarly, in Discourses, Machiavelli focused on the importance of freedom of citizenry above all else. He included graphic accounts of the tragic fate of previous governments in which freedom was restricted. Machiavelli, like his humanist contemporaries, had faith in the ability of humans to make rational decisions concerning their government and ruler. Discourses and The Prince contain both humanist ideals and non-humanist ideals; as a result, his revolutionary and ingenious works have received great fame and scrutiny since his death."
| |
|
Niccolo Machiavelli, 2007.
An analysis of Niccolo Machiavelli's works and their importance with regards to Western thought on society.
1,219 words (approx. 4.9 pages), 2 sources, APA, $ 41.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses Renaissance thought. Particularly, the paper discusses the lasting impact that Niccolo Machiavelli has on Western thought. The paper describes Machiavelli as an important contributor to Renaissance thought as it pertains to the government of society and the means by which to organize the various classes of the people. The paper mentions some of Machiavelli's works, such as "The Prince" and "The Discourses" and it discusses the importance of these works to Western society today.
From the Paper
"It has been noted by scholars that Machiavelli underwent an individual maturing of thought, as seen by his transference from monarchial theory, as seen within The Prince to the more republican theory, as seen throughout his Discourses. Hans Baron's depiction of Machiavellian works demonstrates how Machiavelli early on had an "enthusiasm for a monarchical solution" to Italy, but as time progressed, he affirmed a more republican belief in the future of Italy's governance. That Machiavelli was a historian is an important factor in his progression in thought; Machiavelli used his own experiences within Florence as the means for which to depict the structure that would best be able to rule the province. His reverence for Rome is seen in his later writings, where Machiavelli believes in the strength of the republic, that the republic is the best means necessary to achieve social and political order. Machiavelli's thoughts on republicanism over monarchial structures can be seen in today's society, where republics stand strong in the face of contemporary problems. Machiavelli was a common critic of all governance structures, but most importantly, he criticized the structure in which decisions were made by the few but accepted to govern the many. He believed that private citizens had too much power in even the republics of the age. He sought to allow all people the right to exercise their voice within their government and their province, and only then could an efficient governance structure exist to allow for the stability of all."
| |
|
John Calvin, Thomas More & Niccolo Machiavelli, 2006.
A review of insights from John Calvin, Thomas More and Niccolo Machiavelli regarding the degree of separation between the Church and the State.
1,669 words (approx. 6.7 pages), 2 sources, MLA, $ 54.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the "arbiter" role that religion played to the government and civil society, as reflected in the works of the theologians John Calvin and Thomas More, and political scientist Niccolo Machiavelli. The paper reviews Calvin's "Conversion and Call to Geneva" and More's "Utopia," comparatively analyzing them against Machiavelli's "The Prince".
From the Paper
"Case in point shown in Machiavelli's discourse is the inability of Church leaders to help lead civil society towards betterment and improvement of its state, as Western history had shown. The Pope, as he pointed out, did not have the political power to govern his own clergy, which demonstrates the Pope's inability to govern a bigger number of people, such as civil society. Evidence of the Pope's inability to lead over his clergy is the tendency for cardinals to attempt to usurp each other's, and the Pope's, powers, for their self-promotion and the creation of factions even within the Church organization."
| |
|
The Political Theory of Niccolo Machiavelli, 2000.
Looks at the ideologies of Niccolo Machiavelli concerning political theory and the uses of dictatorships.
1,955 words (approx. 7.8 pages), 7 sources, $ 62.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines the political theory of Niccolo Machiavelli. The author deals with his theory and writings on the use of dictators during war times and the citizens rights.
From the Paper
"Niccolo Machiavelli?s ideology toward popular government can be seen as him being against a democratic form of government. He says that dictatorship works best because ordinary people do not have the ability to govern themselves. A dictatorship is necessary because thee Prince is able to instill fear in the people the threat of punishment exists which makes it easier to govern. Dictatorship allows the Prince to decide what is in the best interests of its citizens. ?Men love at their own free will, but fear at the will of the Prince?A wise Prince must rely on what is in his power and not on what is in the power of others.? (Mc Donald, 1986)"
| |
|
Niccolo Machiavelli, 2002.
This essay explores the political views of philosopher Niccolo Machiavelli.
960 words (approx. 3.8 pages), 2 sources, APA, $ 34.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The main objective of this paper is to discuss the main themes of Niccolo Machiavelli's writings, including "The Prince", and how these themes were a response to both the inherited ideas about politics and to the specific historical context in which the great theorist lived.
From the Paper
"Machiavelli, like any other classical republican treated individual freedom in relation to the freedom of the state. He argued that a state could be said to be free when it is independent of external control by other states? rulers,
and when its rulership is exercised by the citizens and not
a single person or ?prince'."
| |
|
"The Prince" by Niccolo Machiavelli, 2006.
This paper reviews Niccolo Machiavelli's book "The Prince" and discusses the series of generalizations the author uses when describing politics and human nature.
1,312 words (approx. 5.2 pages), 1 source, APA, $ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This writer of this paper analyzes the main character in "The Prince" by Niccolo Machiavelli as well as the author's view as to what is needed for the Prince to be an effective leader. This paper also explores the Prince's constant struggle between the members of the ruling class and ordinary people as well as the amount of ruthlessness that is required of him to lead his people.
From the Paper
"Despite claiming to write from the vantage point of an ordinary man, Machiavelli writes as if he were present on the "lofty peak" of the prince he seeks to advise. The world that he describes is one in which a ruler is isolated by his authority that is constantly in danger of a challenge. These challenges can come from two places: external aggression and internal conspiracy. A prince can limit the possibility of challenges only if he has a well-armed and loyal army and if his subjects respect him."
| |
|
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, $ 26.95
»
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. "
| |
|
Niccolo Machiavelli and Thomas Hobbes, 2005.
This paper describes and compares the political philosophies of Niccolo Machiavelli and Thomas Hobbes.
3,765 words (approx. 15.1 pages), 15 sources, MLA, $ 103.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that Machiavelli lived during the Renaissance, nearly 150 years earlier than Thomas Hobbes, yet it was he who envisioned the basis for the political pragmatism of the twentieth century; while Thomas Hobbes, who lived in the 16th century, was a political materialist in the classical tradition of Plato and Galileo. The author stresses that Machiavellianism, as a term, has been used to describe the principles of power politics and the type of person who uses those principles in political or personal life is frequently described as a Machiavellian. The paper includes a comparison of the Table of Contents of "De Cive" by Thomas Hobbes and of "The Prince" by Machiavelli to demonstrate that Hobbes is looking for a universal law of politic; whereas, Machiavelli is looking for a practical means of surviving real politics. Several very long quotes.
From the Paper
"For Machiavelli, historical change has two forms: (1) the motion of nature and, (2) the order or ordering that man intends. Nature's changes are unreliable; they can be good or bad, but man does not feel safe or grateful. Machiavelli lumps unreliable nature with fickle fortune as the first element of his view of the opposing forces of history. Human order, or as Machiavelli describes it, "orders and modes" (Preface), is devised by human virtu to overcome this sense of being at the mercy of nature or fortune and is the second element of the equation. Simply put, his context of history is a contest between virtu and fortuna. Machiavelli is not a mere observer of this contest. As a humanist historian, he bases his advice, or lessons if you will, on the contest. But unlike the other historians of his day, he does not teach the lesson by what was done, but rather by what should have been done. This clearly places Histories in the political instead of historical genre by modern standards."
| |
|
Thomas Hobbes and Niccolo Machiavelli, 2006.
This paper discusses the political views and philosophies of Thomas Hobbes and Niccolo Machiavelli.
900 words (approx. 3.6 pages), 3 sources, $ 35.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This political study analyzes the major ethical and moral foundations for governing that reside in the philosophy of Thomas Hobbes, Aristotle, and Machiavelli. By understanding the premise of an ethical government in Aristotle's point view, the writer shows that the basis for a republican ethical and morality systems are a function of good political structures in government. However, the writer points out that Thomas Hobbes and Machiavelli disagree with this point of view, finding that self-preservation for elites is the foundation of most governing bodies through the reality of human nature. Further, the writer notes that aside from the dogmatic philosophy of Aristotle that seeks to propose ethical standards in government, both Hobbes and Machiavelli are realists in their understanding of human nature and the often-cruel conflicts that reside within the quest for power.
From the Paper
"... the critical philosophical premise to human nature that ultimately helps one realize how persons that attain power utilize it not for the greater good, but for the self-preservation of the person that is not satisfied with their own portion of power. In this manner, Hobbes provides the deeper insight into governing bodies and how they function, since it is often the issue of self-preservation that often dictates government, whether it be called republican, monarchy, etc., and that power forces men to abide by constitutions and rules only for their own greater personal success. "
| |
|
The Philosophy of Niccolo Machiavelli, 2004.
This paper discusses that two writings by Niccolo Machiavelli, "Mandragola" and "Discourses," focus on his belief that morality should be defined by necessity.
1,250 words (approx. 5.0 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 42.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that, through "Mandragola" and "Discourses," Machiavelli seeks to demonstrate that classical morality is too rigid and inflexible to deal effectively with the true realities of life; he proposes a new morality based exclusively on the necessities of humanity. The author points out that Mandragola," a play in the Commedia Erudita genre, borrows some elements from the classic story of the rape of Lucretia; whereas, in "Discourses," Machiavelli seeks to prove the validity of his philosophy through the use of historical examples, most notably the Roman Republic. The paper concludes that Machiavelli's philosophy does not have evil and unjust ends, which have often been associated with it, but rather is a utilitarian philosophy, which seeks to make morality a more practical application, thus ensuring that a society can reach its highest good.
From the Paper
"In addition to the structure of Rome, Machiavelli also believes that Rome embodied the flexibility to deal with unexpected events and crises. Since "all things of men are in motion and cannot stay steady," Machiavelli concludes that a society must either be advancing or declining (Machiavelli 172). Since history shows that mankind has been prone to war, we cannot expect future events to be peaceful, and we cannot expect to live in an isolated utopia. Events will often transpire that will force a society to either expand or maintain its current prosperity or enter a period of decline. Machiavelli's philosophy calls upon government to forego any moral objections to expansionist policies in favor of doing what is necessary for the future survival of the society."
| |
|
Niccolo Machiavelli, 2005.
This paper discusses Niccolo Machiavelli's (1469-1527) distinction between a prince and a tyrant.
2,250 words (approx. 9.0 pages), 4 sources, $ 89.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper agrees with Machiavelli's idea that the only distinction between the prince and tyrant is the latter's improper motivation in self-gain. The author uses examples pertaining to World War II such as Churchill and Hitler and to Idi Amin. The paper presents quotations from both "The Prince" and "The Discourses" and commentary on Machiavelli's times and career, which shaped his political thought."
From the Paper
"This paper discusses the distinction made between a prince and a tyrant by Niccolo Machiavelli (1469-1527), a figure often referred to as the father of modern political theory. In his well-known "The Prince" (1513) and the manuscript known as "The Discourses" (1531) which seem to further develop many of the ideas found in "The Prince", Machiavelli made clear the important distinction that he saw. Machiavelli's manner of thinking continues to be visible in the contemporary world, in distinctions that can be made between leaders and ordinary tyrants to have achieved political power."
| |
|
A Question of Morality: Niccolo Machiavelli, 2002.
A historiographic analysis of the life, writings and influence of Niccolo Machiavelli.
3,150 words (approx. 12.6 pages), 6 sources, $ 115.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper will examine Machiavelli's career and work with respect both to the intellectual and political climate in which he lived, and to later historical interpretation of his writings. The central problems of his two major works - the "means to power" in "The Prince", and how "the end justifies the means" in "The Discourses" - will be examined to both in terms of historical context and historical interpretation. As will be seen, to understand Machiavelli's thinking about the above problems it is necessary to contextualize his work with respect to the dominant historiographic ideas of his day. It will be argued that, when situated in his own era, the political views which appear brutally cynical to some historians living in the late twentieth century become understandable and, in their own way, actually morally admirable.
| |
|
The Life, Thought and Influence of Niccolo Machiavelli, 2002.
A biography of Niccolo Machiavelli's life and work in relation to the time in which he lived.
2,900 words (approx. 11.6 pages), 3 sources, $ 106.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This essay will examine Machiavelli's career and work with respect to the intellectual and political climate in which he lived. An examination of the central issues of his two major works - the means to power in The Prince, and how the end justifies the means in The Discourses - will demonstrate how necessary it is to contextualize Machiavelli's work with respect to the dominant ideas of his day. It will be argued that, when situated in his own era, the political views which appear brutally cynical even to those living in the late twentieth century become understandable and, in their own way, morally admirable.
|
|
|
