Machiavelli The Prince Rhetorical Analysis
Machiavelli's The Prince
Niccolo Machiavelli lived from 1469-1527. During his life he spent time both very well respected and exiled from society. In The Prince Machiavelli shares what he thinks are the greatest attributes of a strong leader. Though this was written hundreds of years ago his incites seem to still be applicable to many modern situations. Machiavelli survived an incredibly tumultuous period in his region. Growing up Machiavelli's family was financially comfortable though not incredibly wealthy and his home of Florence was a stable society under the govern of the Medici family. He was able to be educated and succeeded in many ways including being elected to many leading roles in the community. This all came crashing down …show more content…
So much of what he is saying is simply trust yourself, and find balance in how you rule. Too harsh or too merciful, too transparent or too deceitful, too trusting or too suspicious and you have set yourself up for failure. From Machiavelli's point of view, lacking this ability to walk both sides of the line would make a rise to power difficult and maintaining authority even harder. All of this can be true of a number of situations from a restaurant manager to the President of the United States. You see this theme of balance in chapter 25 when he speaks about a persons power over Fortune. He says “Nevertheless, that our free will be not wholly set aside, I think it may be the case that Fortune is the mistress of one half our actions, and yet leaves that control of the other half, or a little less, to …show more content…
unethical and at what level you share this with the public is both incredibly important and applicable across the years. Though his question of whether it is better to be feared then loved is a famous example of this I think it is even better seen in chapter 15, “And the manner in which we live, and that in which we ought to live, are things so wide asunder, that he who quits the one to betake himself to the other is more likely to destroy than to save himself; since any one who would act up to a perfect standard of goodness in everything, must be ruined among so many who are not good.” I see this as meaning that while a decision or action may not be the popular or ethical opinion, sometimes it is still the correct
Niccolo Machiavelli lived from 1469-1527. During his life he spent time both very well respected and exiled from society. In The Prince Machiavelli shares what he thinks are the greatest attributes of a strong leader. Though this was written hundreds of years ago his incites seem to still be applicable to many modern situations. Machiavelli survived an incredibly tumultuous period in his region. Growing up Machiavelli's family was financially comfortable though not incredibly wealthy and his home of Florence was a stable society under the govern of the Medici family. He was able to be educated and succeeded in many ways including being elected to many leading roles in the community. This all came crashing down …show more content…
So much of what he is saying is simply trust yourself, and find balance in how you rule. Too harsh or too merciful, too transparent or too deceitful, too trusting or too suspicious and you have set yourself up for failure. From Machiavelli's point of view, lacking this ability to walk both sides of the line would make a rise to power difficult and maintaining authority even harder. All of this can be true of a number of situations from a restaurant manager to the President of the United States. You see this theme of balance in chapter 25 when he speaks about a persons power over Fortune. He says “Nevertheless, that our free will be not wholly set aside, I think it may be the case that Fortune is the mistress of one half our actions, and yet leaves that control of the other half, or a little less, to …show more content…
unethical and at what level you share this with the public is both incredibly important and applicable across the years. Though his question of whether it is better to be feared then loved is a famous example of this I think it is even better seen in chapter 15, “And the manner in which we live, and that in which we ought to live, are things so wide asunder, that he who quits the one to betake himself to the other is more likely to destroy than to save himself; since any one who would act up to a perfect standard of goodness in everything, must be ruined among so many who are not good.” I see this as meaning that while a decision or action may not be the popular or ethical opinion, sometimes it is still the correct