Questions - part II - Essay Example

In this paper, we will focus on two philosophers; Boethius and Machiavelli. Through examining the two philosophers, we will be able to understand the main tenets of the ancient modern debate. Part A The main tenets of the ancient modern debate revolve around several differences on the subject of human nature. It is clear that different philosophers have presented diverse thoughts and opinions regarding the so called human nature. Building on this point of view, there has been a developing code of ethics emerging from such theorists and what people accept as true in the present day.

It is worth examining Boethius view points on the subject and compare them with Machiavelli’s accordingly. Part B From a literal point of view, Boethius’s most excellent known work is referred as the consolation of philosophy. He wrote this work whilst in prison while awaiting his execution. Boethius finds himself in jail. At first, he is profoundly upset. The cause of his suffering emerges from his enduring project, effort to conserve ancient classical knowledge, specifically philosophy.

His work represents an imaginary conversation between himself and philosophy. In that case, philosophy is personified as a woman. The arguments in this scenario are that, in spite of the apparent disparity of the humankind, there is, within platonic fashion, a high power and everything besides is secondary to such divine providence. Despite Boethius suffering while in exile, it is recorded that philosophy appears and attempts to “cure” his suffering. Philosophy, which is personified as a woman, does this in various ways.

First of all, she does this by reminding him of what he once knew about the true nature of human beings; the nature of fortune, the nature of happiness, and the limits of politics to provide happiness (Boethius 49). In Boethius’ argument of the nature of fortune, happiness, and the limits of politics to provide happiness, he agonizes over the professed inappropriateness between the subsistence of God and the wickedness that exists in the earth. What is more, he agonizes between the existence of God and the superficial ethical inversion of the creation.

In responding to such issues, Boethius declares that God’s kindness and God’s obligation to honesty does not necessitate that God get rid of every instance of evil. Then again, Boethius presents argument that there are at least different examples of goodness that appear to have need of the likelihood of some wickedness, ethical education with regards to the free will of humans and the true nature of happiness. Moreover, Boethius presents an argument that the nature of evil as self-destructive to wrongdoers and the nature of the ultimate good as the one which, every person naturally look for, an indication that the earth is not decently inverted.

As a result, Boethius would dispute the reality of premise in the modern formulation of the issue of evil (Boethius 54). In his argument for the compatibility of the subsistence of God with the continuation of evil, he provides explanations as to why God would allow occurrences of evil and not do away with them. As a character in the Consolation, he seems to take consolation in such discoveries. Reflecting on the above discussion, it is worth contemplating that the lady philosophy brings to a n end the dialogue with both caution and encouragement, “