Aristotle's Pros And Cons Of A Single Ruler
government they want to live happily. As Aristotle said, every human has the capacity to distinguish between what is good or bad for the city and it is something that came since a person was born with their natural instinct. They just need the practice and that is the public education that in the city is implemented with virtues. Aristotle is also concerned that human beings are not perfect, or excellent, or always be good, a person can be bad also and it is the natural sense of life. “It follows that there cannot be a single excellence common to all the citizens” (Aristotle 92). Aristotle studies the human behavior in order to create this functional constitution with the needs of the people and the weakness of the human to heal every aspect
…show more content…
This is because it is only one mandate that people would have to follow and not those from lower nobles. In chapter four he gives an example of two kingdoms, where one was ruled only by one person who is able to hold their mandate more easily than the other one that has nobles, who also have their own privileges too, and their nobles can overturn against the kingdom. For instance, the kingdom that is ruled by one person is more solid without finding any possible “malcontents” to want to take over the government (Machiavelli 15-17). He analyzed the pros and cons of different kingdoms to have their final conclusion. In chapter six he introduces the word “virtu“ that is a set of nouns that represented what kind of skills the new ruler should have, that is wisdom, strategy, bravery, strength, and ruthlessness . “Those who become rulers through strength of purpose [vie virtuose], as they did, acquire their kingdoms with difficulty, but they hold on with ease (Machiavelli 19). He identifies that the worst ruler is the one who is opposed to the people or makes them feel any kind of fear, and if that is happening, the ruler would have a lack of support from their people who can also go against the ruler (Machiavelli 33). He gives an important point of why a ruler should always stay in good terms with their followers. “Anyone who becomes a ruler with the support of the populace ought to ensure he keeps their
This is because it is only one mandate that people would have to follow and not those from lower nobles. In chapter four he gives an example of two kingdoms, where one was ruled only by one person who is able to hold their mandate more easily than the other one that has nobles, who also have their own privileges too, and their nobles can overturn against the kingdom. For instance, the kingdom that is ruled by one person is more solid without finding any possible “malcontents” to want to take over the government (Machiavelli 15-17). He analyzed the pros and cons of different kingdoms to have their final conclusion. In chapter six he introduces the word “virtu“ that is a set of nouns that represented what kind of skills the new ruler should have, that is wisdom, strategy, bravery, strength, and ruthlessness . “Those who become rulers through strength of purpose [vie virtuose], as they did, acquire their kingdoms with difficulty, but they hold on with ease (Machiavelli 19). He identifies that the worst ruler is the one who is opposed to the people or makes them feel any kind of fear, and if that is happening, the ruler would have a lack of support from their people who can also go against the ruler (Machiavelli 33). He gives an important point of why a ruler should always stay in good terms with their followers. “Anyone who becomes a ruler with the support of the populace ought to ensure he keeps their