MACHIAVELLI AND MONTAIGNE

Machiavelli And Montaigne



Machiavelli And Montaigne

To what extent are their understandings of strategies for dealing with fortune similar or different?

It can be said that the strategies presented by both, Machiavelli and Montaigne are different to each other in the sense that, Machiavelli has presented the concept of fortune based on the concept of virtue, whereas, Montaigne has presented the concept in a different manner. Virtue can be a force, why do not we praise or blame us because we have the capacity (ability) to experience emotions. Also, the forces conferred on man by nature, while virtues are food "addiction" (cultivation through education). According to Montaigne, the concept of mortal fortune based on an individual himself. It can also be said that both, Machiavelli and Montaigne have presented their concepts of kind fortune in a different manner, yet the basic concept is the same. Machiavelli related the concept of fortune with the concept of virtue, which means, the quality of doing what is right and avoiding what is wrong. Furthermore, Montaigne states the fact that the concept of fortune based on an individual himself. This in turn also means that both, Machiavelli and Montaigne are saying the same thing, but in a different manner. The basic meaning of their statement comes out as the fact that human fortune is dependent on the quality of doing what is right and avoiding what is wrong.

The virtue is the other side of the political thought of Machiavelli. It must first be understood as the ability to impose its will on the fortune. Also, the virtue of politicians does not refer directly to their moral character, but rather to their valor, the quality with which he addresses the fortune and tries to control it (Marriott, 2008). It is more flexible than the rigidity that Machiavelli intends to defend; the virtue implies that the politicians know all about adapting to circumstances (Marriott, 2008). Thus, Machiavelli recommends a pragmatic line of political action, a tailor who can conduct political action contingency circumstances. The analogy of the river dikes and unleashed explains that Fortuna shows its power especially where no resistance prepared (Donskis, Leonidas, 2011). Wealth without virtue is a reflection of nature uncontrolled. The role of virtue is to predict disasters, to prevent them (Capponi, Niccolò, 2010). Machiavelli shows that Virtue is the ability to impose its law on the Fortune. Indeed, he shows that "what the great founders of State had the fortune, it was an opportunity that provides an area to which they were able to form as they judged appropriately". It is an opportunity to demonstrate his political skills, without it, the opportunity being lost. Fortune flies to the rescue who knows not to delude and be clever (Anglo, Sydney, 2005). Where Virtue is at its maximum, the Fortune has a supporting role (Donskis, Leonidas, 2011). Faced with lucidity, Fortune appears as the spur of necessity: meaning that it shows the need for action, and analyze the power relations ...