c


9

 

‡ The notion that human beings are political animals, how he argues
this claim; the vies of nature as a whole that underlies this claim; and the
significance of this claim for understanding his view of politics in his defense of
³the many´

‡ Does not say that everyone is equal, but does leave some
room for hierarchy (everyone is part of something larger than themselves)

‡ The ruler and the ruled are brought closer together by

Aristotle

‡ We are all political animals

‡ Cares about commonalities and differences

‡ Logos is the ability to speak about the just

and unjust (differentiates us from animals) and differences
provide the grounds for why discussion is necessary

‡ Groups must always look out for the whole instead of just
the few

‡ Political animal mentality is revealed when each

group only thinks about themselves

‡ There always needs to be a sense of aiming for the

telos/overall end of things to understand the dues of each group

‡ How each part makes up the whole

‡ We all share ³political´ being, but virtue differentiates

between the exceptional (those who should have a greater share in ruling

‡ Defense of the many: Can the many actually serve as

virtuous authority?

‡ Yes, individuals contribute the best they have to

offer to create a virtuous ruling group

‡ May not be completely virtuous as an individual,

but this works better than a single person who is ³better´
 ‡ Potluck dinner

‡ Counterargument: there is no organization to

individual contributions when no one is making the overarching
decisions

‡ There has to be some principle of organization, laws

have to be made more important that execute decisions because
everyone has something to contribute

‡ Citizens should have a role in ³judging´

‡ Polity coincides with nature in that we have a commonality

of all being political animals, need other people to develop in this way

‡ The disparate groups have commonalities, harmony

‡ Machiavelli does not think there is this

commonality, conflict is the basic state of affairs

‡ Aristotle-harmony is natural

‡ His characterization of the distinction between correct and deviant

regimes; how this follows from his view of nature and human nature.

‡ Regime: how authority is organized/distributive,

characterized as correct or deviant

 

 

1-Kingship/monarchy

Tyranny

Few- aristocracy

Oligarchy

Many- polity

Democracy
 ‡ Correct regimes look towards the common advantage

‡ Deviant regimes look towards the advantage of the ruler

‡ Not only who decides, but how they decide matters

‡ Is polity an exemplary regime because it also means

politeia?

‡ Oligarchy and democracy understand what is just, but

cannot fully grasp it

‡ There is a difference in finding common ground in

what justice actually is because equals think that justice is equality

‡ Inequality is okay in some circumstances

‡ The constant concern with freedom and justice leaves out

virtue

‡ In focusing on material wealth, the oligarch¶s

argument looks better

‡ Whoever is going to lead must have the

character to do so and not only the strength or wealth, takes
virtue of a person into account

‡ Naturally, everything is harmonious, so we have to resolve

the problems to make things work as they are naturally supposed to work

‡ An example of a case in which Aristotle takes two apparently

mutually exclusive things and suggests that they have a closer relationship than
one might assume.

‡ Aristocracy and polity (a mix between oligarchy and

democracy) are not too far from each other

‡ Both accept the idea or ruling and being ruled (this

is political rule, not mastery)

‡ Share an end goal

 ‡ The goal of the city is to allow everyone to
use logos so it is impossible to exclude anyone from ruling

‡ Shouldn¶t have to pay to participate and elections

should occur (not just taking turns)

‡ Aristocracy is on the border of being called a polity

‡ Common people have virtue like the rulers in an

aristocracy (virtue is everywhere)

‡ Aristocracy is unlikely and out of reach for some

cities because it becomes difficult to find the most virtuous among
the virtuous (the political scientists must study souls)

‡ To find the best and not the most extreme, look

towards the middle (virtue and middle class lie in the center of the
balance of virtue)

‡ The middle class provides common ground

between the rich and the poor

‡ These difference can prevent a political

partnership (the city is all about the compromises between
differences)

‡ His view of the good, and what it means for everything to have a
telos

‡ Telos for the individual is happiness, living well, striving to

the most excellent form

‡ To what degree do cities organize themselves to allow for

this environment?

‡ Mixing of certain environments can combine the good from

both to form one better regime (oligarchy + democracy= polity)

‡ Telos- the whole is greater than its parts, must move

beyond individual motivations/goals/egos to keep reaching for the goal of
the entire group

‡ Aristotle¶s techniques

‡ Spends more time on how we should be questioning things

instead of laying out characteristics
 ‡ Aristotle imagines the most ideal regime

‡ He pulls things apart to demonstrate the importance of

them being mixed and what good can result

c





‡ Concepts of fortune and virtu, and how these differ from

Aristotle¶s understanding of virtue and nature

‡ Fortune: river metaphor

‡ There is no ³God is on your side´ or ³miracles, ³

the outcomes are a result of logical and historical details

‡ There is a difference between acquiring an

maintaining, the river of fortune is constantly changing, the prince
must be adaptable/flexible to this change

‡ There is no need to wait around when the prince

could act, do not leave things to fortune but rather take your
fortune into your own hands

‡ Must avoid making ties with people, only causes

inflexibility

‡ Don¶t accuse fortune, there is never such a ting as

bad timing

‡ Virtue: opposition between fortune and virtue

‡ For someone to become a Prince, it is either a

results of virtue OR fortune

‡ Own arms and virtue are necessary to hold the

position of a prince

‡ The ability to be bad has to be inside the Prince but

only used when necessary

‡ Element of control

‡ Knowing what is necessary and what is not is part

of virtue

‡ The broader significance of 3 of his historical illustrations

 ‡ **All of these examples are conditional, depend on the
individual¶s situation

‡ Romans: saw things early and dealt with them early

‡ They did not allow for the suppression of conflict,

conflict is not to be avoided

‡ Princes should want to choose their battles because

war is a natural occurrence

‡ If you try to make nice by avoiding war, in the end

you are only weakening your own position

‡ Strike first

‡ Cesare Borgia: to be feared or loved?

‡ Sends de Orco to Romagna to fix the disorder and

then kills de Orco (all of the dissent had been focused on him)

‡ Now the people BOTH fear and love Borgia

(spectacle of death puts the focus on the body as a display of
power)

‡ He is a model because«

‡ He didn¶t leave anything to fortune, did not

rely on anyone else

‡ Admiration and fear are both necessary

(someone is going to be unhappy/lose)

‡ Agathocles: wickedness

‡ Machiavelli says that he took things too far, infinite

wickedness

‡ His cruelties were only poorly used when not being

used for necessity

‡ If success is the only measure, then Agathocles was

successful because he acquired power

‡ We should only do what is necessary and no more

 ‡ Cruelty can be well used because some problems
can be solved in one effective stroke (first need to determine how
much cruelty is necessary)

‡ His understanding of the good and how it differs from Aristotle¶s

‡ The question is not what is right or wrong, but rather will it

work?

‡ Moral overtone: making a case for the strength of republics

because if you are going to take one over, it will need to be destroyed

‡ It is all about labeling and not what is or is not (ex:

Agathocles¶s cruelties, cannot ³call´ them virtuous because they are bad,
but perhaps they are virtuous even if you can¶t say they are)

‡ There must be something to enforce the most beautiful laws

ever written otherwise they are no longer good (arms vs. laws)

‡ The way in which things are used often determines whether

they are good or not

‡ Ex: auxiliary or mercenary arms- not good in

themselves, but if they are used in a good way/temporarily they
may work well

‡ Ex: cruelty- may be good if used in times of

necessity

‡ Aristotle says that the most important knowledge is of the

good, but Machiavelli says that this good can be recognized but if you do
not know evil you cannot be wise

‡ ³Human conditions do not always permit it´

‡ All men are not good according to their human

nature

‡ The good is always mixed

‡ Fortune changes, always variable, being inflexible

to these changes makes you not good

‡ Variability: parsimony (stinginess) v. liberal (generous)

 ‡ Can¶t be liberal all the time, once you are expected
to be liberal it will look like you are turning on your word

‡ Better to start out stingy and become more liberal

‡ Machiavelli maintains the categories of good and bad, but

by necessity it is only natural to be bad

‡ The question of whether there are (or ought to be) any constraints
on the prince¶s exercise of power

‡ Necessity- if this isn¶t necessary, the Prince¶s power is

unlimited

‡ Hatred of the people-must be avoided

‡ The reasoning behind why a prince must be able not to be good

‡ ³Human conditions do not always permit it´

‡ All men are not good according to their human

nature

‡ The good is always mixed

‡ Fortune changes, always variable, being inflexible

to these changes makes you not good

‡ It is possible to be too moral- must be able to turn these on

and off depending on the current mixed reality

‡ Better to be feared because that is under the prince¶s

control whereas love is under the control of man

‡ Cruelty is what makes you be able to be good/nice (you

have to take in order to be able to give)

‡ The good and the bad are always intertwined and mixed

‡ You can¶t be purely one thing

‡ Should not depart from the good unless it is

necessary to be bad

‡ Pretend to be consistently all good when deep down

you are flexible and variable for times of alternate fortune and
necessity for bad
 ‡ The way Machiavelli¶s characterization of the prince¶s relationship
to his people changes over the course of the book

‡ People are connected to their prince not by his

characteristics, but rather the effects his policies have on them

‡ You can either come to power with the help of the great or
the help of the people (there is no common ground between these two
groups)

‡ The people have to be well-disposed to you, although they

probably have a different perspective princes need the support of their
people

‡ You can have the strength of a republic if the people

are behind you

‡ Trust ONLY lies in the people

‡ In arming the people, there is a win-win situation

‡ The people know that the Prince trusts them

and now are willing to stand behind the Prince

‡ Why the image of a foundation is so important to Machiavelli¶s

project

‡ Politics is its own foundation

‡ Takes politics from the ³ordinary´ behavior of

people and not how they act when they are their best selves

‡ In laying down strong foundations, these show your level

of control (ex: Borgia laid good foundations because he managed to
control everything he could, even the church)

‡ You build the foundation and then the morality is an extra

advantage

‡ Good foundations consist of good laws and good arms

‡ Fear is the strongest of foundations

‡ Machiavelli¶s understanding of the purpose and scope of political

life, and how this differs from Aristotle¶s understanding
 ‡ Scope

‡ A: covers everything, deals with the highest

questions, examines souls

‡ M: very narrow, politics has its own rules, lowers

sights to foundations and what is ordinary, ex: he says sometimes
politics is only about war

‡ Purpose:

‡ A: to provide a way for everyone to achieve the

telos, living well

‡ M: stability and pease, minimizing the negative

effects of conflict, not to be killed, stability seeking (security)

9
c



‡ M: says to look away from the high towards the low

A: encourages eyes to keep on the telos or highest goal

‡ M: ability before morality- separates politics from morality and

religion

A: politics are connected to morality, importance of studying souls

‡ M: starts with details and then formulates guiding principles

A: starts with the most general (highest goods) then moves to the details

‡ M: virtue is the tension between virtue and fortune

A: virtue is exercising logos and excellence

‡ M: very situational

A: based on universal conclusions

‡ M: Prince should focus on war

A: focus on souls and virtue

‡ M: parts, there will always be someone disappointed or angered,

can never attain a happy whole
A: talks about the whole/common good

‡ M: good is variable

A: good is consistent

‡ M: politics is cut off from religion and nature (natural=ordinary)

A: nature dictates our actions (natural= telos =extraordinary)

‡ M: tries to work with the selfish

A: tries to get people to be less selfish

‡ Agreement: political animal and logos are both necessary in man

‡ Must have a proper debate between the beast and the man

‡ Lion (force) and Fox (cleverness)

‡ Must use both to deal with changes in fortune

Î 


‡ What does it mean for a Prince to have virtue?

‡ What is good?

‡ A: Highest good, what all things eventually aim towards,

stable, universal

‡ M: the way in which something is used determines if it is

good or not, variable

‡ What are the specific qualities of democracy and oligarchy that

make polity good?