The Prince: Virtu vs. Fortuna Machiavelli argues that moral and…

VuNgocHongAnBella The Prince: Virtu vs. Fortuna Machiavelli argues that moral and…The Prince: Virtu vs. FortunaMachiavelli argues that moral and righteous people make weak political leaders; the most important quality is the virtu (virtue) of the Prince, which is better understood in Machiavelli’s work as being “of flexible disposition” than of being virtuous. Many medieval and Renaissance writers argued that upright character and virtuous behavior were essential characteristics for a ruler. Machiavelli moves away from traditional Christian advice for rulers and instead focuses on the concept that “the end justifies the means,” even if this means resorting to immorality or violence in order to maintain power. Authority and power are linked, but neither is dependent upon nor requires moral (virtuous) behavior for effective rule. The ruler with virtu will be able to switch from good to evil conduct as necessary for each circumstance. His justification relies on the premise that man is inherently evil, and therefore cannot be led with morality or goodness (“If men were all good, this advice would not be good, but since men are wicked and do not keep their promises to you, you likewise do not have to keep yours to them.”) Virtu is one of two important qualities for achieving strong leadership The other is fortuna. Fortuna (Fortune) is compared to a woman: she plays only half a role in a leader’s success or failure, while the other half remains in the ruler’s hands (through virtu). Fortune is compared to a “raging storm” that unleashes floods and destruction but is also capable of peace if she is “contained.” Princes will fail if they are in constant strife with Fortune: instead, they must adapt to times and find the best method suited to overcome difficulty in that particular time (i.e., a leader who is naturally patient and cautious may find that certain situations call for rashness and recklessness). “Like a woman, Fortune is always a friend of young men because the are less cautious, more courageous, and command her with more boldness.” Fortune is considered the opponent to political order, often leading to conflict and misery. Only through careful observation, preparation, and ability to adapt (virtu) can a leader avoid fortune’s pitfalls. How do Machiavelli’s descriptions/definitions of virtu and fortuna compare to your modern understanding of the words virtue and fortune/fate? In your opinion, how do these concepts feature in contemporary politics? Arts & HumanitiesEnglish