Professor Janara
Poli 340
does not work in a morally corrupt world and will only result in our
destruction. This argument is quite compelling and relatable to most
readers since our virtues depend upon the very condition that we
are kept alive and free from dangers that may threaten our life.
Machiavelli employs the word destroyed to highlight the primacy
of self-preservation in a society full of morally corrupt individuals. As
he writes, any ruler who relies simply on their promises and makes
no other preparations, will be destroyed (Machiavelli, 52). Both
politics and the state of nature operate on the same principle of
power, self-interest and survival in an anarchic world. Therefore, in
order to rule over people and preserve the existence of society, the
ruler has to rely more on cruelty rather than benevolence, fear
rather than love, and deception rather than honesty. Here
Machiavelli reveals himself as a highly utilitarian thinker who
advocates the so-called vices only to the extent that they are
beneficial for the preservation of the state and individuals. As
Machiavelli argues, the ruler should aim only to inspire fear among
the populace and always avoid hatred, which will cause his own
demise (Machiavelli, p53). Similarly, as Machiavelli shows in another
example, it is appropriate for a ruler to be moderately
compassionate by imposing cruelty on a few individuals and using it
as a deterrent, but excessive compassion will only cause disorder
and more harm than good (p51). Therefore, the maximization of the
happiness in a world where every action has a trade-off seems to
Machiavelli a sensible and morally justifiable principle. This is
related to his claim that we should always take actions that have the
fewest disadvantages (Machiavelli, p100).
On the other hand, the Christian philosopher Augustine, who is
more concerned with the absolute, eternal notion of virtues that can
only come from God, places less emphasis on the practical necessity
of self-preservation in this world. Augustine states that everyone
should live virtuously in this life, but we should only do so in
accordance with the Christian teaching and for the purpose of
attaining eternal goods in the afterlife (Augustine, p211). Unlike
Machiavelli who tries to confront and solve the problems of the
world diligently with practical solutions, Augustine, recognizing the
inherent insignificance of human striving and the vulnerability of
human morality, invents a heavenly city where men are
incorruptible and the good is everlasting. While Machiavelli admits
the fallibility of our moral characters and tries to manipulate them
for the advantage of ruler or the state, Augustine chooses to bypass
the messy state of human affairs in which the best and most
virtuous individuals can be corrupted. As Augustine asks, And who
is so utterly wise as to have no conflict at all with his lusts? (p145).
Therefore, Augustine can also be called a moral realist who
recognizes the irreparable state of human condition, but unlike
Machiavelli, looks to heaven instead for an answer. Specifically,
Augustine argues that since no human being has a moral character
strong enough to live virtuously, we need intervention from God who
can persuade us to voluntary poverty, continence, benevolence,
justice, concord, true piety and the other bright and powerful virtues
of life (Augustine, p211). Machiavelli is concerned that virtuous
rulers might suffer from evil or death when they are excessively
benevolent, but Augustine would respond that while preservation of
earthly goods including the life of mortal beings is important, the
end of life in this world is not the end of it all and we will gain
immortality and eternal happiness in the heaven. Augustine
remarks, only evil people obtain transitory and earthly goods and
only good people suffer the same kind of evils, then such a situation
could be referred to the judgment of God, which is just and even
kind (Augustine, p166). It can also be interpreted from Augustines
point that the fear that judgment of God creates in the minds the
people drives them to act more virtuously in this life so that they will
avoid eternal punishment. This is again a pragmatists view but
based on a religious and ideal premise. Furthermore, contrary to
Machiavellis belief in overcoming evil with evil, Augustine, being a
true Christian, advocates the Christian virtue of conquering evil with
benevolence so that the evil-doer will be afflict with guilt and repent
(Augustine, p207). Using the argument of a moral realist, Augustine
explains that the reason that we should return evil with good is for
the benefit of the earthly city, namely the earthly peace (p207). On
the contrary, Machiavelis emphasis on self-preservation does not
solve the problem of evil. Also, if we all choose to endure the evil we
suffered instead of seeking revenge, then our actions will contribute
to the increase in the number of good and the decrease in the
that the best way to live is to always hold on to ones belief in God
and truth and be willing to die for ones belief as he writes, the
latter, not resisting, were killed so that they might teach that dying
for faith in the truth is a preferable victory (Augustine, 224). This is
a proof of Augustines disdain for the perishable earthly good and
faith in the everlasting good in the afterlife. Morality is therefore for
Augustine a form of unconditional belief in an external power and
the exclusion of self, which is the polar opposite of Machiavellis
sense of morality that centers on self-preservation.
By comparing the two divergent views of morality of the two
thinkers, one might be likely to favor the more pragmatic argument
of Machiavelli because of its relevance to this world and our present
state here and now, but on a theoretical level, Augustines argument
seems to be more appealing as it vastly expands the boundaries of
our thoughts and possibilities that are not constrained by our
context. One has to note that Augustine is not encouraging
resignation and idleness in this life, because in his philosophy, one is
required to live virtuously in this life in order to attain heavenly
good. Augustine is only opposed to earthly good when people see it
as an end in itself. As he writes, Godgave to mankind certain
goods suitable for this life (p155). Although Machiavellis notion of
utilitarianism and preparation for the caprice of fortune are practical
and compelling, his philosophy remains grounded in this imperfect
human world, which for Machiavelli is an end in itself since he sees
nothing outside of it. As a result, trapped under the myopic
struggles for power and the darkness of our earthly world, we find
our sense of morality vulgarized and we become incapable of seeing
the nobility of perfection. On the other hand, the humane and
morally uplifting philosophy of Augustine can be seen as a source of
consolation and hope for all the poor, downtrodden and forgotten
people of the earthly world who may one day receive eternal
prosperity and happiness in the heavenly city. The moral purity and
perfection of God can serve as a source of inspiration for individuals
who wishes to emulate his boundless virtues, which can over time
lead to an increase in the number of good individuals and peace,
thereby accomplishing the same goal as the plan of Machiavelli. As
Augustine remarks, if it is said, honor your father and your
mother, God commands it (Augustine 136). The power of authority
God projects therefore compels us to live dutifully and virtuously.
Bibliography
Machiavelli, Niccolo. Selected Political Writings: edited and
translated by David Wootton. Hackett publishing company.
Augustine. Political writings: translated by Tkacz. Hackett publishing
company.