Machiavelli's Argument Essay
“The Prince,” written by Niccolo Machiavelli, although being a 16th century piece of writing, exposes a case that often happens today in where politicians do not necessarily possess natural virtue, and instead become successful by pretending to have such qualities. According to his perspective, leaders, especially monarchs, must have the ability to connect with other proper men as well as with “beasts” to be considered an effective leader. In contrast, Francis Bacon’s “Of Friendship” sympathizes with the lonely lives politicians tend to have. He describes the power of true friendship and having a companion who has a genuine interest in listening and helping in the middle of so many spotlights. If society would accept Machiavelli’s argument
…show more content…
They would question the credibility of those who claim to be qualified for the position. Voting rates would plummet because an election with every politician willing to “fake it ‘till they make it” is no election at all. However, expanding his ideas to the rest of society, don’t many recur to these methods to reach their objectives as well? The world is competitive in all areas, and in many occasions the urge for attaining our goals makes our lacking of skill or virtue become more visible. When this happens, we tend to take advantage of the virtues we do possess to compensate for those we do not have. That is not just a politician’s trick. Athletes are frequently found with steroid usage in order to win. Fanatics often do not protest for the punishment of the athlete, but instead advocate for forgiveness. Men and women often try to use their charm to compensate for good looks when it comes to building relationships. The first example is obviously morally wrong, but no one sees a problem with the last one. The difference is that using this to charm for purposes of wooing is not considered the same as selling an ideal world to millions of people that are influenced by the decisions politicians make. Either way, if we think about it, it is the same
They would question the credibility of those who claim to be qualified for the position. Voting rates would plummet because an election with every politician willing to “fake it ‘till they make it” is no election at all. However, expanding his ideas to the rest of society, don’t many recur to these methods to reach their objectives as well? The world is competitive in all areas, and in many occasions the urge for attaining our goals makes our lacking of skill or virtue become more visible. When this happens, we tend to take advantage of the virtues we do possess to compensate for those we do not have. That is not just a politician’s trick. Athletes are frequently found with steroid usage in order to win. Fanatics often do not protest for the punishment of the athlete, but instead advocate for forgiveness. Men and women often try to use their charm to compensate for good looks when it comes to building relationships. The first example is obviously morally wrong, but no one sees a problem with the last one. The difference is that using this to charm for purposes of wooing is not considered the same as selling an ideal world to millions of people that are influenced by the decisions politicians make. Either way, if we think about it, it is the same