How Does Machiavelli Bring Us From A Medieval View Of...

The platform for political science brought to us by Aristotle, had structuralized the forms and functions of government with little attention to conflict. Whereas, in Machiavelli’s work, we explore new notions of statecraft concerning power, fear and interests. Machiavelli’s work is pulled together from thousands of years’ worth of written history and studies of conflict compared to Aristotle’s work, circa 350 B.C. concerned with proportion and constitutions which consists mostly of observations made of Greek city-states. When comparing these two influential men we should entertain the question, â€Å"would you rather be loved or feared?† Is it possible to have a fully functioning republic without fear of the consequences of disobeying laws and†¦show more content†¦The church was more powerful than organization or governance and anyone who dared speak against the church or pope would be punished severely. Then, during the 14th and 15th cent uries, the conciliar movement sought to limit the popes power by instituting a council (council of cardinals). The council and the pope represented a system of checks and balances. With this and ecclesiastical law (cannon law), we begin to see the decline in the pope’s power around the 1400’s. This sets the scene for Machiavelli’s views. Machiavelli thought highly of the roman republic and wanted a republic of Italy (nation state). He was a tough minded realist that incorporated warfare language into politics which hadn’t really been seen before. Unlike Plato, who wrote of proportion and Aristotle who wrote of moderation, Machiavelli writes of power and state craft. He writes of this new science of state craft as an apparatus of reason, balance, force and coercion. He writes of republicanism and the citizens, focusing importance on virtu, patriotism and vitality as I will discuss in depth later on. The new road Machiavelli sets out on concerns all of this , as well as the factors that pertain to keeping a republic going, which greatly concern not necessarily conflict resolution, but conflict mediation. To continue our discussion, MachiavelliShow MoreRelated Machiavelli?s View Of Human Nature Essay1060 Words   |  5 Pages Machiavelli’s view of human nature. Machiavelli has long been required reading for everyone intrested in politics and power. In The Prince Niccolo M achiavelli presents a unique view on governing a state. Machiavelli believes the ruling Prince should be the only authority that should determine every aspect of the state and put in effect a policy which would serve his best interests. These interests were gaining, maintaining, and expanding his political power. (Machiavelli,5). His understandingRead MoreGreek And Roman Classical Culture2251 Words   |  10 Pagesown beliefs. This classical past became materialistic and commercialized over time. They figured classical Latin written by Cicero, Vergil or Julius Caesar was superior to church Latin spoken during their own time and wanted to purify Latin of its medieval corruption. This lead to destroying living Latin of the Middle Ages. (Cole, Joshua pg. 365-367) -- Humanism: Humanism was a program of study aimed with the association of the movement known as the Renaissance. It was geared to replace the scholasticRead MoreFrancis Bacon15624 Words   |  63 Pagesby compromising upon those morals for the sake of worldly success. For this reaon, William Blake, a spiritual poet says about his essays:   â€Å"Good advice for Satan’s Kingdom.† Blake considers any utilitarian advice contrary to God’s ways, but Bacon does not bother for that. He considers this world more important and striving after the success in this world is equally important. Bacon discusses man as he â€Å"appears† and not as he â€Å"ought to appear†.   In his essay â€Å"Of Great Places† Bacon certainly showsRead MoreContemporary Issues in Management Accounting211377 Words   |  846 Pagesof the first to call the British audit profession to account with his questioning of ‘who shall audit the auditors?’ The subsequent institutional response has most likely gained as much from the likes of Professors Harold Edey, Bryan Carsberg, Ken Peasnell, Geoffrey Whittington, and  ´ David Tweedie as it has from the eminence grise of the profession itself. And even in auditing, significant roles have been played by Professors Peter Bird, David Flint, and Peter Moizer amongst others. Indeed it is