Analysis Of Niccolo Machiavelli

Decent Essays
Is It Better to Be Loved or Feared?
Niccolo Machiavelli raises the question if it is better to be loved or feared when in a position of power. Machiavelli states that it is better to have a relationship that is based on both love and fear but since you can rarely be both loved and feared it is better to have a relationship built on fear. I believe a leader shouldn’t seek to be loved nor feared but rather show themselves worthy of respect. He or she should be more concerned with whether or not they have the respect and trust of the people who they are leading. Being excellent in their field of work, modeling the performance they expect from their subordinates, showing themselves capable of making the necessary decisions that is in the best interest of the state or organization and being fair in their dealings.
Niccolo Machiavelli was an
…show more content…
He thought that loving honorable people were at a disadvantage as a leaders in the real world. Machiavelli was impatient with the utopic idea of what men thought the world should be and chose to focus on how things really were. Machiavelli believed that public success and private morality were two separate things, for him the question was not what made a good human being but what made a good prince.
Machiavelli also had a very pessimistic viewpoint of the nature of man, he believed that men in general were ungrateful, fickle, dissembling, anxious to flee danger and covetous of gain. He said they would be faithful to you as long as you promoted their advantage but the second a need arises they would turn against you. His belief was that if you had a relationships built solely on love it would be easier for men to turn against you without any agony. If the relationship was built on fear however they would think twice about turning on you out of the fear of

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    In one section of the article, Vincent Barnett discusses some of the alternative ways that Machiavelli’s The Prince can be interpreted. One interpretation was that Machiavelli possibly intended for his writing to be satirical, because certain facts, such as how Machiavelli had a family, refute his statement from the pamphlet that he believes all humans are evil. Also, it is possible that Machiavelli didn’t actually agree with the ideas in his writing, but he only wrote those things to gain favor from the leaders of his time. These are just possibilities, but knowing about Machiavelli’s life and his situation are important in order to understand his motives for writing The Prince. Just like Machiavelli, present-day leaders and authors make…

    • 186 Words
    • 1 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The Science of Machiavelli Machiavelli’s analytical tone and calculating demeanor, along with relevant historical examples to back up his claims, make his approach to politics extremely scientific. He sets up a foundation of effective practices for leaders to utilize, and his lack of concern for moral issues allow his work to transcend older political thought. He focuses on the preservation of the state as the main objective of a leader, and he advocates all means necessary to achieve that goal. The first scientific aspect of Machiavelli’s work that differentiates it from other political discourse is the fact that he thinks religion should have no place in the workings of a government.…

    • 741 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Niccolò Machiavelli and Alvar Núñez Cabeza de Vaca went through different experiences that led them to have their own perspectives in human nature and create their ideals for good governance. The simple fact that Cabeza de Vaca was unfortunate enough to have a hard time throughout the expedition made him more open minded about human nature, while Machiavelli had a set idea of what human nature was and how it ties to good governance. Machiavelli's view on human nature is the same as what is a good governance a good leader and a good human being is someone who knows how to be respected and feared without being hated and how that leads to have the people the Prince governs happy and on his side. Cabeza de Vaca has a more down to earth view on human nature but that differs…

    • 2016 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Socrates Is No Prince Socrates and Machiavelli lived in a time of political and civil disarray and chaos. Their thoughts on political philosophy and theory are a product of the times in which they lived. Through interpretations of their own political climate, Socrates and Machiavelli produced two schools of political thought that are incredibly different and contrasting. Plato’s Apology and Crito and Machiavelii’s The Prince present these two vastly disparate ideologies.…

    • 1146 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Machiavelli argued that the ruler or the politicians could achieve national goals with various ways, which include both angle and evil deed. “ Therefore, a prince must not worry about the infamy of being considered cruel when it is a matter of keeping his subjects united and loyal” ,“A prince, and especially a new prince, cannot observe all those things for which men are considered good, because in order to maintain the state he must often act against his faith, against charity, against humanity, and against religion”Form these two sentence, we can clearly understand that the public virtue of Machiavelli can be realized by the evil deed. The division of two kinds of virtue doesn’t mean that Machiavelli deny the importance of private virtue. In his opinion, private virtue should play an important role within a range, like transforming man ' s ideology and cultivate good personality.…

    • 1199 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    Machiavelli's Summary

    • 2626 Words
    • 11 Pages

    This quote is taken out of the part of text when the topic of what princes are blamed or praised for is discussed. It states that a man who solely looks at what should be done, most often in an ethical mindset, without the context of what the state of situation is, would not prosper as a leader and the respect the people have for him would diminish, leading to his ultimate demise. He is stating that one cannot act morally at all times if that is not what’s best at the time because those people who are not moral would act up and possibly overthrow the leadership. Machiavelli believes that leaders, in order to be strong and maintain power must serve themselves and not the people, and therefore uses this statement to illustrate that those in power must primarily accomplish what is best for themselves, and not the people in order to be “virtuous” leaders and have the respect of subjects and ultimately,…

    • 2626 Words
    • 11 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    He believed that it was better to be feared instead of loved. “From this arises the question whether it is better to be loved more than feared or feared more than love. The reply is, that one ought to be both feared and loved, but as it is difficult for the two to go together, it is much safer to be feared than loved, if one of the two has to be wanting” (Machiavelli 61). This is overall view of fear but more importantly how would he relate to the current international system today. Machiavelli states “I conclude, therefore, with regarding to being feared and loved, that men love at their own free will, but fear at the will of the prince, and that a wise prince must rely on what is in his power and not on the power of others” (Machiavelli 63).…

    • 1077 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    In the written work “The Prince” by Niccolo Machiavelli the author elaborates on how a prince can only be a strong leader if he engages in duplicity. Machiavelli focused on a more realistic and immoral strategy to keep the people of his time unified, realpolitik a system based on practical rather than moral considerations. The author, Niccolo Machiavelli, goes through great depths to explain why it takes rulers who are “cruel, dishonest, duplicitous, and manipulative.” There are many great examples to prove his ideology, however, the writing is very subjective and bias as Machiavelli does not give a rebuttal to the different kinds of ruling. He writes “The Prince” after the current leading family of his time falls in order to keep the stability…

    • 1637 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Machiavelli’s Prince seeks to recruit and educate a ruler in the art of ruling. His ideal rulers are founders, men who created a fatherland and were not afraid to sacrifice lives and their self-interests for the common good. Machiavelli stresses that a ruler needs to appear virtuous while using vices when necessary to achieve positive results. Machiavelli teaches the ruler to divide his self. “It is essential, therefore, for a Prince […] to have learned how to be other than good, and to use or not use his goodness as necessity requires” (Machiavelli, 40).…

    • 1300 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    I partially agree with this statement. While the Renaissance Era was a reaction to the narrow and practical way of thinking that was common in the medieval period, it did not reject all aspects of the medieval era. Instead, it embraced and expanded the idea of religion, the relationship one had with their God, and admired pieces of literature from ancient eras. Humanism during the Renaissance worked on reviving cultural and classical literature with the goal of spreading humanities (grammar, poetry, history, and philosophy). During this time, humanism and religion were actually pretty intertwined.…

    • 702 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Machiavelli believes that the ruler must take things into his hands and not depend on God to help him rule. The ruler has to work and be worthy of the…

    • 880 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    “The lion cannot protect himself from traps, and the fox cannot defend himself from wolves. One must therefore be a fox to recognize traps, and a lion to frighten wolves.” Machiavelli uses this analogy as an attempt to teach the masses how to embrace their human significance. Machiavelli wrote The Prince at a time where there was political unrest and confusion in Italy, which is why it can be interpreted in many different ways, such as a political satire or epilogue of his political views; however, while the content may be confusing the true meaning of The Prince is to be understood as a satire. Machiavelli is continuously sarcastic through out the course of the novel about the government standings and the changing world.…

    • 1412 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    “... One would like to be both, but as it is difficult to combine love and dear, if one has to choose between them it is far safer to be feared than loved” (Machiavelli, p. 78). The reason fear is safer relates back to his Machiavelli’s basic principle that humans are ultimately governed by self-preservation; therefore, “because love is held in place by the chains of obligation, which, as men are evil, will quickly be broken if self-interest is at state. But fear is held in place by a dread of punishment, which one can always rely on” (Machiavelli, p. 79). It is unrealistic to assume or expect a person would act in a way disadvantageous to his or her own goals and ambitious. So with this in mind, a nearly foolproof way to guarantee a behavior is to make it either most beneficial or, at least, least detrimental to themselves to act accordingly.…

    • 1149 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    He’s trying to say who would one be less disappointed in, a person that loves and forgets one or the murder or would kill you for disappointing them. He’s saying more people would follow his actions if his was feared from my perspective. I think from a man with powers perspective he would want to be feared to assert his dominance and let everyone know what all they have. For an average person it would probably be better to be loved because, they don’t have the support from people if they were feared and they could get injured. In all, if one has the backup and headed an organization feared would probably be the better option, however; an everyday normal person should pick loved because they don’t have the support of others for…

    • 916 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Machiavelli argues that too much compassion brings along dire consequences, as too much mercy allow disorders to take place, thus justifying acts of cruelty, on occasion, in order to prevent such outcomes from happening. Therefore, acts of cruelty may also be used to protect the people. This leads to Machiavelli’s answer to his famous question, arguing that while one hopes to be both feared and loved, it is nearly impossible to carry out such high standards. Being feared is more preferable, as those living under the ruler’s feared reputation are protected from acts of evil. In addition, Machiavelli argues that men are “ungrateful, fickle, pretenders and dissemblers, evaders of danger, eager for gain”, which should dissuade princes from too much compassions, as they will be taken advantage of from the…

    • 806 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays