Humanities: core concepts and applications

¶ … individualism: Boccaccio, de Pizan, & Machiavelli's discussion on the dynamics between society and self

Machiavelli, Boccaccio, & de Pizan

In the political treatise entitled "The Prince," political theorist Niccolo Machiavelli provided his own standards and list of qualities of what a model and effective leader of civil society should be. In introducing the leader identified as the Prince, he discussed the nature, character, and philosophy this model leader must have, in order to have a Utopian-like civil society.

Meanwhile, in the literary piece entitled, "Decameron," author Giovanni Boccaccio delved into the social issues that plagued Italian society in the 14th century, a period of transition as the Western world prepared itself for the eventual development of what would be the Enlightenment Period, which also led to the creation of the Renaissance movement. In this literary work, the dominant theme discussed was the continued tyranny and control of the Christian Church in Italian society, which curbed the nation's chance to develop not only intellectually, but most importantly, socially.

Both Machiavelli and Boccaccio's works have mirrored the social landscape they found themselves in during their time. Both their works were written in a period wherein Western society was plagued with socio-political conflicts: Machiavelli's piece reflected the transition in leadership in Italian society, while Boccaccio's was created when the Church was considered the most powerful institution, not only in Italy, but in the whole of the Western world.

Given this historical contexts, it is interesting to note that Machiavelli and Boccaccio shared the same objective when they wrote their pieces. Both authors proposed rules and conditions or situations in which unity, peace, and harmony can be achieved in civil society. While Machiavelli proposed asserting one's individualism as the key towards creating the ideal leader (in the persona of the Prince), Boccaccio highlighted the fact that civil society has the power to dominate over oppressive institutions such as the Church.

For Machiavelli, his political discourse was a criticism of previous leaderships that Italians had over the centuries. "The Prince" provided people with information about the desirable and unpleasant realities and strategies essential in governing civil society. For him, rules must be set by the Prince so that the ideal social order will be achieved. This means that the Prince, as an individual, must assert himself and enforce regulations that would be beneficial for his state's stability and security from enemies.

Asserting the Prince's desires was acceptable, according to Machiavelli, because he is the only individual qualified to govern over civil society (in accordance to the qualities Machiavelli had also enumerated in the discourse). It is "necessary for a prince wishing to hold his own to know how to do wrong, and to make use of it or not according to necessity," primarily because "it is necessary for him to be sufficiently prudent that he may know how to avoid the reproach of those vices which would lose him his state..."

In effect, the Prince asserting himself is desirable because he is the only person capable and eligible of knowing what is good for the civil society. Hence, in Machiavelli's viewpoint, change must be induced by an individual for the welfare of the majority.

Although Boccaccio shared a similar objective as Machiavelli's, he proposed social change not through a powerful individual like the Prince, but through the individual himself/herself, or the citizenry, members of the civil society. In "Decameron," he demonstrated how society itself is powerful enough to expose the corruption, hypocrisy, and tyranny that the Church committed against Italian society. By portraying the members of the Church (the clergy) as more sinful than ordinary people, he laid bare the fact that this powerful institution is actually vulnerable to criticism, and has a very fragile structure, which could break anytime if society wants to.

For Boccaccio, the rules do not involve any strategy or trickery of the people, just as what Machiavelli proposed in his discourse. In "Decameron," he made it apparent that people can be empowered simply by adhering to the universal norms of morality and humanity, values and traits that, unfortunately, were not strictly adhered to by the Church. The Church's hypocrisy, corruption, and tyranny and perceived weakness of the individual to abolish these was the message reflected in the introduction to his literary work, wherein he stated: "Wherein is contained, how hard a thing is, to distinguish goodenesse from hypocrisie; and how (under the shadow of holinesse) the wickednesse of one man, may deceive many..."

Morality and virtue in the society: Social and political perspectives from Niccolo Machiavelli and Christine de Pizan

Niccolo Machiavelli and Christine de Pizan were both proponents of the emerging active socio-political theorists and writers between the 15th and 16th centuries. This period was considered the Western society's transition period in establishing a new world order, one wherein intellectual development was valued equally or greater than the teachings and principles depicted in Christian doctrines. Among these people who became proponents of the new intellectual movement in Western society were Machiavelli and De Pizan.

Comparing Machiavelli with De Pizan, the latter was considered more orthodox in her discussion of feminist politics in her discourse, "The Treasure of the City of Ladies." Machiavelli discussed his political treatise solely through logical (philosophical) and political arguments, contrasting De Pizan's line of reasoning, which hinged not only on reason, but also on religious beliefs and teachings. In sum, Machiavelli's arguments bordered on the political perspective while De Pizan's feminist analysis was primarily religious in her viewpoint.

These differences in perspectives are important considerations in understanding how Machiavelli and De Pizan viewed their realities, particularly on the issue of morality and subsistence to specific human virtues. This paper argues that morality have different meanings and interpretations for Machiavelli and De Pizan. Machiavelli believed that the rightness or wrongness of intent and action are dependent on the outcome or "end" of these, while De Pizan asserted that morality is bound by social norms -- particularly norms as decreed by the Church's things and principles.

"The end justifies the means" is the famous credo that Machiavelli stated in his political discourse, "The Prince." In it, he argued how innate goodness must not be cultivated in the Prince's character, for it is through the individual's innate goodness that makes people abuse or take advantage of him/her. Goodness is ideal, yes, but in the case of the Prince, goodness must be used strategically and not all the time. What the Prince must possess, according to Machiavelli, is wise judgment, in order to ascertain whether he must act and behave kindly or badly to an individual or his people (sovereign).

A reflection of Machiavelli's interpretation of human morality and virtue was discussed in the section, "Concerning cruelty and clemency, and whether it is better to be loved than feared." In it, he argued:

Upon this a question arises: whether it is better to be loved than feared or feared than loved? It may be answered that one should wish to be both, but, because it is difficult to unite them in one person, it is much safer to be feared than loved, when, of the two, either must be dispensed with. Because this is to be asserted in general of men, that they are ungrateful, fickle, false, cowardly, covetous, and as long as you successed they are yours entirely; they will offer you their blood, property, life, and children, as is said above, when the need is far distant; but when it approaches they turn against you. And that prince who, relying entirely on their promises, has neglected other precautions, is ruined; because friendships that are obtained by payments, and not by nobility or greatness of mind, may indeed be earned, but they are not secured, and in time of need cannot be relied upon This passage demonstrated how Machiavelli distrusted human nature, especially its propensity to take advantage of goodness. This also provided an insight about the author's attitude towards humanity: evil and wrongdoing happens because people are simply not capable of acknowledging goodness and returning it with the same degree of goodness. Thus, people would always consider you as a wrongdoer whether an individual has committed good acts and behavior or not. With this wisdom in mind, Machiavelli's Prince must cultivate the belief that human nature tends to gravitate towards unjust actions and other forms of wrongdoing against others.

In effect, morality was an impediment, a hindrance that would only cloud the judgment of the Prince, resulting to potentially unwise or unsound decisions that will greatly affect his sovereign. This line of argument highlighted Machiavelli's credo that the end justifies the means. It is not important whether the Prince thought highly of his people; rather what is important is that he serves as an effective and efficient leader, constantly ensuring the welfare of his sovereign and security of his leadership. Machiavellian leadership is, therefore, impersonal and highly logical in its perception of humanity in general and outlook towards governance and leadership.

De Pizan, on the other hand, offered a different way of looking into a political issue, especially if this issue involves an important sector in the society: women. In her discourse, "The Treasure of the City of Ladies," De Pizan contemplated how human society had developed the psyche and perception that females are inherently inferior to males. This issue was borne out of the author's observation how literary and scholarly works portray a common stereotype of women as subversive to men, depicted as uneducated and not able to create decisions for themselves. In the words of Pizan, "learned men" tend depict women through 'wicked insults" about their behavior. This drove her to investigate and know the origin of this perception and wrong portrayal of women in Western societies.

Through the help of the different "Ladies" in her discourse, Pizan was able to trace the wrongful creation and institutionalization of women as less incapable of creating and expressing sensible thoughts about relevant and significant issues and concerns in their society. One of the early arguments presented in her analysis was discussed by Lady Reason, whose explanation of women's submissiveness as rooted in their religious, particularly, good moral upbringing:

..if she finds out that some words have been said against her...she will nevertheless not be perturbed about it nor will she regard it as a great crime....Nor will she ever for her high rank bear a grudge against anyone who has done her a great injury... The excellent lady will suspect that in some way she may have deserved it, and so virtue will provide her with the teaching of Seneca, who says, speaking of princes and princesses or powerful persons, that it is a very great merit in God's eyes...For whoever does not bear patiently the wrongdoing of another is impatient and proves that he is far from the fullness of virtues.

Basing her arguments about women submissiveness on religion, Pizan had shown how, because of their morality and virtue of humility and selflessness, females were considered inferior to males. Her arguments were characteristic of the religious belief that there lies a greater gift or reward for those who are willing to sacrifice themselves for God's will.

Though Pizan's arguments were not as strongly rational in its analysis since it utilized religious principles and teachings to explain and justify her assertions about women submissiveness, her observations were realistic and indeed, true descriptions of the life of women during her time. For the women sector, religion plays a significant role in their lives because it is through it that they receive understanding and strength to make sense of their reality -- that is, being treated derogatively by the males in their society. Pizan's political discourse also disclosed her belief that having morality and virtue is more important than social status alone.

Machiavelli and De Pizan on Gender Role Differences