Essay Question: Compare the Characteristics of the true guardians, as described by Plato (Republic, bk VII, pp.158 – 61, 484b – 487e) with the characteristics of the rulers, as described by Machiavelli (The Prince, ch.15, pp. 47 – 49 and ch. 18, pp.54f). What is the most important difference between the two accounts? In your view, which account is better, and why? For centuries, every ruler created their own principles and rules and somehow they ruled millions of people and controlled their future. In this essay, I will try to compare the characteristics of two types of ruler, one is Plato’s true guardian where he mentions in the Republic and the other one, Niccoló …show more content…
Accordingly, he determines that “… there are some ways of behaving that are supposed to be virtuous, but would lead to your downfall, and others that are supposed to be wicked, but will lead to your welfare and peace of mind” [Selected Political Writings, The Prince, ch.15, p.49]. This clearly shows that if a ruler behaves like the one Plato mentions, he may probably lose the throne, but if follows the Machiavelli’s path, he will lead his ruler ship in safety.
As I mentioned before, in the “Republic”, Plato clearly states that a ruler must hate and reject what is falsehood and must become a lover of the truth. For him, uprightness and respecting to moral rules is so important to become a philosopher-king. Contrary to Plato, Machiavelli believes that the ruling one should not be always straight forward, in order to survive; one needs cunning to bedevil and fool other man. He indicates that, if you always respect the rules and behave morally, one shall not hold on to power because men are so treacherous. Although you are trustworthy or reliable, soon men will turn against to you and destroy your ruler ship [Selected Political Writings, The Prince, ch.17, p.52] Therefore, to prevent downfall, Machiavelli