Individuality In The Prince And Machiavelli's The Prince

In his essays, Montaigne develops the limits of pure reason based on his own thinking. Like Dante, Montaigne favors order and structure in terms of how to live, even though he respects individuality and does not say that people need to follow his specific lifestyle. Montaigne does not condemn mankind as sinners, but instead he discusses his own individuality and does not aim his observations at the world. Dante and Montaigne are both men of order, but Montaigne values self-knowledge as a means to change. Montaigne speaks of change through intentions and having intentions requires knowing inward feelings. “I speak the truth, not my fill of it, but as much as I dare speak” (Montaigne, 611). Montaigne explains that he cannot completely know about …show more content…
To Machiavelli, appearances and reality both change. Yet, Machiavelli’s argument in The Prince differs from Montaigne in that he believes rulers should learn how to manipulate whereas Montaigne respects each person’s right to individuality. The reasoning Machiavelli pushes toward is the kind that centers around militant morality. The main difference between these two authors is that one discusses the logic of ruling civilization while the other thinks about how to live as an individual. Although the morals in The Prince are somewhat controversial, Machiavelli is able to realize that change is essential for a society to grow, and this reasoning especially echoes Rabelais who greatly favored transformation. Machiavelli warns that “if time and circumstances change he will be ruined because he does not change his policy” (Machiavelli, 81). Machiavelli discusses reasoning in terms of governance and so this type of logic is limited by its applicability to only one aspect of society; it is not logic for the general public. By leaving out the importance of individual reasoning, Machiavelli might be pointing out a distrust of people’s ability to reason in comparison to