What kind of leader was machiavelli

A9: Yes, Machiavelli would have become a good ruler because his statementswere good and powerful on how to rule successfully. Having Intelligence. The fifth and possibly the most important of the traits of a Machiavellian leader is intelligence.

Without intelligence a prince or king could not gain the support of his people, be able to find the perfect balance of fear or love, or know to use your own arms in battle. Machiavelli proposed that immoral behavior, such as the use of deceit and the murder of innocents, was normal and effective in politics.

He also notably encouraged politicians to engage in evil when it would be necessary for political expediency. Fortune was frequently personified in Renaissance art and literature as Fortuna, a female figure who held a turning wheel to symbolize her constant state of change.

A Prince, therefore, since he cannot without injury to himself practise the virtue of liberality so that it may be known, will not, if he be wise, greatly concern himself though he be called miserly. Without these five qualities, a leader has no hope of becoming a successful Machiavellian leader.

Machiavelli desperately wanted to return to politics. Someone Machiavellian is sneaky, cunning, and lacking a moral code. The qualities of the ideal prince according to Machiavelli include ruthlessness when necessary, the ability to inspire respect, military expertise, and a willingness to set virtue aside. The five main characteristics are as followed: 1 A price must have no other thought in mind than war and how to pursue it Machiavelli, , 2 a price must be liberal, rather than generous Machiavelli, , 3 a good prince should be merciful rather than cruel, but must not overuse his mercy one must be cruel ….

Forced to make a choice, it is much better to be feared than loved. According to Machiavelli, military knowledge is one of the most important qualities one needs to be a prince.

For a prince must have no other object or any thought, nor take anything as his art save warfare and its institutions and training. Machiavelli believed that public and private morality had to be understood as two different things in order to rule well. Machiavelli believed as a ruler, it was better to be widely feared than to be greatly loved; A loved ruler retains authority by obligation while a feared leader rules by fear of punishment.

Machiavelli advises that it is fine to avoid vices, but because no one can avoid them all, the prince should be careful to avoid those that will most severely damage his reputation and, therefore, his power. Summary and Analysis Chapter 15 A prince must know when to act immorally. Everyone agrees that a prince should have all good qualities, but because that is impossible, a wise prince will avoid those vices that would destroy his power and not worry about the rest.

Humanizing Machiavelli and his concept of a good leader. According to Machiavelli, there are four main ways a prince can come into power. The first way is through prowess, meaning personal skill and ability.

The second is through fortune, meaning good luck or the charity of friends. The third way is through crime, such as through a coup, conspiracy, or assassination.

What does Machiavelli say that a leader must do to remain in power? A prince must avoid becoming hated or despised.

Taking the property or the women of his subjects will make him hated. But the way you get to that goal is not important and can be immoral. Does anyone come to mind as you read this from Chapter 18 of The Prince :. Every one sees what you appear to be, few really know what you are, and those few dare not oppose themselves to the opinion of the many, who have the majesty of the state to defend them; and in the actions of all men, and especially of princes, which it is not prudent to challenge, one judges by the result.

For that reason, let a prince have the credit of conquering and holding his state, the means will always be considered honest , and he will be praised by everybody because the vulgar are always taken by what a thing seems to be and by what comes of it; and in the world there are only the vulgar, for the few find a place there only when the many have no ground to rest on.

While his advice might apply well to corporate leaders as well as political, we can see the limitations of such approaches when confronted with the social media outrage culture. In the political sphere, however, especially in a hyper-partisan atmosphere, the methods might often be argued but the results of actions will likely overwhelm any details. His exact quote in chapter 17 was:.

It may be answered that one should wish to be both, but, because it is difficult to unite them in one person, it is much safer to be feared than loved, when, of the two, either must be dispensed with. The advice here can certainly be taken to extremes, with visions of authoritarian figures ruling through intimidation and secret police.

Taken on a broader basis, the idea is that fear is simpler to maintain for a ruler than love, which can be fickle. The key is to avoid being hated, which is when people can really turn against you. How do you instill that fear? Whether a leader is feared or loved has been a debated issue by philosophers for many years. You could argue that a leader being loved is better because of the trust and motivation sides of things, or you could say to be feared is better because people follow rules and orders better.

What is the role of government in human society? Whether being ruled under democracy, dictatorship, or autocracy all of these types of governments do however have one thing in common. All of these types of leaderships have. Socrates is the leading proponent of believing it is better to be harmed than to harm. Both can easily lead to corruption outside of their strengths, but deciding which is the more corrupting.

Leadership is important in any gathering of people in order to give guidance and direction. Different types of leaders can be found everywhere. Some people believe leaders should be kind and a friend-figure, while others like leaders who are no-nonsense and get things accomplished. Machiavelli and Socrates were two very important and revolutionary political philosophers for their time.

Plato writes about the trial and death of Socrates and what he says about how people are supposed to act as well as how society should be changed. Ching, written in the early sixth century B. Through their pieces of work, one can see how their views differ. Between Lao-Tzu wanting nothing but peace and harmony and.