Essay: The patrician (Italian: Il Principe), Niccolo Machiavelli

Being a prince is something that requires great honor, skill and courage. These are some of the traits, say, a prince or even a King, has to possess. They also have to get their community to trust them, or if not things could get ugly in the town. They have to keep a good perception of themselves and be seen as someone that you could look up to. There are a lot of characteristics or themes that being a good prince require, but the most important would be far be to exhibit a strong case of fortune and virtue. These are a necessity in order to exhibit very good honor and to get respect from your people. Without this, they could be overthrown. I agree with Machiavelli somewhat on is debate. Although you may have to put these to the side when needed, these two themes are pivotal when it comes to being a very good prince. The word virtue is more than just a word according to Machiavelli. It’s a structure of life. It’s a standard of the right thing and a life based around being morally sound and correct.
The patrician (Italian: Il Principe) could be a sixteenth century political piece of writing by the Italian diplomat and political theoretician solon. The work is claimed to be one in all the primary works of recent philosophy, particularly fashionable political philosophy. it’s additionally one in all the foremost disputable and sometimes misinterpreted philosophical works. The patrician is concerning however a patrician got to be and act so as to take care of and enhance his demesne. In Machiavelli’s analysis, he delineates those princes United Nations agency have come back to power by their virtue or by fortune. By virtue (Italian: virtu), Niccolo Machiavelli refers the ability and temperament of the patrician, instead of his (or her) ethical qualities (which isn’t to mention that these don’t seem to be necessary, even for Niccolo Machiavelli, however this can be a sophisticated issue for one more time). Fortune (Italian: fortuna) is a lot of or less just like our fashionable conception; it’s basically what we might consider because the role of luck, especially that it acts as a double edged arm. Niccolo Machiavelli writes: “that in new principalities, where there is a new prince, one encounters more of less difficulty in maintaining them according to whether the one who acquires them is more or less virtuous. And because the result of becoming a prince from private individual presupposes either virtue or fortune, it appears that one or the others of these two things relieves in part many difficulties; nonetheless, ho who has relied less on fortune has maintained himself more”. Exhibiting virtue is step one when it comes to being a very good prince. This is something that leads into gaining respect from the society that the prince governs. Virtue, or virtus, is essentially having the skill and charisma to be a leader in something. In order to run a governing body, your leadership skills have to be off the charts.
The analogy to the capitalist is a visible one: of these WHO have had success, investors who have had success as a results of their virtue, be it some combination of talent and temperament, can realize that it’s easier to keep up their success than people who were lucky (i.e. lucky or that their success was a results of their connections and not their virtue). whereas this distinction is sort of obvious as a matter of truth, in point of fact it’s not as simple to tell apart those investors who were merely lucky or well connected, particularly in bull markets. Moreover, it usually seems to be the case that these lucky investors area unit solely discovered to be therefore once it’s too late and permanent capital loses have incurred. because it is alleged, it’s solely till solely the tide pulls some time past you see people who area unit swimming naked. Since maintaining success for the end of the day is that the name of the sport, each for Machiavelli’s patrician and for any capitalist, one have to be compelled to perceive the role of luck.
Machiavelli writes of fortune: “I choose that fortune is arbiter of half our actions, however additionally that she leaves the opposite 0.5, or getting ready to it, for US to govern” (Ch. XXV). For rather unclear reasons, Machiavelli asserts that fortune accounts for half our actions. The accuracy of the particular portion that fortune has could be a comparatively insignificant worth for the needs of this analysis, however the vital takeaway is that he acknowledges the role of luck in our actions, even for the virtuous value (or in our case, capitalist); for what makes a patrician or capitalist therefore virtuous is however he approaches and handles fortune. the explanation that the patrician, or investor, WHO depends on fortune alone is commonly undone is as a result of Machiavelli recons fortune to be:
“one of those violent rivers which, when they become enraged, flood the plains, ruin the trees and the buildings, lift earth from this part, drop in another; each person flees before them, everyone yields to their impetus without being able to hinder them in any regard” (Ch. XXV).
Having a good sense of fortune is also an extremely important trait to obtain for a prince. A prince needs to have everything go his way. While this is obviously out of his control, the perception that he gives off has to be portrayed as that. This will ensure that the community thinks everything goes his way so that they could not only trust him, but believe in him and not try anything that they think they could get away with, without him finding out.
No circumstance shall ever justify cruelty or anything of that matter. Although this in return will bring peace and prosperity to the community, you are just cancelling it out if you are being cruel to the other humans living in your community. It’s morally wrong to do something of that matter, regardless of how much of a “pro” the outcome is. To even think about trying to justify what Machiavelli believes in is wrong and it should not be a common theme. You would be solving one problem but causing another by enforcing this type of structure. A prince needs to have good morals and be trusted by everyone that he will protect them and the community at all costs, not being cruel to them or deceiving them, even if it is to get a positive effect. A prince needs to be a leader. Machiavelli’s description of fortune implies that it’s a lot of active role in delineating the virtuous from those that don’t seem to be, as he writes:
“It happens similarly with fortune, which demonstrates her power were virtue has not been put in order to resist her and therefore turns her impetus where she knows that dams and dikes have not been made to contain her” (Ch. XXV).
These are some of the many extremely important characteristics and personality traits that a prince must exhibit. He must exhibit strong fortune. Virtue is another must, however it is also something that must be put to the side when needed. Responsibility plays a huge role in how successful someone is as a prince, knowing when to do what. This all comes in to reflect Machiavelli’s strong ideas on fortune and virtue regarding a prince.