Total Posts:24|Showing Posts:1-24
Jump to topic:

Machiavelli

wonderwoman
Posts: 744
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2010 9:15:50 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
For the sake of saving the state or your regime you must make unsavory policies.

Well, given the fact that everyone seems up in arms around eco sanctions lately.

These policies are unsavory but they are required to save your state. They provided the illusion of power to your people and over your people by exerting power over others.

It certainly would be justice seeing as justice encompasses moral, social, and political ideals.
Vi_Veri
Posts: 4,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2010 9:24:09 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
We are reading and discussing The Prince in my Political Philosophy course right now. This will be the second time I've read it :) Always a pleasure, Machiavelli.
I could give a f about no haters as long as my ishes love me.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2010 9:30:10 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/24/2010 9:28:54 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
Currently, I'm reading The Virtue of Selfishness (Rand), The Prince (Machiavelli), and the Spirit of Community (Etzioni).

What's your next trio? The Bible, Mein Kampf, and the Satanic Bible?
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
philosphical
Posts: 1,643
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2010 9:30:15 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/24/2010 9:25:03 PM, Vi_Veri wrote:
We're reading that after :)

"were" meaning L and you, correct?

I might give this book a read.
Your mouths writing checks that your @ss can't cash!
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2010 9:35:17 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/24/2010 9:30:10 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 1/24/2010 9:28:54 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
Currently, I'm reading The Virtue of Selfishness (Rand), The Prince (Machiavelli), and the Spirit of Community (Etzioni).

What's your next trio? The Bible, Mein Kampf, and the Satanic Bible?

I've always wanted to read Mein Kampf; I might get that in my next round of purchases, along with Atlas Shrugged, and The Art of War (Tzu, not Machiavelli).
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2010 9:36:52 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
The question was rhetorical.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2010 9:40:39 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Machiavelli : http://2.bp.blogspot.com...
(he's the guy in blue)
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
wonderwoman
Posts: 744
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2010 10:00:59 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/24/2010 9:35:17 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 1/24/2010 9:30:10 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 1/24/2010 9:28:54 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
Currently, I'm reading The Virtue of Selfishness (Rand), The Prince (Machiavelli), and the Spirit of Community (Etzioni).

What's your next trio? The Bible, Mein Kampf, and the Satanic Bible?

I've always wanted to read Mein Kampf; I might get that in my next round of purchases, along with Atlas Shrugged, and The Art of War (Tzu, not Machiavelli).

ewww Ayn Rand

Yes, on Tzu and Mein Kampf.

But perhaps you should read some other MAchiavlli books as he is quite the intellect
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2010 10:11:25 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/24/2010 9:42:45 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
https://libwebspace.library.cmu.edu...

I'm sensing a distinct difference.

yeah you're right he doesn't really resemble a giant douche,

he's really much more the spitting image of satan
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/25/2010 12:35:26 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/24/2010 10:11:25 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 1/24/2010 9:42:45 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
https://libwebspace.library.cmu.edu...

I'm sensing a distinct difference.

yeah you're right he doesn't really resemble a giant douche,

he's really much more the spitting image of satan

If you are referring to his treatise of, The Prince, his reputation is a little hard done by. He analysed historical events, pulling threads for what was successful for those that ruled populations, sought to expand and consolidate into new territory and just as notably what did not work.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/25/2010 4:40:49 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/25/2010 12:35:26 AM, Puck wrote:

If you are referring to his treatise of, The Prince, his reputation is a little hard done by. He analysed historical events, pulling threads for what was successful for those that ruled populations, sought to expand and consolidate into new territory and just as notably what did not work.

He wrote a book, for a child, on how to grow up to be an A-moral Giant douche to the people in such a way that he can maintain absolute control over them.

One might say: well that's just a treatise on how to be an effective ruler.
And I'd say: yes it is, but it's also a treatise on "how to be an effective, uncaring, prick" written specifically for a child.

---

If you are looking for such manuals however the work of Han Fei is also a good pick. His work is similar in purpose, and in it's disregard for morality, but it inspired and was successfully implemented by the Giant Douche who (many would say thanks to the thinking of Han Fei) unified, and became the First Emperor of, China.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/25/2010 9:56:52 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/24/2010 9:30:15 PM, philosphical wrote:
At 1/24/2010 9:25:03 PM, Vi_Veri wrote:
We're reading that after :)

"were" meaning L and you, correct?


No, by "we're" I think she's referring to her class... Contrary to popular belief, we are actually 2 separate people with different interests lol. Although it's true that we do read together (remember when we used to read Nietzsche aloud to one another, b? <3), I've already read Machiavelli - The Prince, anyway - so now I'm reading a few other books... I sound like a lying nerd, but I'm honestly in the middle of 3:

1. Spinoza's Ethics
2. About Time: Einstein's Unfinished Revolution (a physics book)
3. Outrage (about this country's superfluous spending)
President of DDO
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/25/2010 10:03:43 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/24/2010 9:24:34 PM, wonderwoman wrote:
he is by far one of my favorite people in the world.
I'd also suggest The Art of War by machiavelli

I've read both, can barely remember either of them.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
Vi_Veri
Posts: 4,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/25/2010 5:52:47 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/24/2010 9:30:15 PM, philosphical wrote:
At 1/24/2010 9:25:03 PM, Vi_Veri wrote:
We're reading that after :)

"were" meaning L and you, correct?

I might give this book a read.

No, meaning me and my Political Philosophy class
I could give a f about no haters as long as my ishes love me.
wonderwoman
Posts: 744
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2010 12:14:45 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/25/2010 4:40:49 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 1/25/2010 12:35:26 AM, Puck wrote:

If you are referring to his treatise of, The Prince, his reputation is a little hard done by. He analysed historical events, pulling threads for what was successful for those that ruled populations, sought to expand and consolidate into new territory and just as notably what did not work.

He wrote a book, for a child, on how to grow up to be an A-moral Giant douche to the people in such a way that he can maintain absolute control over them.

One might say: well that's just a treatise on how to be an effective ruler.
And I'd say: yes it is, but it's also a treatise on "how to be an effective, uncaring, prick" written specifically for a child.

---

If you are looking for such manuals however the work of Han Fei is also a good pick. His work is similar in purpose, and in it's disregard for morality, but it inspired and was successfully implemented by the Giant Douche who (many would say thanks to the thinking of Han Fei) unified, and became the First Emperor of, China.

So there is nothing that is morally permissible it is either all moral or immoral?
Vi_Veri
Posts: 4,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2010 9:47:19 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/25/2010 4:40:49 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 1/25/2010 12:35:26 AM, Puck wrote:

If you are referring to his treatise of, The Prince, his reputation is a little hard done by. He analysed historical events, pulling threads for what was successful for those that ruled populations, sought to expand and consolidate into new territory and just as notably what did not work.

He wrote a book, for a child, on how to grow up to be an A-moral Giant douche to the people in such a way that he can maintain absolute control over them.

One might say: well that's just a treatise on how to be an effective ruler.
And I'd say: yes it is, but it's also a treatise on "how to be an effective, uncaring, prick" written specifically for a child.

---

If you are looking for such manuals however the work of Han Fei is also a good pick. His work is similar in purpose, and in it's disregard for morality, but it inspired and was successfully implemented by the Giant Douche who (many would say thanks to the thinking of Han Fei) unified, and became the First Emperor of, China.


I'd have to disagree, good sir. Machiavelli raises some important issues in his work that can be used very well in the political philosophy debate (for example, the use of mercenaries as suggested by anarcho-libertarians is laughable after reading is passages on military arms). He is a man that is taken very seriously by great leaders as he was a political genius.

And of course The Prince sounds like it's written for a child :) It is a manual, and a gloriously manipulative one at that, for the young Lorenzo to treat the formerly tortured Machiavelli (by Lorenzo's Medici family) with dignity and a way for Machiavelli to attain glory (his primary value - which, since he seems to be an atheistic teacher, is his way of attaining immortality).

Since Machiavelli lacked all the fortune (for fortune is a dicey little mistress indeed), he had to make up for it with virtue of his mental faculties. He is a fox, after all, and The Prince was written for lions. And if you've read enough of his work, you know this makes him very clever indeed :)

The Prince is not how it seems. It takes at least 2-3 reads to grasp how manipulative Machiavelli is in writing it. Your first read is surely never like your 2nd and 3rd if you have this clue in mind after the initial introduction to him.

He was a genius - pure and simple.
I could give a f about no haters as long as my ishes love me.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2010 12:46:57 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/27/2010 9:47:19 AM, Vi_Veri wrote:
At 1/25/2010 4:40:49 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 1/25/2010 12:35:26 AM, Puck wrote:

If you are referring to his treatise of, The Prince, his reputation is a little hard done by. He analysed historical events, pulling threads for what was successful for those that ruled populations, sought to expand and consolidate into new territory and just as notably what did not work.

He wrote a book, for a child, on how to grow up to be an A-moral Giant douche to the people in such a way that he can maintain absolute control over them.

One might say: well that's just a treatise on how to be an effective ruler.
And I'd say: yes it is, but it's also a treatise on "how to be an effective, uncaring, prick" written specifically for a child.

---

If you are looking for such manuals however the work of Han Fei is also a good pick. His work is similar in purpose, and in it's disregard for morality, but it inspired and was successfully implemented by the Giant Douche who (many would say thanks to the thinking of Han Fei) unified, and became the First Emperor of, China.



I'd have to disagree, good sir. Machiavelli raises some important issues in his work that can be used very well in the political philosophy debate (for example, the use of mercenaries as suggested by anarcho-libertarians is laughable after reading is passages on military arms). He is a man that is taken very seriously by great leaders as he was a political genius.

And of course The Prince sounds like it's written for a child :) It is a manual, and a gloriously manipulative one at that, for the young Lorenzo to treat the formerly tortured Machiavelli (by Lorenzo's Medici family) with dignity and a way for Machiavelli to attain glory (his primary value - which, since he seems to be an atheistic teacher, is his way of attaining immortality).

Since Machiavelli lacked all the fortune (for fortune is a dicey little mistress indeed), he had to make up for it with virtue of his mental faculties. He is a fox, after all, and The Prince was written for lions. And if you've read enough of his work, you know this makes him very clever indeed :)

The Prince is not how it seems. It takes at least 2-3 reads to grasp how manipulative Machiavelli is in writing it. Your first read is surely never like your 2nd and 3rd if you have this clue in mind after the initial introduction to him.

He was a genius - pure and simple.

lol, I guess I'll have to give'm another shot then.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."