Comparing Socrates And Machiavelli's The Prince

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. Socrates would be appalled at Machiavelli’s concept of a Prince. His ideas are in complete opposition to those Machiavelli presents in The Prince. Socrates would not support the political system that Machiavelli’s “ideal” Prince would lead. Where Socrates would want the sovereign to do whatever it takes to act justly and ethically, Machiavelli wants the Prince to do whatever is most prudent in order to safeguard his power and to ensure the continuation of his rule. Socrates said, “the unexamined life is not worth living” (Apology, 38a). Socrates is an avid supporter of self-knowledge, of better understanding yourself and your nature. From this better understanding of self comes an increased knowledge of right and wrong. Socrates’ main concern is acting justly and ethically. Knowledge of what is just and ethical comes from constantly …show more content…
He is writing this text in order to counsel and influence the minds of rulers or as he calls them, “Princes”. Machiavelli calls for the separation of politics and ethics. Machiavelli does not like Christianity and despises the Holy Roman Empire, as he does not believe Princes should submit to a set of grandiose ideals. Rather a prince should take whatever action is necessary to prolong his rule and protect the state, regardless of religious or ethical considerations. Machiavelli provides a harsh, sometimes callous version of complete and outright

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    Niccolo Machiavelli wrote "The Qualities of the Prince" in July 1513 in Florence, Italy, to convey his idea of the strong, active, and perfect ruler to the current ruling the Medicis. The work is remembered and responsible for bringing “Machiavellian” into wide usage as a pejorative term. The essay takes a stringent position on the proper way to govern a nation. With a straightforward logic, a relevant idea, and an expressed method, Machiavelli’s “The Qualities of the Prince” is a practical guide for current…

    • 85 Words
    • 1 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Machiavelli puts this ideology into words best when discussing how a prince must regard virtues like goodness, “A prince, and especially a new prince, cannot observe all those things which are considered good in men, being often obliged, in order to maintain the state, to act against faith, against charity, against humanity, and against religion. And therefore, he must have a mind disposed to adapt itself according to the wind, and as the variations of fortune dictate, and, as I said before, not deviate from what is good, if possible, but be able to do evil if constrained” (65). This passage perfectly summarizes the key dissidence between Machiavelli’s and Socrates’s philosophies. While Socrates’s philosophy is founded on upholding moral virtues and justice at all costs, Machiavelli’s pragmatic philosophy stresses a prince detach himself from all moral virtues and be willing to act against them when necessary. To Machiavelli this means being deceptive in projecting the appearance of being pious and virtuous, while being morally unconstrained in acting in your own…

    • 1488 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Machiavelli and Socrates both share a similar background filled with political fragmentation and violence; however, the two philosophers would not see eye to eye on the way the government should be ran. Both men are very different in how the government should be structured and treat its people. Machiavelli’s prince would not be able to rule under the same philosophy of Socrates, and wouldn’t be able to let Socrates live among his people. In no way, would Socrates support Machiavelli’s concept of a prince seeing how it would constrain Socrates, being a gadfly. If Socrates lived under Machiavelli’s view of a prince then Socrates would ultimately be put to death for his contradictory views of a sovereign that interferes with the prince’s absolute…

    • 1779 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Plato’s Republic and Machiavelli’s The Prince depict their views of both the duties and the ideal personas that rulers should strive towards. Socrates, in Republic, strives to discover truth in the creation of a hypothetical “perfect city,” in which all citizens are just and fair to each other. His Philosopher King was designed to rule this ideal city, and as such this is a perfect and ideal figure. Having been educated only in the just for his whole life, this Philosopher King is always virtuous, and relies purely on this virtue to be a good ruler for his people.…

    • 1713 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    An explanation that is potentially one of the more conventional validations of the relationship between Machiavelli’s The Prince and the Discourses is reading The Prince as a manual for the founder of what would eventually emerge as a republic. Once the prince has established a foundation of the state, the republic that Machiavelli advocates for in the Discourses will become achievable and desirable. The Prince was written to establish a unified state; the republic in the Discourses will maintain that stable and unified state. Academic Leo Strauss explains that Machiavelli wrote the Discourses to promote the imitation of ancient republics. Machiavelli longed for the rebirth of ancient republicanism .…

    • 764 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Apology And Crito Analysis

    • 1784 Words
    • 8 Pages

    Socrates is not exact in what his idea of an ideal prince is, as he himself views himself as pretty disengaged from politics, working in the private sphere as opposed to the public sphere. Thus, even though he questions political figures, acting as a gadfly, and teaches the youth some of his philosophies,…

    • 1784 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    One main point Socrates mentions is that power is based on goodness, but what is good or bad in society is often changed. For example, in ancient times it was acceptable to stone someone to death, nowadays this is viewed as inhumane. Socrates further claims that if a person lacks intelligence they cannot yield power. This is proven wrong daily. A modern day example would be a workplace with a boss that lacks intelligence.…

    • 1029 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Socrates examines the human nature, or the characteristics of just man and unjust man. A just man would always chooses justice and guide others to justice. Whereas an unjust man guides himself and others with his lawless desires, and proceed with unjust actions. Hence, just man lives happy life because he is wisdom and good will; the unjust man live a miserable life because of his ignorance and evil…

    • 835 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    When Machiavelli turned to the question of whether it was better for a prince to be to be loved or feared, he wrote that while it would theoretically be wonderful for a leader to be both loved and obeyed, a…

    • 937 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Socrates was the teacher of many philosophers. One of his many quotes were: “I only know that I know nothing” and “Only the Gods are wise.” He used to fight for moral standards and he also thought that there was just one goodness that is knowledge, and one evil that is negligence.…

    • 124 Words
    • 1 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Superior Essays

    As above-mentioned, we must clear that Machiavelli is not the person who advocated bad morality. On the contrary, he thought that the morality and religious would have a great influence of society. He also thought that a country would not have a good organization without good virtue. So we must combined with the specific time and background when we try to understand who was Niccolo Machiavelli and why he wrote the book. Otherwise, it will result in many misunderstanding of…

    • 1199 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Throughout history, both ancient and modern, there have been few literary works composed as notable nor influential as Machiavelli’s consummate discussion of politics, known as the Prince. Equally if not more significant, however, is Plato’s account of the Apology by Socrates and the subsequent events illustrated by the famous Greek philosopher in Crito between Socrates and his titular comrade. Both texts, being written in times of abundant political alteration and conflict, make powerful statements about politics and take firm stances on the function governments and how they should be used to serve society, or in turn, how society should serve them. In the Prince, Machiavelli provides strict guidelines by which an individual must adhere to…

    • 848 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    The legacies left by Plato and Machiavelli, inspired and profoundly shaped modern governing. Their beliefs and views on how a ruler should run a government, constructed today’s political atmosphere. Despite the differences between Plato and Machiavelli 's visions on an idealistic utopian society, they both necessitate a ruler who possess the highest extent of reason within the tripartite division. However, their contrasting agendas they set for their ideal rulers, forged conflicting definitions of a virtuous society. Conclusively leading to differences in their beliefs on what responsibilities a ruler is entitled to and ultimately, the outcome of their society.…

    • 1167 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    He disregards the well being of the people, and instead focuses on the will of the prince. This is evident through his reasoning when providing options for rulers who had just acquired a nation in which the people have lived under liberty and freedom. Machiavelli’s first option is to simply destroy them, citing the Roman’s destruction of Capua, Carthage, and Numantia in their successful endeavor to control a free society. Machiavelli’s disregard for human life, coupled by the fact that he provides methods for ruling without seeking a means of good for the people, allows one to understand his definition of…

    • 806 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Hans Baron makes and maintains assertions that The Prince and the Discourses are incompatible. He declares that we ought to face the blatant differences between the two texts. Baron questions the different regime types in the rule of tyrants in The Prince and the nascent Roman commonwealth in the Discourses. The mixed-constitution in the Discourses is problematic in synthesizing it with The Prince. In the Discourses, Machiavelli speaks of Aristotle’s constitutional cycle.…

    • 1201 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays