The Question Of Ends And Means

The Question of Ends and Means

A longstanding debate in human history is what to do with power and what is the best way to rule. Who should have power, how should one rule, and what purpose should government serve have always been questions, and more than once have sparked controversy and conflict. The rule of human being has placed our human need for order and structure against the human desire for freedom, and compromising between the two has never been easy. And to this day people try to consider the question about government and its role in society and particularly the question regarding "end justifying means". However, the argument has not rested solely with military powers or politicians, but philosophers as well. Three prominent voices in this debate are Aristotle, Machiavelli, and Plato, whom all had very different ideas of government's role in the lives of its people. Although Aristotle's definition of the "good" and good government differs radically from other philosophers we can apply his concept to both Plato and Machiavelli because the philosophy of ends justifying means supersede and override their ideas if we'll look at it through the certain historical moment and the place each of them lived. The question how does Aristotle's very different concept of ends and means apply to both Plato and Machiavelli can not be answered, however, without first analyzing the core tenants of Machiavelli, Plato, and Aristotle.

Born in Florence, Italy in 1469, Niccolo Machiavelli was the first great political philosopher of the Renaissance. Once a bureaucrat and diplomat for the state of Florence, he was removed from office when the Medici family was restored to power in 1512. He retired to his country home where he, among other works, wrote The Prince, a work which has become a political handbook for modern day politicians as well as for those who desire powerÐ'--whether it be on Wall Street, in White House, or in their personal relationships. The Prince is a philosophical political view on how one might gain, maintain, and expand the power over the state or states in which a ruler has authority. In The Prince, Machiavelli states several things: what a prince should do in war and in peace. He begins first by talking about how the prince should retain a territory that has been taken. The prince, he says, must have "good fortune as well as great industry to retain them." The prince must therefore apply himself to achieve the good ends which justify any means even if they are the means of power, war, torture. "If good luck is needed as well as good effort than certainly the reverse is true in that good effort is needed just as much as good luck." - he writes in The Prince. Now once the lands have been pacified, Machiavelli goes on to explain how a prince must rule those people. People used to liberty are tough to rule, he says. He tells of three ways to rule a city used to its independence and liberty. A prince must either destroy them, live with them, or leave them alone. He states that freedom can only be conquered by destroying it. A new prince comes to rule solely on the basis of his own abilities or virtue. He has done and will continue to do whatever it takes to continue his rule. Machiavelli recommends a very practical course of action for the prince: obtain power by direct and effective means, which is necessary. By Niccoli Machiavelli, the concept "The ends justify the means" is saying that a prince should hold absolute control of their territories, and they should use any necessary means to accomplish this end, including violence and deception. Now that the views of Machiavelli have been established, his beliefs can be compared to Plato and Aristotle..

Plato, The son of wealthy and influential Athenian parents, began his philosophical career as a student of Socrates. When the master died, Plato travelled to Egypt and Italy, studied with students of Pythagoras, and spent several years advising the ruling family of Syracuse. Eventually, he returned to Athens and established his own school of philosophy at the Academy.

Different time, different country, different circumstances... Is there anything common in Machiavelli's and Plato's positions of" ends justifying the means"? "We Hold these truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. These words are the most recognized words ever written in ancient history. As we can see Plato's ideals and beliefs were derived from a deep regard for life, liberty, and freedom. And to achieve these ends any necessary means could be applied including means of rebellion - war, civil disorder, injustice, and death. The lives of the few are forfeit when they threaten the many. Does it sound familiar? In my opinion Machiavelli and Plato declare the same principle: all means are virtues by the good ends they achieve. The good ends according to Machiavelli is a stable state and according to Plato it is happiness, life, and liberty which could be given to people again by a government that would serve and protect all its constituents.

Aristotle lived in Athens during the time after the Peloponnesian War ( 384 -322 B.C.). His views were shaped by that war, the political atmosphere of the post-Peloponnesian Athens, and his teacher Plato. Aristotle was the student at the Academy of Plato in Athens and turned out to be his most brilliant pupil. Later Aristotle did not agree with Plato on all issues, however, and seems to have broken with his master. The primary sources for Aristotle's political theories are Nicomachean Ethics and Politics. We can say that, rhetorically speaking, the body of all his works is an exploration