I believe that The Prince is an amoral book. I think that when Machiavelli wrote it, he was just telling the truth. He was just saying what he believed was right and what I believe is right. Sometimes the truth is not what people want to hear. Most of the time people want to hear what is the nice or what they think the right thing is. The truth is that The Prince is the right way to be a leader. The only problem is that most people don’t agree. They think that a lot of the material Machiavelli has provided in this book is wrong and that he teaches the way to be in power the wrong way.
Machiavelli says in The Prince that a prince should want to be both loved and feared. He later says that being loved and feared at the same time is extremely hard to do. So he says that if a prince should have to choose, he should choose being feared. There are probably a lot of people out there that disagree strongly with him. His reasoning behind it was that if you are not feared then people could easily turn on you and overthrow you. A prince’s whole goal is to not only become in power, but stay in power for as long as they can.
Even if all your people say that they love you, they could easily lie to you or just one day decide that they need a change. If that happens then they would not be afraid of attacking your throne. So if you, as a prince, are feared, no matter what the people think they won’t rebel against you. The biggest thing that Machiavelli said, was that a leader has to be more focused on appearing good then being good. I completely agree with this statement, Machiavelli has the same reasoning that I do. One of Machiavelli’s biggest things in The Prince is that a leader must do whatever it takes to not only get power but stay in power.
Just vs. Viable To be just is to be fair and honorable. Kids are taught that if you are kind and just you will excel and be successful. But life's not fair and being just doesn't necessary mean that a society will stand the test of time and be able to grow. The two different societies introduced in More's Utopia and Machiavelli's The Prince are very different and although More's Utopian society ...
So while you are running for office you must appear to be a good candidate for the job. You have to tell the people what they want to hear. You have to do things for others that will make people look at you like a good person. So if that means possibly lie to the people, then that is okay in his eyes because you are doing what you need to do to get power. I think Machiavelli was very smart at saying some of these things. He understood that people only hear what they want to hear. So as a candidate trying to get power, you need to say what they want to hear.
If you do that than voters will give you their attention. Politics is a game, it is now, and we know it was back then when Machiavelli wrote this book. Machiavelli stressed to rulers to make sure that not only no one in your kingdom takes your power, but no one outside your kingdom. He said to make sure that you have a strong military to protect your kingdom. You can’t just have a strong military, you have to know how to use it also. It is preferable to have your kingdom in a place where there are natural barriers.
Barriers like having a mountain range around you or being located on a water source. If there are mountains or water then your enemy has a much harder time reaching you, or you can see them coming and have time to react. He also stresses that if your kingdom does not have a natural barrier that you, as a ruler, should protect your kingdom the best you can by building a barrier. Machiavelli was not only a smart man that wrote this book to rulers and future rulers. His advice was very effective back then and now in the present day. Many great leaders have based their ideas off of Machiavelli.
One of the more recent American leaders is George W. Bush. Throughout his presidency he showed many characteristics such as keeping his personal life on the down low and keeping his faith during his presidency. Bush was arrested for a DUI in 1976 but it was not talked about a lot while he was president. Bush was a very strong Christian, he believed that he was chosen by God to run for office. So he did a very good job keeping his faith. Machiavelli book, The Prince, was an amazing guide for all rulers at the time and has been for the past hundreds of years.
Individual Understanding agree with functionalists, specifically the strong Artificial Intelligence (AI) camp, concerning the concept of understanding. While John Searle poses a strong non-functionalist case in his AChinese Room@ argument, I find that his definition of Ato understand@ falls short and hampers his point. I criticize his defense that understanding rests on a standardized knowledge of ...
He did an amazing job of guiding them through every possible difficulty that they could have had during their rule. I really believe that if Machiavelli had not have written this book that the world would have been different then it is today. I think that this book has guided rulers that much. I am sure that there has been a lot of rulers out there that have turned to this book for advice. If this book was not there then these rulers might have made different decisions and possibly decisions that would have impacted the whole world. So Machiavelli’s book has been a great tool for many rulers.