The Statesman, (257A-291C, pp. 294 -335). Philosophy 190: Plato Fall, 2014 Prof. Peter Hadreas Course website:

Download The Statesman, (257A-291C, pp. 294 -335). Philosophy 190: Plato Fall, 2014 Prof. Peter Hadreas Course website:

Post on 15-Jan-2016




0 download


PowerPoint Presentation

The Statesman, (257A-291C, pp. 294 -335) .Philosophy 190: PlatoFall, 2014Prof. Peter HadreasCourse website:

Platos Academy, a mosaic in the Museo Nazionale, Naples, (Photo: Giraudon)Topic of the Statesman:

What is the art of statesmanship and how might it be applied well

Was Napoleon a good statesman? A good political leader? Is Barack Obama a good statesman? A good political leader?

Who Is the Eleatic Visitors Interlocutor: The Younger SocratesThe Socrates of Platos early and middle dialogues, as in the Sophist, is silent in the Statesman except for a few opening remarks. The younger Socrates, of the Statesman, is mentioned once in the Theaetetus (147D1) as studying mathematics with Theodorus and Theaetetus. He was likely an early member of Platos Academy. He is mentioned once in Platos Tenth Letter (358E). Aristotle also mentions him once in the Metaphysics (Meta, B 1036b25) in a way that suggests he belonged to a group in the Academy that Aristotle reproaches for their pan-mathematicism.

Result of Division (Diaeresis) I (p. 308, 267B-C)VISITOR: Well then; of theoretical knowledge, we had at the beginning a directive part; and of this, the section we wanted was by analogy said to be self-directing. Then again, rearing of living creatures, not the smallest classes of self-directing-self knowledge, was split off from it; then a herd-rearing form from rearing of living creatures, and from that in turn, rearing of what goes on foot; and from that, as the relevant part, was cut off the expertise of rearing the hornless sort. Of this in turn the part must be woven together as not less than triple, if one want to bring it together in a single name, calling it expert knowledge of rearing of non-interbreeding creatures. The segment from this, a part relating to a two-footed flock, concerned with rearing of human beings, still left on it own this very part is now what we were looking for, the same thing we call both kingly and statesman like.

End of Diaeresis I (p. 308, 267B-C) Is a Joke 1The last divisions of the longer way of the first Diaeresis 265E-266C hardly can be meant seriously The Stranger says that the young Socrates and Theaetetus need to divide up literally tear open -- the nurturing of hornless land-dwelling herd animals. (Theres a problem with dogs because they travel in packs when wild, but singly or severally with human beings when tame.) But especially funny is the comparison of four-footed animals to the square root of four and two-footed animals to the square root of two. As Rosen points out this is a Platonic joke. (Two-footed land animals are irrational like 2). And especially a joke or joke-like is the Visitor calling human beings the noblest and laziest race (266B10-C6) playing on the word for pig. 1. Indebted to Stanley Rosen for these observations. See Rosen, Stanley, Platos Statesman: The Web of Politics, (South Bend, IN: St, Augustines Press, 2009), pp. 34-35.

End of (Diaeresis) I (p. 308, 267B-C) Is a Joke 1The shorter way (266D-267A) the last revision in the first Diaeresis -- also seems to be ironical. The shorter way takes for granted that human beings are the only two-footed featherless animals, drops the main condition of the political art as a tender of human beings and inserts that the political leader holds the reins of the city. This suggests a comparison between human beings and horses. So we end up with the conclusion that the royal and political art is the pastoral science of unmixed breeders, a herding of two-footed animals.

1. Again adapted from Rosen, Stanley, Platos Statesman: The Web of Politics, (South Bend, IN: St, Augustines Press, 2009), pp. 34-35.

The Statesman Diaeresis I is an Example of the Misapplication the Method of Division in the Determination of a Type .1

The progress of the first application definition by Division, Diaeresis I, in the Statesman methodically demonstrates the misapplication of this manner of analysis. Each forward division step is revealed to be a step backward; admitted to be a failure; and, the correction of errors are made through further errors. The goal of the Method of Division is to uncover a natural and conceptual order. But this sequence of division relies on a freakish system of distinctions. Commentators find fundamental Socratic ironyThe Statesman Diaeresis I is an Example of the Misapplication the Method of Division in the Determination of a Type1 [from previous slide]

in the Early and Middle Plato Dialogues with little exception have been able to find irony in the Statesman. Few commentators allow Plato the same rhetorical complexity in this later dialogue. One of the few who reads the Statesman giving Plato the license to irony in the Statesman is Rosen. Rosen writes about Diaeresis I: Philosophy is transformed into technology and the doctrine of Ideas into ideology. Platonism is then indistinguishable from the late-modern version of the Enlightenment, according to which humans make themselves.

1. Rosen, Stanley, Platos Statesman: The Web of Politics, (South Bend, IN: St, Augustines Press, 2009), p. 36.

The Incompleteness of Diaeresis I: the Introduction of the Myth of a Forward and Backward Moving CosmosImmediately following his summary of Diaeresis I, the Visitor says that the previous result of the Method of Division has not been entirely successful (267C-D). In the case of the non-human herds there seems to be one art and type of person capable of caring for them. But in the case of human beings there are numerous types of professionals and producers who nurture people along with the statesman. There are for example, merchants, farmers, grain producers, gymnasts and physicians (2676-268A). In terms of Platos previous dialogues and his later dialogues such as the Timaeus and the Philebus we should also note that Diaeresis I of the Statesman is directed towards the human animal. There is an avoidance of any knowledge or techn that might be concerned with the best or the Good. The dialogue will finally arrive at the Socratic conclusion. But the initial investigation of the Visitor seems to methodically avoid it. The Myth of the Statesman:A Forward and Backward-Moving CosmosMyth of a Forward and Backward Moving Cosmos - IIntroduction(268E-269C)The Visitor refers to tales recounted by ancients. He says many actually took place and will occur again. (The Statesman myth bears comparison to Nietzsches Eternal Recurrence of the Same.) The Visitor mentions the account of the heavenly sign marked upon the strife between Atreus and Thyestes. The legend that the Visitor refers to is about strife between two brothers Atreus and Thyestes who fight over who should be king. Zeus settles the dispute in preference of Atreus. Myth of a Forward and Backward Moving Cosmos I Introduction(268E-269C) [continued]Zeus then changes the course of the sun and the Pleiades as a sign of his decision. The Visitor in the Statesman revises the legend. Instead of changing the motion of the sun and the Pleiades, The Visitor has Zeus changing the motion of the entire cosmos, a motion which perpetually recurs. Hence forward there is the epoch of the motion of the cosmos as we know it, followed and preceded by its reversal. This recurs perpetually. Well call the first the forward epoch and the second the reverse epoch. Ruins of Mycenae. Thought to be Atreus treasure or perhaps Agamemnons tomb.

Myth of a Forward and Backward Moving Cosmos - IIDescription of Cosmic Motion (269C-270B)The Visitor refers to the god who guides all. This would suggest a Demiurge. Neither Zeus the Forward Epoch god nor Cronus the Reverse Epoch god will qualify since they operate within their specific epochs. Some overriding Demiurge guides the cosmos which is described as possessing a body and being alive. The Visitor describes the Reverse Epoch in which things become younger. Humans and animals who are previously dead are resurrected from the earth at the point of their death and then they become younger entering into middle age, youth, and infancy until they become seeds and are sewn in the earth. The rejuvenation is described as a process of unraveling, so mental and perceptual processes unravel as well. To the extent there is any knowledge it is subject to a process of forgetting. Myth of a Forward and Backward Moving Cosmos - IIIConsequences of Reverse Cosmic Motion (270B 271C)Most animals and especially humans cannot sustain the process of the reversal of becoming younger. The Reverse Epoch begins when the cosmos has undergone the final period of the Forward Epoch which was the last stages of destruction an decay. The cosmic reversal is a kind of purgation perhaps an ancient version of modern theories of revolution which maintain that current civilization must be destroyed or largely destroyed -- before a fair and just society may be inaugurated. Rosen observes that during this period the Platonic Ideas or Forms must remain particularly in the background because nothing is keeping its look, its eidos or form since everything in becoming younger is changing and unravelling.1 1. Quoted from Rosen, Stanley, Platos Statesman: The Web of Politics, (South Bend, IN: St, Augustines Press, 2009), p. 49.

Myth of a Forward and Backward Moving Cosmos - IVThe Reverse Epoch is Ruled by Cronus (271C 272B)Hesiod: Works and Days (109ff.):The deathless ones who dwell upon Olympus first made the golden race of articulate human beings. These belong to the time of Kronos, when he was king in heaven. They lived like gods with a careless spirit, far from pains and misery. Nor did miserable old age approach them. For these residents of the golden age, death was like a falling asleep. They did no work; all goods were theirs by natures bounty. This race was followed by the silver race who enjoyed a childhood of one hundred years, followed by a brief adulthood marked by by crime and an absence of divine worship. They were destroyed by Zeus. The third race, produced by Zeus, is that of bronze and consists of warriors. The heroes make up the fourth race, and we ourselves are the fifth race who inhabit the age of iron. 1. As summarized by Rosen, Stanley, Platos Statesman: The Web of Politics, (South Bend, IN: St, Augustines Press, 2009), pp. 51-2.The "Agamemnon" Mask, Gold, from Tomb V at Mycenae, Sixteenth century BC, National Archeological Museum, Athens. Agamemnon is referred to repeatedly in the Iliad as shepherd of the people. See Iliad, Book IV, 295, 413.

HomericKings were likened to shepherdsCronus & Rhea, Athenian red-figure pelike,circa 5th B.C., Metropolitan Museum of Art, New YorkThe Era of Cronos (Statesman 268d275c)

Lucas Cranach the Elder, The Golden Age

Joachim Wtewael, The Golden Age

Lucas Cranach the Elder, The Silver Age

Virgil Solus, (1514 - 1562) The Iron Age

Myth of a Forward and Backward Moving Cosmos - IVThe Reverse Epoch is Ruled by Cronus (271C 272B)

The Reverse Epoch, which is ruled by Cronus in Platos myth, has similarities to the Golden Age described by Hesiod, but there are many differences. Cronus is the shepherd of all humans. The reference to Cronus as a shepherd is very likely meant to make puerile conceiving the art of statesmanship as a kind of shepherding. Animals and humans in the Reverse Epoch and humans are blissful but also increasingly ignorant. Cronus shepherds humans. Every herd of animals is shepherded by a daimon. There is no meat eating, no war, no sedition. People eat fruit and of course continue to become younger. They have no political constitutions, nor acquired wives and children, for all of them came back to life from the earth, remembering nothing of the past. (pp. 314-5, 271E-272A)

Myth of a Forward and Backward Moving Cosmos - VSpeculation About The Age of Cronus (272B 272D)

In this short section, the Visitor says that if the nurslings of Cronus have speech and use it to gather wisdom there lives will be far more fortunate than those who live now. But if they spend their time gorging themselves with food and drink and exchanging stories with each other and and with the animals of the sort even now are told about them, this too, if I may reveal how it seems to me, is a matter that is easily judged. (p. 314, 272D). This would seem to be another Platonic irony, since this myth is can be thought of as an exchanging of stories. Further Plato is ironically portraying the condition of what it would like to be utterly controlled by some superior being, even if the being is benevolent. Its a Garden of Eden without the Tree of Knowledge and in Platos construct without Eros.

Myth of a Forward and Backward Moving Cosmos - VIRotation from Reverse Epoch to Forward Epoch (272D 273E)We recall the cosmos has its own life and unity. Once the shepherd-like rule of Cronus had brought the earthborn humans to a fully blissful and peaceful if vegetable-like state . . . The steersman of the universe, let go, -- as it were of the bar of the steering oars and retired to his observation post; and as the for the cosmos, its allotted and innate desire turned it back again in its opposite direction. (pp. 314-5; 272E) This produced a great tremor which in turn brings about another destruction of all sorts of living things, but in time . . . It set itself in order, into the accustomed course that belongs to it, itself taking charge of and mastering both the things within it and itself. But the accustomed order in the long run finally returns again to self-destruction and the whole process of reversing time and rejuvenation recycles again, rendering it immortal and ageless. (p. 315, 273E). Myth of a Forward and Backward Moving Cosmos - VIIPoint of the Myth (273E-274E)

We are now at the point that our account has all along been designed to reach. . . . Everything that has helped to establish human life has come from these things, once care from the gods, as has just been said, ceased to be available to human beings, and they had to live their lives through human resources and take care for themselves, just like the cosmos as a whole, which we imitate and follow for all time, now living and growing in this way, now in the way we did then. As for the matter of our story, let it now be ended, and we shall put it to use in order to see how great our mistake was when we gave our account of the expert in kingship and statesmanship in our preceding argument. What the Main Errors of Diaeresis I?The Younger Socrates asks and the Visitor Responds (274E-275A, p. 316)

YOUNG SOCRATES: So how do you say we made a mistake and how great was it?VISITOR: In one way it was lesser, in another way it was very high-minded, and much greater and more extensive than the other case.YOUNG SOCRATES: How so?VISITOR: In that when asked for a king and statesman from the period of the present mode of rotation and generation we replied with a shepherd from the opposite period, who cared for the herd that existed then, and at that a god instead of a mortal in that way we went very astray. But in that we revealed him as ruling over the whole city together, without specifying what manner his does so, in this way, by contrast, what we said was true but incomplete and unclear, which is why our mistake was lesser than in the respect just mentioned.Preliminary Pass at a Definition of the Statesman276D-277A, pp. 318-319VISITOR: First of all, as we are saying we should have altered the name, aligning it more with caring for things than with rearing, and then we should have cut this; for it will still offer cuts of no small size.YOUNG SOCRATES: When would they be?VISITOR: I imagine, where we would have divided off the divine herdsman, on o0ne side, and the human carer on the other.YOUNG SOCRATES: Correct.VISITOR: But again we ought to have cut into two the art of the carer resulting from this appointment.YOUNG SOCRATES: By using what distinction?VISITOR: That between the enforced and the voluntary.YOUNG SOCRATES: Why so?Preliminary Pass at a Definition of the Statesman276D-277A, pp. 318-319 [continued]VISITOR: I think we made a mistake before in this way too, by behaving more simple-mindedly than we should have. We put king and tyrant into the same category, when both they themselves and the manner of their rule are very unlike one another.YOUNG SOCRATES: True.VISITOR: But now we should set things to rights again, and, as I said, should we divide the expertise of the human carer into two, by using the categories of the enforced and the voluntary?YOUNG SOCRATES: AbsolutelyVISITOR: And should we perhaps call tyrannical the expertise that relates to subjects who are forced, and the herd-keeping that is voluntary and relates to willing two-footed living things that expertise which belongs to statesmanship, displaying, in his turn, the person who has expertise and cares for his subjects in this way as being genuine king and subject?YOUNG SOCRATES: Yes, visitor, and its likely that in this way our exposition concerning the statesman would reach its completion.Filling out the SketchVISITOR: . . . We took upon ourselves an astonishing mass of material in the story we told, so forcing ourselves to use a greater part than was necessary; thus we have made our exposition longer, and have in every way failed to apply a finish to our story, and our account, just like a portrait, seems adequate in its superficial outline, but not yet to have received its proper clarity, as it were with paints and the mixing together of colors. But it is not painting or any other sort of manual craft, but speech and discourse, that constitute the more fitting medium for exhibiting all living things, for those who are able to follow; for the rest, it will be through manual crafts.11. It seems then somewhat arrogant of the Visitor proceeds through the analogy of manual crafts, weaving and clothes-making.The Paradigm of Weaving in the Statesman(279B, p. 321)

VISITOR: So what model, involving the same activities [pragmateia] as statesmanship, on a very small scale, could one compare with it, and so discover in a satisfactory way what we are looking for? By Zeus what do you think? If there isnt anything else at and, well, what about weaving? Do you want us to choose that? Not all of it, if you agree, since perhaps the weaving of cloth from wool will suffice; maybe it is part of it, if we choose it, which would provide testimony if we want.YOUNG SOCRATES: Ive certainly no objection.The Paradigm of Weaving in the Statesman

The Visitor does say (285E, p. 329):

I certainly dont suppose that anyone with any sense would want to hunt down the definition of weaving for the sake of weaving itself. How is Weaving like Statesmanship(279B, p. 321)The Visitor says they are both activities or pragmateia. This word should be distinguished from knowledge: epistm or gnstik. It means diligence in business or in a practice. Pragmateia as applied study is halfway between knowledge and practice.1Weaving like good politics provides protection against nature.Clothes in general are to the body as the polis is to the citizen.Statesmanship like weaving depends on other arts. An analogy is drawn between the warp or hard threads and the spirited or hard-souled citizens and between the woof and soft threads and then gentle citizens. Various weaves are various blends of the two types of character.1. Thanks again to Rosen for this characterization of pragmateia. Rosen, Stanley, Platos Statesman: The Web of Politics, (South Bend, IN: St, Augustines Press, 2009), p. 101.

Raw wool that has been carded and made into rolags

Woman spinning. Detail from an Ancient Greek attic white-ground oinochoe, ca. 490BC, from Locri, Italy. British Museum, London..

Weft and woof are Old English words for woven.The Art of MeasurementIts Two Types and the Assessment of Moral/Aesthetic/Political value 283B-287A, pp. 327-330

The Eleatic Visitor, considering whether hes been going on too long, takes up a discussion of two kinds of measurement. (metrtik). The first accords with the ordinary concept of measurement. We measure number, lengths, depths, breadths and things in relation to what is opposed to them. (284E, p. 328). what is opposed to them implies some standard which is not being measure, but which is a criterion for the measuring, as a, inch foot or a mile millimeter, kilometer -- might be for length, depth and breadth. The Art of Measurement:Its Two Types and the Assessment of Moral/Aesthetic/Political value 283B-287A, pp. 327-330[continued from previous slide] But the second type of measurement is the distinction, with very significant revision, that will become Aristotles notion of virtue as a mean between an excess and a deficiency. The Visitor introduces the notion by saying (283E, p. 326): What about this: shant we also say that there really is such a thing as what exceeds in due measure [ , pros to metrion]1, and everything of that sort, in what we say or what we do? Isnt it just in respect that those of us who are bad and those of us who are good most differ?YOUNG SOCRATES: It seems so.1. , pros to metrion which Rowe translates as due measure is literally translated as toward the mean.The Art of Measurement283B-287A, pp. 327-330[continued from previous slide] VISITOR: In that case we must lay it down that the great and the small exist and are objects of judgment in these twin ways. It is not as we said just before, that we must suppose them to exist only in relation to each other. But rather as we have just now said, we should speak of their existing in one way in relation to each other, and in another in relation to what is in due measure. Do we want to know why?YOUNG SOCRATES: Of course.VISITOR: If someone will admit will admit the existence of the greater and everything of the sort in relation to nothing other than the less,1 it will never be in relation to what is in due measure you agree?YOUNG SOCRATES: Of course. 1. NOTE: The visitor apparently doesnt have the vocabulary to speak of parameters of measurement, such, meters, pounds, degrees of Centigrade, miles per hour, etc. , but his meaning is clear enough: we measure something by a lesser part of it, a degree Centigrade is an increment lesser part of heat, etc. But due measure as in the sweater or shoe is the right size is something quite different. And Platos goal is clearly not to apply due measure to crafts but to find the due measure between an excess and and a deficiency in the actions of a statesman.The Art of Measurement283B-287A, pp. 327-330[continued from previous slide] VISITOR: Well, with this account of things we shall destroy shant we? both the various sorts of expertise themselves and their products, and in particular we shall make the one we are looking for now, statesmanship, disappear, and the one we said was weaving. For I imagine all sorts of expertise guard against what is more and less than what is in due measure, not as something which is not, but as something which is and is troublesome in relation to what they do. It is by preserving measure in this way that they produce all the good and fine things they produce. YOUNG SOCRATES: Of course.VISITOR: If, then, we make the art of statesmanship disappear, our search after that for the knowledge of kingship will lack any way forward?YOUNG SOCRATES: Very much so.

1. NOTE: Unlike Aristotle, Plato applies the mean, as the due measure, not only to the moral virtues but to acts of human production, to studied skills, to technai in general. The Art of Measurement283B-287A, pp. 325-330[continued from previous slide] VISITOR: Is it the case then just as with the sophist we compelled what is not into being as well as what is, when our argument escaped us down the route, so now we must compel the more and less, in their turn, to become measurable not only in relation to each other, but also in relation to the coming into being of what is due measure? For if this has not been agreed, it is certainly not possible for either the statesman or anyone else who possesses knowledge of practical subjects to acquire an undisputed existence.YOUNG SOCRATES: Then now too we much do as much as we can.VISITOR: This task, Socrates, is even greater than the former one and we remember what the length of that was. Still, its very definitely fair to propose the following hypothesis about the subject in question.YOUNG SOCRATES: Whats that?The Art of Measurement283B-287A, pp. 325-330[continued from previous slide] VISITOR: That at some time we shall need what I referred to just now for the sort of demonstration what would be commensurate with the precise truth itself. But so far as concerns what is presently being shown, quite adequately for our immediate purpose, the argument we are using seems to me to come to our aid in a magnificent fashion. Namely, we should surely suppose that it is similarly the case that all the various sorts of expertise exist, and at the same time that greater and less are measured not only in relation to each other but also in relation to the coming into being of what is in due measure. For if the latter is the case, then so is the former, and also if it is the case that the sorts of expertise exist, the other is the case too. But if one or the other is not the case, then neither of them will ever be.YOUNG SOCRATES: This much is right, but whats the next move after this?The Art of Measurement283B-287A, pp. 325-330[continued from previous slide] VISITOR: Its clear that we should divide the art of measurement, cutting it in two in just the way we said, positing as one part of it, all those sorts of expertise that measure number, lengths, depths, breadths and speeds of things in relation what is opposed to them, and as the other, all those that measure in relation to what is due measure, what is fitting, the right moment, what is as it ought to be everything that removes itself from the extremes to the middle.YOUNG SOCRATES: Each of the two sections you refer to is indeed a large one, and very different from the other. Cut to Final Definition of the Statesman

(304A, p. 248-9) VISITOR: Well, is seems that in the same way we have now separated off those things that are different from the expert knowledge of statesmanship, and those that are alien and hostile to it, and there remain those that are precious and related to it. Among those, I think, are generalship, the art of the judge and that part of rhetoric which in partnership with kingship persuades people of what is just and so helps in steering through the business of cities. . . .

[continued]Cut to Final Definition of the Statesman

continued from previous slide](305A, p. 351) VISITOR: If then one looks at all the sorts of expert knowledge that have been discussed, it must be observed that none of them has been declared to be statesmanship. For which is really kingship must not itself perform practical tasks, but control them with the capacity to perform them, because it knows when it is the right time to begin and set in motion the most important things in cities, and when it is the wrong time, and the others must do what has been prescribed for them.

Niccol Machiavelli{1469 1527)

Niccol Machiavelli{1469 1527) Niccol Machiavelli and the problem of the traditional moral virtues if practiced by a political leader.

The PrinceFrom Chapter XVTherefore, putting on one side imaginary things concerning a prince, and discussing those which are real, I say that all men when they are spoken of, and chiefly princes for being more highly placed, are remarkable for some of those qualities which bring them either blame or praise; and thus it is that one is reputed liberal, another miserly, . . one is reputed generous, one rapacious; one cruel, one compassionate; one faithless, another faithful; one effeminate and cowardly, another bold and brave; one affable, another haughty; one lascivious, another chaste; one sincere, another cunning; one hard, another easy; one grave, another frivolous; one religious, another unbelieving, and the like.

The PrinceFrom Chapter XV [continued]And I know that every one will confess that it would be most praiseworthy in a prince to exhibit all the above qualities that are considered good; but because they can neither be entirely possessed nor observed, for human conditions do not permit it, it is necessary for him to be sufficiently prudent that he may know how to avoid the reproach of those vices which would lose him his state; and also to keep himself, if it be possible, from those which would not lose him it; but this not being possible, he may with less hesitation abandon himself to them.

The PrinceFrom Chapter XVI Concerning Liberality And Meanness selectionTherefore, any one wishing to maintain among men the name of liberal is obliged to avoid no attribute of magnificence; so that a prince thus inclined will consume in such acts all his property, and will be compelled in the end if he wish tomaintain the name of liberal, to unduly weigh down his people, and tax them, and do everything he can to get money. This will soon make him odious to his subjects, and becoming poor he will be little valued by any one; thus, with his liberality, having offended many and rewarded few, he is affected by the very first trouble and imperilled by whatever may be the first danger; recognizing this himself, and wishing to draw back from it, he runs at once into the reproach of being miserly.

The PrinceFrom Chapter XVI Concerning Liberality And Meanness selection [continued]Either you are a prince in fact, or in a way to become one. In the first case this liberality is dangerous, in the second it is very necessary to be considered liberal; and Caesar was one of those who wished to become pre-eminent in Rome; but if he had survived after becoming so, and had not moderated his expenses, he would have destroyed his government. . . . And there is nothing wastes so rapidly as liberality, for even whilst you exercise it you lose the power to do so, and so become either poor or despised, or else, in avoiding poverty, rapacious and hated. And a prince should guard himself, above all things, against being despised and hated; and liberality leads you to both.

The PrinceChapter XVII Concerning Cruelty And Clemency, And Whether It Is Better To Be Loved Than Feared -- selectionsTherefore a prince, so long as he keeps his subjects united and loyal, ought not to mind thereproach of cruelty; because with a few examples he will be more merciful than those who, through too much mercy, allow disorders to arise, from which follow murders or robberies; for these are wont to injure the whole people, whilst those executions which originate with a prince offend the individual only. . . . And of all princes, it is impossible for the new prince1 to avoid the imputation of cruelty, owing to new states being full of dangers. [Emphasis added]1. Many commentators have argued that with The Prince Machiavelli addresses a state in a highly weakened an corrupt state that needs extraordinary methods to restore itself. Consider: "In fact, when there is combined under the same constitution a prince, a nobility, and the power of the people, then these three powers will watch and keep each other reciprocally in check." Book I, Chapter II, Discourses on Livy.

The PrinceChapter XVII Concerning Cruelty And Clemency, And Whether It Is Better To Be Loved Than Feared -- selectionsUpon this a question arises: whether it be better to be loved than feared or fearedloved? 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. Because this is to be asserted in general of men, that they are ungrateful, fickle, false, cowardly, covetous, and as long as you succeed they are yours entirely; they will offer you their blood, property, life, and children, as is said above, when the need is far distant; but when it approaches they turn against you.

The PrinceChapter XVII Concerning Cruelty And Clemency, And Whether It Is Better To Be Loved Than Feared -- selectionsAnd that prince who, relying entirely on their promises, has neglected other precautions, is ruined; because friendships that are obtained by payments, and not by greatness or nobility of mind, may indeed be earned, but they are not secured, and in time of need cannot be relied upon; and men have less scruple in offending one who is beloved than one who is feared, for love is preserved by the link of obligation which, owing to the baseness of men, is broken at every opportunity for their advantage; but fear preserves you by a dread of punishment which never fails.

The PrinceChapter XVII Concerning Cruelty And Clemency, And Whether It Is Better To Be Loved Than Feared -- selectionsNevertheless a prince ought to inspire fear in such a way that, if he does not win love, he avoids hatred; because he can endure very well being feared whilst he is not hated, which will always be as long as he abstains from the property of his citizens and subjects and from their women. But when it is necessary for him to proceed against the life of someone, he must do it on proper justification and for manifest cause, but above all things he must keep his hands off the property of others, because men more quickly forget the death of their father than the loss of their patrimony.

The PrinceChapter XVII Concerning Cruelty And Clemency, And Whether It Is Better To Be Loved Than Feared -- selectionsBesides, pretexts for taking away the property are never wanting; for he who has once begun to live by robbery will always find pretexts for seizing what belongs to others; but reasons for taking life, on the contrary, are more difficult to find and sooner lapse. But when a prince is with his army, and has under control a multitude of soldiers, then it is quite necessary for him to disregard the reputation of cruelty, for without it he would never hold his army united or disposed to its duties.

The PrinceChapter XVII Concerning Cruelty And Clemency, And Whether It Is Better To Be Loved Than Feared -- selections. . . .Returning to the question of being feared or loved, I come to the conclusion that, men loving according to their own will and fearing according to that of the prince, a wise prince should establish himself on that which is in his own control and not in that of others; he must endeavour only to avoid hatred, as is noted.

The PrinceChapter XVIII(*) Concerning The Way In Which Princes Should Keep Faith (*) "The present chapter has given greater offence than any other portion of Machiavelli's writings." Burd, "Il Principe," p. 297.. . . Therefore a wise lord cannot, nor ought he to, keep faith when such observance may be turned against him, and when the reasons that caused him to pledge it exist no longer. If men were entirely good this precept would not hold, but because they are bad, and will not keep faith with you, you too are not bound to observe it with them. Nor will there ever be wanting to a prince legitimate reasons to excuse this non-observance. Of this endless modern examples could be given, showing how many treaties and engagements have been made void and of no effect through the faithlessness of princes; and he who has known best how to employ the fox has succeeded best.

The PrinceChapter XVIII(*) Concerning The Way In Which Princes Should Keep Faith (*) "The present chapter has given greater offence than any other portion of Machiavelli's writings." Burd, "Il Principe," p. 297.. . . But it is necessary to know well how to disguise this characteristic, and to be a great pretender and dissembler; and men are so simple, and so subject to present necessities, that he who seeks to deceive will always find someone who will allow himself to be deceived.

Alexander never did what he said, Cesare never said what he did. (Italian Proverb.)

The PrinceChapter XVIII(*) Concerning The Way In Which Princes Should Keep Faith (*) "The present chapter has given greater offence than any other portion of Machiavelli's writings." Burd, "Il Principe," p. 297.Therefore it is unnecessary for a prince to have all the good qualities I have enumerated, but it is very necessary to appear to have them. And I shall dare to say this also, that to have them and always to observe them is injurious, and that to appear to have them is useful; to appear merciful, faithful, humane, religious, upright, and to be so, but with a mind so framed that should you require not to be so, you may be able and know how to change to the opposite.

The PrinceChapter XVIII(*) Concerning The Way In Which Princes Should Keep Faith (*) "The present chapter has given greater offence than any other portion of Machiavelli's writings." Burd, "Il Principe," p. 297.And you have to understand this, that a prince, especially a new one, cannot observe all those things for which men are esteemed, being often forced, in order to maintain the state, to act contrary to fidelity,(*) friendship, humanity, and religion. Therefore it is necessary for him to have a mind ready to turn itself accordingly as the winds and variations of fortune force it, yet, as I have said above, not to diverge from the good if he can avoid doing so, but, if compelled, then to know how to set about it.

The PrinceChapter XIX That One Should Avoid Being Despised And Hated

Now, concerning the characteristics of which mention is made above, I have spoken of the more important ones, the others I wish to discuss briefly under this generality, that the prince must consider, as has been in part said before, how to avoid those things which will make him hated or contemptible; and as often as he shall have succeeded he will have fulfilled his part, and he need not fear any danger in other reproaches.

The PrinceChapter XIX That One Should Avoid Being Despised And Hated

It makes him hated above all things, as I have said, to be rapacious, and to be a violator of the property and women of his subjects, from both of which he must abstain. And when neither their property nor their honor is touched, the majority of men live content, and he has only to contend with the ambition of a few, whom he can curb with ease in many ways.

The PrinceChapter XIX That One Should Avoid Being Despised And Hated

It makes him contemptible to be considered fickle, frivolous, effeminate, mean-spirited, irresolute, from all of which a prince should guard himself as from a rock; and he should endeavour to show in his actions greatness, courage, gravity, and fortitude; and in his private dealings with his subjects let him show that his judgments are irrevocable, and maintain himself in such reputation that no one can hope either to deceive him or to get round him.

Slide #4; portrait of Napoleon, #5, photograph of Barack Obama: #7: schema of first two diaereses in Platos Statesman: #16: photograph of ruins of Mycenae: #20: photograph of gold mask of Agamemnon: #21: Vase painting portraying Cronus: #22: Cranach painting: Golden Age of Man: #25, etching fy Virgil Solis of the Iron Age: # 34, photograph of carded wool made into a rolag and ready for spinning: #35, woman spinning and drawn on 5th century B. C. vase: #37, and following, portrait of Machiavelli:


View more >