Pico Della and Niccolo Machiavelli's Arguments on Religion and Theology - Essay Example

Religion and Theology Introduction Niccolo Machiavelli is well known for his philosophical contribution in religion and politics. The complexity of Machiavelli’s ideas made it so difficult to understand most of his (Machiavelli’s) messages. In most cases, Machiavelli appeared to be contradicting his own self to many people (Pico 119). One thing is however clear, that Machiavelli stood to explain the role of humanity both in religion, leadership and politics. This paper aims to analyze two seemingly contradicting Machiavellian quotes- “he holds the intelligence and the general character of the masses in contempt” and “public opinion is remarkably accurate in its prognostication”- as brought out by Pico Della Mirandola in his “Oration on the Dignity of Man.” Pico Della Mirandola and Niccolo Machiavelli Both Pico Della and Niccolo Machiavelli even though with different opinions about humanity are credited to have revolutionized philosophy from superstitious centered points of view to a more open and easily acceptable point of view. Both Niccolo Machiavelli and Pico Della viewed humanity as important, but in varied manners (173). The most points of diversion between Pico Della and Machiavelli about humanity was on leadership, authority and power. Moral weakness, laziness on one side formed the basis of humanity to Niccolo Machiavelli. On the other hand, Pico Della viewed humanity in terms of character and honesty. Moral weakness and laziness to Machiavelli applied in his theory of continuity. Machiavelli at no point believed that continuity in authority could be achieved by honesty and good character. To Machiavelli, if the results were desirable and had meaning to the people, then it did not matter how those results were achieved. Pico Della on the other hand, however argues that being honest with humanity was the very best way of achieving continuity in leadership, authority and power. According to Pico Della, involvement in inhumane acts to achieve results meant nothing but failure (400). The question however is, based on the following discussion, did Niccolo Machiavelli contradict his own principles and beliefs or not? “Holding the Character of Masses in Contempt” In his work The Prince Niccolo Machiavelli is quoted severally as saying how he disregards the masses in terms of their opinions, decisions and beliefs. Political philosophers can be said to have had a shared view in their analysis of authority and morality and was not left out (317). Machiavelli quotes, “it seems that in all the actions of men, besides the general difficulties of carrying them to a successful issue, the good is accompanied by evil.” To a greater extent, this quote tries to expound on how philosophers viewed authority. Rulers were originally advised that in order to pass the authority in good spirits to the following generations, they had to have some moral standards. This view was mainly based on the belief that power always lay with the masses who judged by results. The masses had the authority to do away with leadership that oppressed them and a leadership that was not willing to yield to their demands. To Machiavelli, however, people did not understand the authority and the power that lay within them. With the same lack of knowledge, people kept on giving authority and power to people who did not deserve it. Based on this argument, Machiavelli doubted the capability of the masses when it came to vital political decision making. In the Renaissance, it was common to find wise leaders giving back to the people; laying hopes for their future generations to keep on with the good spirits (507). However, with the perennial way in which the masses embraced bad leadership, it was inevitable to attract criticism from the philosophers. Pico Della Mirandola’s Interpretation Pico Della Mirandola is renowned for his remarkable analysis of philosophical quotes. Most Pico’s works were based on his admiration for man and human kind. According to Pico, God made no mistake in creating man and putting him in charge of other creatures. Pico quotes, “Who would not admire a man, who is called by Moses and the Gospels "all flesh" and "every creature," just to show his (Pico’s) admiration for human kind. Pico Della Mirandola was out to counter any philosophical criticism of human kind. First, Pico argues that, grounded on his contradictions and the unsystematic manner in which Machiavelli put his ideas, maybe Machiavelli did not consider himself a philosopher. Also by doubting the decision making capability of humankind, it was predictable that Machiavelli crossed lines with Pico. Against the belief of everybody, however, Pico did not take an expected strong stand in his arguments against Machiavelli (437). Pico interprets the Machiavellian quote in a more positive manner. First, Pico implications are to understand the context from which Machiavelli argued. To Pico, it is true that human beings were created with weaknesses. Originally, Pico argues that leadership, authority and power do not belong to humanity, but to the creator. Leadership, be they good or bad was an act of the creator and could not be questioned (277). Pico further explains that the quote must have come out of the frustrations that Machiavelli was subjected to emanating from poor leadership. If only Machiavelli understood religion, then maybe he would have toned down his criticism for humanity. “Accuracy of Public Opinion in its Prognostication” With the belief that “the end justifies the means,” Machiavelli gave very little credit to the participation of humanity in leadership. However, Machiavelli comes to stun his followers when he suggested that if the public opinion forecasts what comes to be reality, then the prognostication can be considered accurate. To some extent, Niccolo Machiavelli contradicts his earlier stand that human view was not vital to authority bearing the content of the quote "public opinion is remarkably accurate in its prognostication.” The literal interpretation of the quote "public opinion is remarkably accurate in its prognostication” can be that if at all humanity took power and authority seriously, then humanity would be capable of dictating the means (589). Machiavelli as well implies that humanity had a role to play in leadership, but only if they were aware of the power that they possessed. Apparently, the quote bears a doubtful tone, meaning that Machiavelli was in no way sure if the opinion of the public will actually prove accurate at some point. In the quote "public opinion is remarkably accurate in its prognostication,” however, Machiavelli does not give much about what is “accurate.” The analysis then gives a benefit of doubt to Machiavelli- objectively. Pico Della’s Interpretation Pico Della does not in any way agree with the opinion of Niccolo Machiavelli who does not give so much weight to the opinion of the public. Even though Pico Della also agrees that public opinion counted in the success of any authority, Pico does not agree to the limitation of the importance of the public opinion only to an accuracy (577). Pico argues that if the opinion of the public was inaccurate, but shed light or gave rise to other issues, then such an opinion would be considered equally important. It is however important to note that Niccolo Machiavelli’s beliefs tend to answer some religious issues in the social perspective according to Pico Della. Even though the quote "public opinion is remarkably accurate in its prognostication” tends to support the participation of humanity, the quote does not give weight to the fact that religion had a huge travesty of language and social issues at this time. Opposing the opinion of the public seemed to Pico Della as an opposition to religious and social beliefs. Further, the opposition to the beliefs of the religion signaled failure in Pico Della’s argument. The statement according to Pico Della also tended to divert and unsystematically exhausted the original arguments of Machiavelli which rendered it unbelievable. Pico Della can somehow be believed with a closer analysis of another Machiavellian quote in the form of “The nature of the masses, then, is no more reprehensible than is the nature of princes, for all do wrong and to the same extent when there is nothing to prevent them doing wrong.” In other words, according to Machiavelli, the opinion of the public could not deter the authority from performing any task; be they right or wrong (613). The opinion of the public was there to be heard and listened to in Pico Della’s view as opposed to the view of Machiavelli that the opinion of the public could only be listened to if they were “accurate.” Conclusion Based on the discussion herein, both Pico Della and Niccolo Machiavelli had concrete and believable opinions about humanity. The only differences between Pico Della and Niccolo Machiavelli came in the form of how to involve the participation of humanity and the populace in authority and leadership. As Pico Della emphasized the participation of the populace, Machiavelli gave the participation of the populace little importance to leadership and authority as witnessed herein. However, from the discussion herein, it is true to conclude that critical perceptions of religion and humanity have not been put into consideration in the humanitarian philosophical analysis. Work Cited Pico, della M. G. Oration on the Dignity of Man. Washington, D.C: Regnery Gateway, 1999. Print. Read More