The concept of virtu is at the heart of Machiavellian political theory in The Prince. The problematic nature of this term makes it difficult to formulate a concise definition. Different definitions often lead to different interpretations of Machiavelli. In order to understand the implications of Machiavelli's writings, it is important to explore this concept and how it shapes his political theory. This essay will be divided into two parts. The first will deal with the definition of virtu and a review of all the ideas that are included in this term. Examples of historical and contemporary counterparts will be studied and compared to the Machiavellian model. Next, the implications of this idea for Machiavelli's political theory will be discussed in detail. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an Original Essay Before we begin examining the term virtu, it is first necessary to explain the context of this essay in relation to the Prince. Many scholars have suggested that The Prince was written with an intention that was far from obvious. At first glance, it appears to be nothing more than a government manual, written in the hope that Machiavelli can find employment in the Medici family. A different interpretation sees the text as an offering of bad advice, or at least ambiguous advice, written with the intention of bringing down the Medici family who had left Machiavelli banished from the city he loved and destitute. Both interpretations are accepted as possibilities, but for our purposes we will take The Prince literally and assume that his advice is given seriously. If he wrote with anything less than truthful in intent, it would radically change the context of his virtua. According to Machiavelli, the unscrupulous, deceptive, and vicious activities required for good political sense can be seen as a plan for the downfall of a ruler. territory. From this context emerges the idea of ​​virtu. Virtu is a set of characteristics that make a ruler great. Tides of fortune (fortuna) can easily sweep away any ruler. The leader who possesses Machiavelli's virtu, even if he is not completely immune to the possible negative effects of fortune, is much better placed to deal with whatever may arise. Virtu should not be confused with the modern concept of virtue. Machiavellian virtuosity differs greatly from the current moral model commonly associated with virtuosity. Likewise, most historical interpretations of virtue disagree with Machiavelli. Christian virtue, once described by Nietche as “slave morality,” has very little in common with Machiavellian virtu. The Christian version includes characteristics such as gentleness, humility, charity, piety and forgiveness. None of these ideas are present in Machiavelli's princely virtue (virtu). Although not a complete atheist, Machiavelli was far from a religious man and had a certain contempt for the Catholic Church. He never expresses these opinions and respects the power of religion in his writings, because to do otherwise would be tantamount to political suicide, but a secular air surrounds his writings. The Platonic model of virtue is also out of step with Machiavelli's Virtue. The emphasis on truth and justice that characterizes Platonic virtue is nowhere to be found in Machiavelli's conception. Likewise, Roman virtue, which places the highest importance on honesty and honor, is a poor equivalent to virtu. From this, one could argue that Machiavelli is amoral, or without a moral code. This is not the case. A moral code is defined as a set ofstandards against which conduct can be praised or criticized. Machiavelli praises and condemns various courses of action with great vehemence. We have examined what virtu is not, now we will next clarify what this term means. If the Christian, Platonic, and Roman conceptions of virtue do not equate to Machiavelli's princely virtue, then what can we use to clarify this troubling concept? The answer lies in the heroic ideas of virtue found in Homer's writings. The Homeric version of virtue found in the Illiad and the Odyssey is much more in line with virtu. There is no emphasis on truth, justice and similar concepts. Instead, the hero must be a resourceful survivor, sacrificing everything with the sole goal of self-preservation. Where other models of virtue fail to compete with Machiavelli's, the Homeric characteristics of virtue are more closely related. The linguistic basis of the term virtu is not irrelevant. Virtu is derived from the Italian word virtus, but is not exactly related to it. Formed from the root vir, meaning man, or more specifically free male citizens, virtus refers to the characteristics displayed in the class of free male citizens when fulfilling roles and obligations. In this sense, only the vir aspect is truly applicable. Machiavelli's contemporaries also used the term virtu. D'Vinci used this term with a strictly scientific definition. He used it to designate, in the physical sense, the driving force. Another connotation of the term, the most widely used, is found within the Italian Renaissance medical community. This form of the word describes the vital force on which the life and strength of all organisms rest. Some authors have suggested an echo of this medicinal basis in Machiavelli's use of the term. A letter written a few years later refers to a king recently recovered from illness as having "his virtue grown strong again." Despite all the evidence and similarities, very little emphasis has been placed on this theory. The use of this term in The Prince is widespread and includes many connotations. No single word can adequately express the idea, and the long list of variations makes application of the term difficult. The result is a range of different possible interpretations in each use case. Some ideas of the term virtu are desirable in a modern sense. Intellect is a key aspect of the concept. A ruler must be knowledgeable and use this knowledge in the affairs of his state. A keen intellect will aid a leader seeking greatness while ignorance will foster unhappiness and bad decisions. History must be studied rigorously and the actions of great men imitated. An intelligent leader has advantages in all aspects of political life. Confidence also plays a role in the formulation of virtu: “I think, however, that it is better to be stubborn than prudent, for fortune is a lady. If we want to control it, we must beat it and hit it. And we see that she submits more often to those who act boldly than to those who proceed in a calculating manner. "A proper ruler will be confident and command respect from those below him. Machiavelli gives the example of Maximilian who often rescinds his decrees after they have been criticized. The result is that no one knows what they are. his intentions and decisions are unreliable. Talent, intelligence and confidence are all required by Machiavelli if a ruler is to possess virtu. Machiavelli also requires his ruler of virtuity to be pragmatic. THEcircumstances and able to apply his knowledge to any endeavor he embarks on. He must be attentive to those around him and weigh his opinions wisely, taking into account all that may be gained and lost for each party involved. Attention should always be paid to activities abroad as they may affect the state or transmit useful information. The ruler must be vigilant and perceptive, as people may plot against him in an attempt to gain power. The decision also plays a role. Uncertainty is unacceptable for a leader and shows weakness. This pragmatism will be very useful to the leader in times of crisis and will help to guarantee the sustainability of his long reign. This brings us to the negative moral aspects of Machiavelli's virtu. These beliefs led to his loss of popularity, as they presented him as a tyrant with little regard for so-called moral imperatives. Although Machiavelli believes that wherever possible one should take the right path, there are situations that may require a ruler to abandon traditional morality in favor of cunning and deception. The example of Agathocles, who took bold and deceptive steps to seize power alone. , like the massacre of the senators and the richest citizens of Syracuse, deserves the praise of Machiavelli: “He was the son of a potter and, from beginning to end, he led an evil life; nevertheless, his wicked behavior testified to such strength (virtu) of mind and body...there seems to be no reason why he should be judged less admirable than any of the best generals. His cruelty and brutality, as well as his countless wicked actions, mean that it would be wrong to praise him as one of the most remarkable of men. » The distinction between being a good general and being a good man is clear. Positions of power sometimes require actions from men that would not otherwise earn you praise. Circumstances seem to be the main determinant of whether bad actions should be employed or not. A ruler must be able to act against his good nature if required to do so: “For he who will act in all circumstances as a good man will bring about his own ruin, for those with whom he has dealings will not do so.” everything must be good. It is therefore necessary for a ruler, if he is to retain power, to learn how to not be good and to know when it is necessary and when it is not necessary to use this knowledge. "Machiavelli is just as good. aware that sometimes wickedness benefits a ruler much more than so-called virtuous acts: "Above all, do not worry if you are supposed to have those vices which a ruler needs to remain firmly in power, because, if you think about it, you will realize that there are certain ways of behaving which are supposed to be virtuous, but which would lead to your downfall, and others which are supposed to be evil, but which will lead to your well-being and your peace of mind. "Integrity and truth have always been praised as characteristics of great men. However, careful observation taught Machiavelli that when it comes to power and politics, the honest man is not necessarily the one to imitate: "Everyone recognizes how commendable it is for a ruler to keep his word and to live a life of integrity, without relying on trickery. However, we see that in practice these days these leaders thought it was not important to keep their word, achieved great things, and knew how to use trickery to confuse and disorient other men. to defeat those who placed great importance on integrity. "Virtu has little to do with justice and more to do withopportunism. The virtuous traits of the ordinary citizen do not apply to princely virtu. A manager, because of his position in a society, is subject to different standards. It is because of Machiavelli's contempt for the masses that he recognizes that the ruler must be above common morality: “They are ungrateful, fickle, deceitful and deceitful, avoiding danger. , eager for gain. They promise you their blood, their goods, their lives and their children, as I said before, as long as you seem to have no need of them. But as soon as you need help, they turn around. you." If people were not so evil and undesirable, things would be different. However, the nature of man, as Machiavelli sees it, does not permit traditional virtue: "So you see that a ruler wise man cannot and must not keep his word when it is to his disadvantage and when the reasons which led him to promise it no longer apply. Of course, if all men were good, this advice would be bad: but. since men are evil and will not keep faith in you, you need not keep faith in them." It is now clear how the concept of princely virtue differs from traditional notions of virtue. How then does this conception of virtu affect Machiavelli's political theory? The answer is that virtu shapes almost every aspect of Machiavelli's formulations and dominates the Prince's text, from the preeminence of military power and strategy in a ruler's life to theories about the type of ruler best suited to conquer the force of fortune, virtu takes center stage. in almost all discussions of Machiavelli. Perhaps the most important aspect of virtu and its relationship to political power, according to Le Prince, is military superiority. In fact, Machiavelli suggests that this is a ruler's only area of ​​concern: "A ruler, then, should have no other concerns, no other thoughts, should pay attention to nothing but war, military institutions and the training of its soldiers... It is of such importance that military prowess does not only keep those who are born leaders. in power, but also often allows men born private citizens to access power. » Although this may be a slight exaggeration, this section is written to impress upon the reader the importance of military force. Machiavelli does address non-military issues in his text, but none receive the high esteem that war issues receive. Another issue addressed in The Prince is the nature of government and the role that virtu plays in bringing someone to power. Leaders can gain power in different ways. Some, like church leaders, are chosen from a group of like-minded men. These leaders face small challenges because their presumed relationship with God prevents evil from happening to them. In the same way. Leaders who are in power based on birthright do not face many challenges because they are often seen as figureheads and expectations of them are usually low. However, the citizen leader, who comes to power through luck or through his own virtue, faces the greatest number of challenges. In these circumstances, the leader must rely on his virtue to remain in power. Those who have been placed in the role of ruler based on the good graces of fortune, without continued luck, will quickly fall from power. It is the leader who has struggled to gain power, overcoming obstacles and gaining experience, who possesses virtu. He is the most skillful ruler, but he faces the most opposition.: 1995