Would Socrates Support a Machiavellian System?
During a time of political turmoil, it is hard to know who to trust, and who should lead. In “The Prince” Machiavelli lists a plethora of guidelines as to how a prince should gain political power along with ways for them to ensure this power is long-lasting. Although Socrates and Machiavelli both lived in time periods with serious political issues, Socrates would not support Machiavelli’s concept of a Prince, or any type of government created as a result of Machiavellian principles. This is due to the fact that most of Machiavelli’s principles and doctrines are directly challenged by the ethics and beliefs of Socrates. Socrates was notorious for being a gadfly and for constantly questioning the …show more content…
Under his view, a ruler will never be able to please all of their subjects. However, if they were to tell their subjects that they won’t be able to fulfill all of the citizen’s wishes, they would most likely be unable to gain or keep the power that they desire. His ideal leader would have to lie and make promises that he may even be unable to keep, just to make sure that they maintain a good image. This is revealed in chapter 13, where Machiavelli states, “a prudent ruler ought not to keep faith when by so doing it would be against his interest, and when the reasons which made him bind no longer exist” (Prince, 18). This statement directly challenges the agreement made between Crito and Socrates, where they acknowledge that one ought to “fulfil all one’s agreements, provided that they are just” (Crito, 49e). This demonstrates that while Machiavelli believes that a ruler should break promises that go against his interests, Socrates believes that someone who makes promises must fulfill each and every one. A leader who makes promises that he may not be able to fulfill and creates a virtuous facade to conceal their true qualities is simply something that Socrates, a truth-seeking skeptic, would be unable to …show more content…
Socrates would be unable to support a Machiavellian system because Machiavelli believes that the government should prioritize the feelings of citizens. In contrast, Socrates thinks that a government should prioritize the feelings and criticism of qualified people with political knowledge, such as nobles, while viewing the opinions of the masses with skepticism. Machiavelli states that in order for a leader to have long-lasting authority, they need to neglect the feelings of nobles and aristocrats, while prioritizing the requests and feelings of the citizens. (Prince, 9) This directly goes against the morals of Socrates in Crito. Crito tells Socrates to flee from the prison because of how the citizens of Athens would think of him if he did not. Socrates replies that a person should, “be afraid of the criticism and welcome the praise of the one qualified person, but not those of the general public.” (Crito, 47b). While Machiavelli believes that a leader should value the opinions of the public rather than other nobles, Socrates thinks that it is smarter for someone to prioritize the thoughts and opinions of others who are qualified in your field, rather than those of the public as they can be foolish and flawed. Due to the contrasting views of Socrates and Machiavelli on whose criticism and
During a time of political turmoil, it is hard to know who to trust, and who should lead. In “The Prince” Machiavelli lists a plethora of guidelines as to how a prince should gain political power along with ways for them to ensure this power is long-lasting. Although Socrates and Machiavelli both lived in time periods with serious political issues, Socrates would not support Machiavelli’s concept of a Prince, or any type of government created as a result of Machiavellian principles. This is due to the fact that most of Machiavelli’s principles and doctrines are directly challenged by the ethics and beliefs of Socrates. Socrates was notorious for being a gadfly and for constantly questioning the …show more content…
Under his view, a ruler will never be able to please all of their subjects. However, if they were to tell their subjects that they won’t be able to fulfill all of the citizen’s wishes, they would most likely be unable to gain or keep the power that they desire. His ideal leader would have to lie and make promises that he may even be unable to keep, just to make sure that they maintain a good image. This is revealed in chapter 13, where Machiavelli states, “a prudent ruler ought not to keep faith when by so doing it would be against his interest, and when the reasons which made him bind no longer exist” (Prince, 18). This statement directly challenges the agreement made between Crito and Socrates, where they acknowledge that one ought to “fulfil all one’s agreements, provided that they are just” (Crito, 49e). This demonstrates that while Machiavelli believes that a ruler should break promises that go against his interests, Socrates believes that someone who makes promises must fulfill each and every one. A leader who makes promises that he may not be able to fulfill and creates a virtuous facade to conceal their true qualities is simply something that Socrates, a truth-seeking skeptic, would be unable to …show more content…
Socrates would be unable to support a Machiavellian system because Machiavelli believes that the government should prioritize the feelings of citizens. In contrast, Socrates thinks that a government should prioritize the feelings and criticism of qualified people with political knowledge, such as nobles, while viewing the opinions of the masses with skepticism. Machiavelli states that in order for a leader to have long-lasting authority, they need to neglect the feelings of nobles and aristocrats, while prioritizing the requests and feelings of the citizens. (Prince, 9) This directly goes against the morals of Socrates in Crito. Crito tells Socrates to flee from the prison because of how the citizens of Athens would think of him if he did not. Socrates replies that a person should, “be afraid of the criticism and welcome the praise of the one qualified person, but not those of the general public.” (Crito, 47b). While Machiavelli believes that a leader should value the opinions of the public rather than other nobles, Socrates thinks that it is smarter for someone to prioritize the thoughts and opinions of others who are qualified in your field, rather than those of the public as they can be foolish and flawed. Due to the contrasting views of Socrates and Machiavelli on whose criticism and