machiavelli's view on ethics and poltics
122995
Just read the book, it's worth it.
632233
Politics and Morality are both relative terms.\nUnfortunately for us, they both happen to be totally unrelated to each other !
175223
Very good question. I agree with your assertion about integrity and honor. This means to behave according to reasonable standards of morality, and to accept responsibility for decisions, both good and bad. And to be consistent in our words and deeds as much as possible within a political environment.\nI'd really like a politician who can listen to all viewpoints and make decisions based not on special interests alone, but based on the good of the citizens as a whole.\nThere are times when the ideal politician will even vote against the preferences of the majority in his/her district, if the larger good is enhanced. \nBeing able to resist special interests would be a fundamental quality.
308746
This is really easy. Machievelli said the ends will justify the means and rulers should basically do anything to stay in power, ANYTHING.If you've read "The Prince," by Machievelli, you would understand this idea. Each of the people you have listed were pretty ruthless in their desire to stay on top. Just provide examples of this. Google each of their names to get a breif history of thier years as rulers. You will find plenty to support your claim. If you can't read the prince, get some sparks notes and find a few of his really good quotes.
247222
The Prince is a classic book on modern political thought; not necessarily a business book. While a little archaic, it can give you pointers on how to become a leader (ok, even a ruthless leader) and how to gain and hold on to power. This was the book found under the bed of the late Philippine dictator Ferdinand Marcos. Machiavelli was the proponent of the "the end justifies the means" thinking. Some of his other nuggets of wisdom include "be close to your friends, but keep your enemies closer." Certainly good for conflict resolution, preservation of company, and others.\n\nAll of the books you've listed are must-reads. Though I would think that Napoleon Hill's books are more applicable even today. In fact, if you're only going to read one, go for Hill's book. It's not about discourse on the importance of state, but more about your changing your mindset and redirecting it towards success. This is the book that helps you take charge of your financial life as it gives an excellent formula for attaining success. The examples in the book are old (afterall it was published in the 1930s), but they are relevant even today. \n\nI would say buy Napoleon Hill's Think and Grow rich book.\n\nBut if you want to be an entrepreneur, there are several books that excellent and can give you concrete ideas on how to start your business:\n\n- What No One Ever Tells You About Starting Your Own Business: Real Life Start-Up Advice from 101 Successful Entrepreneurs  http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1574101129/ref=nosim/powerhomebizguid \n- If You're Clueless About Starting Your Own Business and Want to Know More  http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1574100939/ref=nosim/powerhomebizguid \n- Start Your Own Business : The Only Start-Up Book You'll Ever Need  http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1891984217/ref=nosim/powerhomebizguid \n- Steps to Small Business Start-Up : Everything You Need to Know to Turn Your Idea into a Successful Business http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1574101323/ref=nosim/powerhomebizguid
507654
Notable ideas: tabula rasa, "government with the consent of the governed"; state of nature; rights of life, liberty and property \nInfluences: Plato, Aristotle, Aquinas, Grotius, Descartes, Hooker, Hobbes
501524
I would suggest you look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_of_the_flies#War_and_human_nature and I would also get yourself familar with the idea's of Thomas Hobbes who believed without the laws of society man will live by the laws of the jungle (kill or be killed) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Hobbes\n\nGood Luck!!!
404932
From Monty Python's Flying Circus-\n\nWe would like to apologize for the way in which politicians are represented in this programme.  It was never our intention to imply that politicians are weak-kneed political time-servers who are concerned more with their personal vendettas and private power struggles than the problems of government, nor to suggest at any point that they sacrifice their credibility by denying free debate on vital matters in the mistaken impression that party unity comes before the well-being of the people they supposedly represent, nor to imply at any stage that they are squabbling little toadies without an ounce of concern for the vital social problems of today.  Nor indeed do we intend that viewers should consider them as crabby ulcerous little self-seeking vermin with furry legs and an excessive addiction to alcohol and certain explicit sexual practices which some people might find offensive.\n\nWe are sorry if this impression has come across.
426664
Thank you for sharing your epiphany with modern day politics.  I once had the highest regard for our political powers based on what I learned from the history of our founding fathers as we all have learned and I have come to the same conclusion.  The reality of the matter is that politics is everything whether we like it or not. The stroke of a pen from a leader represents a decision for the masses even if the paperwork does not represent our thoughts and beliefs to the fullest extent. That is why we must stay on top of the game and elect our leaders as skillfully as possible.  Knowing your political roots and being able to distinguish between the issues is a self taught philosophy that your social standing forces you to entertain.  Be patient.  Be informed.  Inform others.  We shall overcome!!
578251
hey..try project guttenberg , lots of online book there! good luck. Bdway, The Prince by Machiavelli is an interesting read and its THIN :) \n\nhttp://www.gutenberg.org/\n\nHave fun!
116690
Voltaire's philosophy was based on skepticism and rationality, which leads me to believe that he didn't really lean one way or the other. He probably would be more of the philosophy that men do good things and bad things, thus being skeptical of both the naturally good and the naturally evil philosophies. Check out the link below and see if that helps.
452966
I've read many of his articles on FindLaw, where he discusses some of the issues raised in the book. \n\nFrom what I can see, he's a very intelligent and loyal conservative who is saddened by some of the things being done to his party.
156098
The national interest actually lies in ethics.\nWhile it might not seem so in the short term, acting unethically will weaken us morally. It also prompts others to retaliate etc. like 9/11 which cannot be good for anyone.\n\nWe should lead morally and ethically even if in the short term it puts us at a slight disadvantage.
453596
"Civility" or "Human Citizenship"  - (Dorky names, but I'll explain the concept)\n\nIf everyone concentrated on what it takes to be civil with one another, instead of forcing an abstract belief on one another, then the world would be a better place.\n\nThe tenants would include the improvement and advancement of personal ethics, community soveriegnty, environmental ethics, essential human rights, and sexual responsibility.  I'd like to throw in an "anti-cell phone while driving" agenda, but that's just a selfish wish.   It would not include any threats or promises of an afterlife, nor any divinely inspired text.  These seem to be distractions to what is really important, which is the growth and strength of personal ethics based on what's good for the community (both local and the world).
389087
The statement is a straightforward liberal commentary on many misunderstandings and false teachings within the Christian community.  I especially liked his point that Jesus had a lot to say about hypocrisy and phariseeism, but nothing about homosexuality.  I think he went over the top a bit by implying that we needed to read Greek or Latin to have a discussion about it, though.
320996
If you expect to get some answers you need to narrow your expectations, don’t presume that all the users have answers to everything so try to ask a question at a time to get an answer or two.\nI personally could not get you all the information you needed but I tried my best to look it up for you. I have an overall definition and I hope that you can pick what you need from it.\nDante had an admiration for ancient letters. At first, he intended to\ncompose his great epic in Latin verse. Petrarch considered his Africa a fair effort to reproduce Vergil. In the exordium of his chief work Petrarc h appeals to the Heliconian Sisters as well as to Jesus Christ, Savior of the world. He also reviews the epics of Homer (although he never learned Greek), Statius, and Lucan. He was overwhelmed with the friendships of many prestigous men of his day, a mong whom Cardinal Stephen Colonna was prominent. Petrarch is the pathfinder as well as the measure of the new movement. He idealized the classical world. His classicist consciousness and his Christian consciousness are revealed in his writings. Th e experiences of life constantly evoke in him classic parallels, reminiscences, associations. Julius Caesar, Papirius Cursor, are nostri, "our people"; Pyrrhus, Hannibal, Massinissa are externi, "foreigners." His epistles provide the b est revelation of his soul. Of course, the craving for pure Latinity and the elevation of such practical power of imitation and reproduction involved an artificiality of which neither Petrarch nor his successors were aware. Boccaccio was not only a hu manist, but he, with appalling directness, revealed the emancipation of the flesh as one of the unmistakable trends of the new movement. Both he and Poggio, Valla, Beccadelli, Enea Silvio dei Piccolomini (in his youth) show that the hatred of the cle rical class instigated literary composition. At the same time in the caricatures of foulness which these leaders of the new learning loved to draw, there is no moral indignation, but clearly like satyrs they themselves relish these things. For this reason the Humanists of Italy, as such, were not at all concerned in the efforts for a reformation of the church as attempted in the councils of Constance or of Basel. Poggio, apostolic secretary, came to Constance with the corrupt pope John XXIII., bu t spent most of his time in ransacking the libraries of Swiss monasteries for Latin codices. The defense of Jerome of Prague before the Council reminded him of Cato of Utica. His correspondent Lionardo Bruni at Florence warns him to be more circumsp ect in his praise of a heretic. In the Curia itself a semipagan spirit was bred by the Humanists. In 1447 Parentucelli, an enthusiast for codices, became pope as Nicholas V. On Easter, the eminent humanist Filelfo wrote to him from Milan to congratul ate him on his elevation. Filelfo expressed a general satisfaction of scholars, citing also the humanitas of Christ himself, as well as writing somewhat hypocritically of fucata gentilium . . . sapientia. Some time later, in 1453, Filel fo personally appeared at the papal court. Nicholas kept the vile "Satyrae" of the humanist until he had perused them, and gave Filelfo a purse of 500 ducats when he departed. Enea Silvio de' Piccolomini ascended the papal throne in 1458 as Pius II., another humanist pope.
465733
What a piece of work is man! How noble in reason! how infinite in faculties! in form and moving, how express and admirable! in action how like an angel! in apprehension, how like a god! the beauty of the world! the paragon of animals! And yet, to me, what is this quintessence of dust? Man delights not me; no, nor woman neither, though by your smiling you seem to say so." \n\n--From Hamlet (II, ii, 115-117)