File Name: relationship between ethics and politics according to machiavelli .zip
Why Machiavelli? That question might naturally and legitimately occur to anyone encountering an entry about him in an encyclopedia of philosophy. Certainly, Machiavelli contributed to a large number of important discourses in Western thought—political theory most notably, but also history and historiography, Italian literature, the principles of warfare, and diplomacy. But Machiavelli never seems to have considered himself a philosopher—indeed, he often overtly rejected philosophical inquiry as beside the point—nor do his credentials suggest that he fits comfortably into standard models of academic philosophy.
He who lets himself in for politics, that is, for power and force as means, contracts with diabolical powers and for his action it is not true that good can follow only from good and evil only from evil, but that often the opposite is true. Anyone who fails to see this is, indeed, a political infant. The sheer infamy Niccolo Machiavelli has drawn to himself in the five centuries since he wrote The Prince underscores the fact that he was no political infant. After all, against the ecclesiastical backdrop of the post-Augustinian Christianity of his time, Machiavelli boldly challenges religious morality in politics, lambasts older traditions of political thought, exposes the harshest truths of political life and extols a realistic understanding of the intractable nature of mankind Major Though they are all intricately interconnected, it is the first that this paper aims to explore; in light of the entirety of his life and works, does Machiavelli justify departures from canons of morality in politics, and if so, to what extent and in what circumstances?
Machiavelli's Ethics challenges the most entrenched understandings of Machiavelli, arguing that he was a moral and political philosopher who consistently favored the rule of law over that of men, that he had a coherent theory of justice, and that he did not defend the "Machiavellian" maxim that the ends justify the means. By carefully reconstructing the principled foundations of his political theory, Erica Benner gives the most complete account yet of Machiavelli's thought. She argues that his difficult and puzzling style of writing owes far more to ancient Greek sources than is usually recognized, as does his chief aim: to teach readers not how to produce deceptive political appearances and rhetoric, but how to see through them. Drawing on a close reading of Greek authors--including Thucydides, Xenophon, Plato, and Plutarch--Benner identifies a powerful and neglected key to understanding Machiavelli. This important new interpretation is based on the most comprehensive study of Machiavelli's writings to date, including a detailed examination of all of his major works: The Prince, The Discourses, The Art of War, and Florentine Histories.
Machiavellian ideology is often depicted "as godless, scheming and self-interested". In particular English theatre saw a "'pseudo-Machiavellian' burlesque stage tradition. Its relation to Machiavelli's political doctrine "does not go much beyond its borrowing of the Florentine's name. According to one recent scholar, "the sixteenth-century stage image of Machiavelli as a proponent of political deception of and power-for-power's sake persists today, and for most readers the term 'Machiavellian' still carries negative connotations associated with this conception of him". In the 20th century the word "Machiavellianism" also became used in psychology as the name of a personality trait , one that is also included in the dark triad with narcissism and psychopathy. The early appearances of the word all relate to its political meaning.
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN POLITICS AND MORALITY. Starting from the according to Machiavelli, is not in the prince's best interest. For example facts and purpose, but one important goal it sets to achieve is to serve as a manual for.
Politics is an essential human activity — essential in building societies and communities based on rules, laws and a balance of conflicting interests. It requires a high level of responsibility and commitment from citizens, political parties, parliamentarians, government executives, the judiciary, the media, businesses, non-governmental organisations NGOs and religious and educational institutions. But, politicians, almost in all parts of the world, are often seen as selfish and corrupt who pursue their own vested interests instead of the common good of the populace. This highlights the role of ethics in politics because trust in, and respect for, politics and politicians is vital for living together in communities and societies, especially in democracies.
I would point out that, before Machiavelli, politics was strictly bonded with ethics, in theory if not in practice. According to an ancient tradition that goes back to Aristotle, politics is a sub-branch of ethics—ethics being defined as the moral behavior of individuals, and politics being defined as the morality of individuals in social groups or organized communities. Machiavelli was the first theorist to decisively divorce politics from ethics, and hence to give a certain autonomy to the study of politics. But here is where things start to get complicated.
His writings have inspired, guided, outraged, and perplexed intellectuals and politicians alike for more than half a millennium, and even in the 21st century they remain a major subject of academic controversy.