Welcome back to the new Thinkery. I'm David Barr and with me as always is Alex Brieu. I'm David. And Greg McBrayer.
So today we're gonna talk about chapter 15 but before of Machiavelli's Prince but before that gets underway we've had a lot of listeners writing emails. We haven't released this episode yet but about the Hawk this update so I'm still I also do about the Hawk. Yeah yeah but it was indecent so I actually went to what that email about the Hawk was about. I guess I'm like I'm like yeah but but here's the update so my mother and and wife scared this magnet.
Hold on. The way you said that made it sound like that was the same person. No different people. It's shameful.
I'm sorry. They're different people. Got it. All right.
Isn't that what Kriya said or Cali's? Yes. Cali's. Cali's.
Cali's. Anyway back to the Hawk. Pull this to the hybrid. So they scare away the Hawk and your mother-in-law and your wife scare away the Hawk.
They scare away the Hawk because they're upset that the Hawk's been ravaging this family of bunnies and it has. It's amazing. I'd never seen a Hawk in person that close. It's just a magnificent bird and the kids were loving it.
They didn't really know what it was about but they were loving it and so the squawk the Hawk goes away the Hawk comes back that really pissed off and then they go to the store and they come back with a plastic Hawk and I'm like what did you guys do? And it's this massive thing that they got from the stuff from like the construction store whatever Lowe's but it's a massive plastic Hawk and we guys what are you guys doing with this plastic Hawk here. I'm like well it's gonna scare away the real Hawk. We just put it in the backyard and I was like oh yeah and I read the directions and that plastic Hawk is meant to scare other birds away and so what I'm hoping is that the real Hawk comes back tries to meet with the plastic Hawk and I somehow capture it.
Speaking of mating with plastic birds this might be a good transition to Greg's single life. Back in the day. That's good. Alright listeners.
So we're starting off on this relatively light note today we want to do something a little bit different so in our previous episode we gave a kind of synoptic view of the Prince. We want to do a bit of a deeper dive today on chapter 15 of the Prince title of those things for which men and especially princes are praised or blamed and the way that this episode will unfold is I think akin to the way that Alex and Greg might teach the Prince in a seminar and it's essentially going line by line the text and this is kind of this will be a hopefully a master class class for idiots on how to read a good book carefully but really I think for our listeners who know this book well it's hopefully kind of will serve as an illumination of some of the darker corners of this pivotal chapter. That sounds about right Greg. Yeah so at the end of the last episode I just thought and we've been talking to three of us and thought it would be kind of fun to do this sort of line by line.
We'll see if this is successful and if it is maybe we'll do it for other texts but yeah sort of how we would do a class and what I've noticed in some of the conversations that three of us have had that the dialogue that three of us have seems to produce new insights for me so we're gonna take a really close look at chapter 15. I guess I would say just a few things by way. Let me show it because I always forget this. If you guys you know obviously please rate our episodes subscribe tell your friends but also drop us a note on whether or not you liked this approach to kind of the episode.
We won't do it every time but we are striving to kind of mix up what we do here on the new thinkery so we may do deep dives one day and maybe an aerial view another we may just have an actors come in or just talk about Hawks and their meeting practices. We're thinking about new things now here on New Thinkery. So just let us know if you let us know. We have an actor.
That's right what is it Alex? It's at the New Thinkery and the email is the new thinkery at gmail.com. Our teams are open. Our teams are open.
Everybody knows what that means but I just know what that means. I will say I learned today that the Twitter burn has a first name. Did you know that? No.
What is it? Larry? Guys guys it's just gonna be up. Alex is a dosing.
Sorry. All right let's get wrapped down to brass text. So let me just I'll just mention a couple things before we jump in. Three things I want to mention first is that I'll speak for myself.
Alex can say something to you and David you were about I don't think any of us is pretending to novelty here. I mean we've read widely in the secondary literature and so some of the insights you may have heard somewhere else and we're very much a derivative or secondary in that regard but hopefully our conversation will produce something new. Second point we're in the 15th chapter which in the last episode I laid out when I think there are the three main parts of the prints. We'll see this very quickly in the text but we're now in the third part which is how a prince should behave with respect to subjects and friends.
Last point we're using all the three of us are we're all using hard VC man's fields translation. I'm sure we'll provide a link to that somewhere somehow University of Chicago Press. I have an also to have a couple of translations. Andy just if we get stuck on something nice sometimes find it helpful to look at them.
I have Paul Paul Alvarez and Angelo Cotevia's handy. I don't read Italian although sometimes I check some words Alex do you read Italian? He's drinking. Okay and so the body of this work is in Italian the chapter headings are in Latin.
Maybe we can talk about that one or not but I think maybe I'm just turn that's yes that's important to know actually that chapter headings are all in Latin. The body is in Italian so it means it's in the vulgar tongue more widely. It's a very light accessible. It's a very light night Italian.
There's a lot of it's not like yeah if you look at it a little bit I'll often look at the Italian just to pick out words to see what exactly I do but there's there's certainly there's certainly lots of sort of line words and even sometimes line efforts and things like that. There are literally I have a list here but I won't share that with everybody. There are Latin phrases that actually occur in the body of the text. I think sometimes he does it kind of tongue in cheek like to make something sound a little more official or something like that.
So is this the key that was this is just the Italian of Machiavelli's day was kind of infused with line or was he writing okay well here's my guess so I've actually got let's see roughly off top of my head here it looks like in two-thirds of the chapters he uses an Italian phrase or adverb so he'll say for example in Latin sometimes it's just and in Latin or and also the longest Latin phrase occurs in chapter 17 where he says the harshness of things in the newness of the kingdom compelled me to contrive such things and to keep a broad watch over the borders that's all in Latin. So I just the church the church is language so I think there's some play going on there for this work but I mean we should have somebody on who actually knows these things a little better but you know Latin but I think we can just turn to the text David take it away okay it's the first sentence. So I was walking down the street sorry sorry I'm sorry and the new thing has been cancelled. No no I have a telly blood.
Is that true? Is that last time? Yeah from Nevada from Northern Italy that's right my mom had a dual passport. Okay Italy the EU and in Paraguay so so the three two I guess that's no she's never US citizen okay wait this is getting personal now okay so here's the first sentence right okay it remains now to see what the modes in government of a print should be with subjects and with friends yeah so there's the first sentence and we're gonna try and go line by line see how this goes that language to me sort of confirms what I said last time that we're now moving on to a new subject so I began with chapter 12 Machiavelli begins by saying having discorched on the types of principalities now we're gonna talk about arms or military so that marks I think a new beginning here the first sentence of 15 I think marks another beginning so chapters 12 through 14 we're talking about enemies how a prince should deal with enemies I'm speaking loosely in chapter 15 how a prince should deal with subjects and friends our audience if you've read some of my killing other modes seems to be an important word that recurs throughout the prince you have anything else there else I would also emphasize the word remains this is similar shift at the beginning of 24 when he says when the thing was written above yeah which if this is what remains then why is there a fourth division I think obviously answer is the fourth divisions are kind of concluding three chapters and so I think this would be signaling in a way the peak of the inquiry you can say before it gets down more towards his practical concern or his his desire to see Italy unified can I back up a little end of work break in order here but the title of the chapter those things for which men and especially princes are praised of lands this is there's an indication on the chapter title that this chapter is not simply about not simply about princes but simply about how human beings as such should act and last time we talked about how one of the key things Machiavelli is doing is trying to really reorient radically the moral world in the West and I think that here is this is the chapter I think a reason we chose chapter 15 folks on is because we took this to be the parody map chapter that does that and you see here that often you'll see people interpret Machiavelli and say no no he's just talking about how princes ought to be these nasty things and here in the chapter heading I think you see we're not limiting ourselves to thinking about what princes ought to do it's things men simply ought to do things which men are praised and blamed and because I know that many have written of this I fear that in writing of it again I may be held presumptuous especially since in disputing this matter I depart from the orders of others there's a second word that he's so well-known from the princes orders orders yeah so in the first sentence modes the second sentence orders and what was the distinction there it's funny when he says I'm not holding Machiavelli anyway presumptuous using these words that I can't recall having come across prior to Machiavelli so what's he doing it's a great question I take modes to be a lower level modes are something that princes make use of orders or a higher level thing that princes are instituting if this like this language right here in the last clause of that sentence I depart from the orders of others I think that recalls chapter 6 where he talks about the highest and most excellent types of princes as being those who ordered new principalities so they've brought new sort of peoples into existence he mentions Moses Cyrus Romulus of Theseus so I will go ahead just a couple of points there and you jump to the end of that sentence I'll start there and work my way back there I think this is a circumlocutous way of saying something much more daring than the white says in a muted way in saying that he devarts from the orders of others I take him to be saying I am setting out and establishing new orders and there if you do look back at chapter 6 where he says nothing's more difficult than putting oneself ahead of introducing the order you get I think last time we talked about how Machiavelli has this enormous self-regard in this world historical idea this enterprise this world enterprise Machiavelli sees himself as trying to establish a new order on par with Moses Cyrus Romulus these if not even greater so jump in the house yeah just on the distinctions we modes and orders and I please don't know Machiavelli well enough to know what this bears out but when I think of a mode the word is obviously related to mood right or you know it's a manner I think I think of a mood or a disposition or a kind of tactic adopted I think this is important especially in this chapter when we start talking about moral categories being cruel at the right time I'd be considered a kind of mode when kind of adopt wears an order seems less fluid or flexible but something founded as you were saying right in chapter 6 something that's static so one's a bit more emotion once more grass one way to think about at least with these words just seem to be to meet on the face in the presumptuous part I don't understand sure so in the use of the word fear I don't yeah there's a bunch here so presumptuous first this seems to me to echo the language of the letter dedicated to him so it seems to be presumptuous because what sort of person ought to write on these things right now it's princess all right so it seems to me to indicate a kind of restart to the book as well or some indication we're starting again but things are getting more important now it's kind of indicated we're actually getting to the view things right now the fear is interesting Machiailla does do it we take this as ironic are we taking a sincere maybe he did publish this anonymously as Alex mentioned last time and so maybe maybe that fear can be mitigated to some degree because I know many have written of this this is I mean this sounds therefore just like the very beginning the letter sounds very conventional again so I'm saying nothing new many people read about this is probably presumptuous of me except I might be departing just a wee bit from the orders of others and so I mean I I feel free to jump in here but for me this is sort of showing you that he's restarting again so there's this sort of feigns conventionality I would say that's gonna be radically dropped here in just a moment and even has already dropped at the end of the sentence I depart from the orders of others yeah and I would yeah so I mean it's obviously in establishing new orders right as he's saying here and departing from what other people have written about how to relate to subjects and friends which is to say you know past political and ethical thought a kind of fear overtakes him that he overcomes which I think would indicate that the primary virtual of a philosopher from Machiavelli would have to be something like courage right a kind of riskiness a risky undertaking a risky revolutionary project I only bring that up because I do think you see this on other early modern thinkers where there is a kind of willingness to put their head on the line for what they consider to be something of you know great good to mankind to humanity that's debatable whether that's actually the primary virtue I think but I think that is a modern trend these guys present himself as courageous to see you have to share sure move on sure and but since my intent is to write something useful to whoever understands it is appeared to me more fitting to go directly to the effectual truth of the thing into the imagination of it I think there's a few things here that are really important especially with the next sentence should we bring the next sentence because I think they go really well yeah I agree so and many have imagined republics and principalities that have never been seen or known to exist in truth but it is so far from how one lives to how one should live and he who lets go of what is done for what should be done worms his ruin rather than his preservation yeah so I mean the thing that I think this is you know this chapter one of the reasons we're reading it right is because it's very crucial I think for understanding how Machiavelli is a kind of founder first modern a founder of majority right and when you see something like this getting down to the brass tax to for self-preservation I do think of course you hear hints of Hobbes here right thinking about philosophy as useful as something that can have an effect or be practically efficacious that's certainly a very modern I think way of thinking about the truth I think that's right I'm just going to emphasize again from the previous on sport move on right he's the part of me where's by the season he sees himself as a reorder things are going to change and how are they going to change in the way that I was just indicating it seems although previous and I'm inferring a little bit here previous writers on this topic have written things that are imaginary and so by the way I guess this is probably something also the point he didn't mention previous writers I'm talking about foreign fairs maybe there's something maybe there's something less ambiguous about what what not to do with foreign affairs maybe the only comes in domestic politics and how one of the one's life personally right me the ancients Plato and these guys even as much as they talked about nobility and honor and virtue they still recognize that then for affairs the necessity of sort of doing some nefarious things right I mean the entire education or print and republic excuse me is about educating warriors to defend the place they recognize and for affairs perhaps these things it's only here what that we start to see all right here's where I'm really departing from the orders of others it seems to say that he's was enough of a master to take care of you know I think that's right but you know what I don't maybe this is a question for later if we have time is I understand the criticism I understand lurking behind Machiavelli's comment implicit criticism of say Plato but I don't understand how this would apply to say Aristotle but but anyway that could be for something I mean I'm sorry no I think David's question is important because and he gets at something really significant here he distinguishes the imaginary from the effectual along the ought versus the is right and that that's a I think an initial signal that he's going to be critiquing morality pretty systematically as he goes on to do that's one thing and I think the you know it's very easy to be an artisan in the Republic but to be a philosopher king right that's what breaks the glaucon's ambition finally in the Republic I think you could say the same of the great old man like this peak of walvary to you see him in Aristotle's ethics and I think when you look at that you see what's demanded of that it does seem like an impossible ought like an imaginary ought I think the Greeks would agree with that right they would see that there's a kind of impossibility here but they wouldn't write off wholesale the distinction between higher and lower in their political flossing the way that you know Machiavelli does even in Aristotle's best regime which is not unambiguous it seems like there at least three different ways in which he uses that phrase right the simply best regime I think is imaginary and maybe it best be prayed for in their soul's language so it's even even the politics which seems to be so much more realistic than the Republic still holds up a standard for regime that may not be able to be achieved right and I think another thing I emphasize here when he's talking about how men actually behave we need to keep in mind what he said in the past year and what he's about to say this idea that human beings are by nature acquisitive and afraid this fear and greed and I think if you can reduce all and obviously this is looking forward to you know hops right where life in the state of nature is nasty British and short much like one of my ex-girlfriends actually and I think we do you know for it but when I think you when you would do all human beings to one or two passions I think obviously we're waiting to do this basic stuff politics can become scientific if you have natural right where there's different soul types as you do and say Plato then you have three tears in the government you have to try to manage that that's where the noble like was in the class system and everything and it gets very complicated right but if you can reduce human beings or convince human beings that this is all they are and right reduce them to these passions now you can have a scientific study of politics it's a keen and modern science to what Adams do right Adams are basic stuff the same everywhere and now that you have that everything is built like legos I think the same to be said occurs in Machiavelli and even more strikingly in Hobbes is political philosophy.
This is really good how we complement one other my mind's going in an entire different direction so we read two sentences the very first sentence but since my intent is to write something useful to whoever understands that common. Well here is something last time I think Alex rightly pointed out that this book has been very has sometimes been described as a job application but I think even a cursory reading shows that to be sort of silly. Here I think Machiavelli clearly indicates his audience his audience is not Lorenzo Medici his audience is not even simply necessarily differences or potential princesses his audiences whoever can understand it so that it's a different type that he's writing for that's his primary audience I think that's important to know I mean maybe other thinkers of his caliber for example right people who are capable of understanding. I would add to that I think this yeah and this also supports the idea that this is our way he's now getting to the peak of his thought.
Yeah is this all now? Yeah yeah it's only now that he's turning to this issue that he is forced to reveal or that we're going to really see at the heart of how what he's doing is is for philosophers. I think we also then have to ask well then what is his intention with respect to those readers who can't understand it right I think we touch on that a little bit with some of the imperialism stuff I think it talks about that last time but no I think that's important to emphasize is that we're reading a kind of philosophical core and just reading this as a movement I think you're out you're absolutely right here the previous 14 chapters have been building and building and now here it is I'm going to reveal it to you know the language and the final chapters actually invokes sort of revelatory language here it is here's the useful part this is really important but just if you can just understand it. Yeah and here's this phrase a factual truth just so famous so Greg you know use it in a sentence for listeners using Alex's appearance and truth and the a factual truth and then maybe bring it back to my appearance.
Well anything you want to just a little hang in for sure here's here's something I will give I will talk to students about right how many of you could explain how a microwave works or explain how your how combustible engine works or explain how flight works without even the most intelligence businesses can explain why gravity is I think the answer is no but you know me I know how to use a microwave I'm very effective with that I can be effective in the world if I just worry about the effectual truth and don't worry about some sort of grander conception of truth some sort of eternal beings floating in the sky like if you just focus on what we can actually control and manage you can be much more effective in the world that's I think what Mikey really has in mind that's what sorry I was more one more bit here on this I heard it said so maybe one of our listeners can correct us that this is how one might have translated the effect of the the effectual cause from air fishing policy efficient policy from aerosol at the time okay if you look at aerosol's taxonomy of the four types of causes yeah Machiavelli is saying I think we are focusing on the efficient cause and this focuses therefore on the primacy of founders and politics right because they're the ones who are affecting it they're bringing it into being there the Alex touched a lot last time on the question of matter and form and that the founder of the efficient cause is the person who can give form to matter so we are so much people issuing teleology or things we're calling it kind of physics there's weird stuff in the background of this book yeah I think the and the word effectual comes from the land fuck you right from the principal fuck you thank you trust me I remember middle school you know land this is true I don't say this is this true I don't you're saying yeah yeah the principal part I did is is fake F E C I it's also where the word fact comes from yeah the part of both is fucked right so thing done so an effectual truth is a truth that has to do with doing or the things that come from a deed or something that's done and those are in a way the facts of the matters the the bear deeds you could you could say absolutely one thing I would also add to this is that I think there's some ambiguity about how effectual is modifying truth one way I owe and my initial way is to take it as a great set right this is the truth that allows you to accomplish something right you want to know how the microwave works to start you know poking the buttons this way but I think there's another way which is sometimes if if people believe certain things to be yes it can be a factual yeah and I think one sign of my lucky socks for example yeah yeah and that sometimes or like a placebo yeah and I think there's there's now we don't want to push too hard on that because it seems like a little bit of a distortion but then when you notice that Machiaelle often contradicts his rules and yet we found those rules to be infallible right he subtly pointing at poking holes in them I think he's showing you even the ways writing that hey these truths these rules I've shown you they're also sort of only true because they're having an effect on you right it's enough if enough people believe it it's enough to move them dumbbells feather but why don't I am I'll take us to the next two sentences before you want to make sure you did read a sense of many of the magic of public's principalities no that's that's next okay got it well why don't you go then right I don't know did I read that or an I read that in a sentence that follows I think he read ruin rather than his preservation I think he read the that's where we stopped good that's my thought so I'll just mention a point about the republic's principalities and since this is important for me in my own studies here so we've already alluded to the imaginary republics the most obvious candid obviously is played with the republic but I think it also like includes Aristotle and later Aristotelian platonic the oblithonic conceptions of the best regime the second one principalities I mean for a lot of readers this will be completely obvious but when Machiaelle goes through the various types of principalities in the first chapters and says that's it this is all of the types of principalities he's therefore excluding other principalities is obvious semantically and logically maybe he's therefore excluding other kinds of principalities I think most important one in this context would be the kingdom of heaven he denies that anyone has ever seen or known that heaven exists in truth and so this may be just a circle background to why we want to focus on chapter 15 from the start for me this is this is the central idea here if you think about the West in 1500 what are the two what are the twin sources of morality in the Western world right the Bible on one hand and Greek philosophy on the other and if you go back to that second sentence where Machiaelle says he's departing from the orders of others I think he's he's putting up his real opponents and his gun sites here the Greeks on one hand and the Bible on the other they are both bad guides for life if you live your life according to the principles of Plato's Republic and other writings it will lead to your ruin exhibit A who's the hero of the platonic dialogues Socrates how did he how did things turn out for him his he was ruined he was executed by the state you want to live your life according to other sorts of Western civilization the Bible well how do things turn out for the hero of the Bible Jesus he was ruined as well from Machiaelle's point of view and so these are bad guides for how to live your life yeah but their names are forever famous yes no question and and so in a certain manner speaking I think we talked a little bit about this last time this is this is why Machiaelle finds an impressive and why Machiaelle wants to imitate them he wants he sees what Socrates was able to affect any see effect and effect will true and he sees what Jesus was able to affect so I think we talked a little bit about this last time but the trick or the question of the problem from Machiaelle is how can he imitate the success of a Socrates up from Jesus on one hand in their successes but avoid suffering the fate of a Socrates or Jesus that I think is the trick and there's a lot of ways in which he does it for us one is anonymity yeah the solutions also posthumous publishing yeah that's definitely part of hard to come so you're ruined when you're dead that's a huge part of it no question but the other part is he's relying on right I'm writing to whoever understands it he's relying on other people taking up his task I think and he's I think he's very self-conscious of it so he can't do it on his own okay so let me move forward yeah let's move forward so I'll read the last sentence again in chapter 15 two paragraphs rather lengthy just two of them since this is closing out the first paragraph for a man who wants to make a profession of good in all regards must come to ruin among so many who are not good hence it is necessary to Prince if he wants to maintain himself but learn to be able not to be good and to use this and not use it according to necessity first thing I'll say is you were there's one of the first times I've heard that sentence read without stumbling over to be able not to be good because it's such a strangely what is it yeah yeah reading things out loud for sure one thing I would say is by reducing the shit to the is right he moves therefore from you know to evoke Aristotle from the voluntary from choice right down to necessity and they're with right from the good as well right the profession of good in all regards right so not in every respects can you be good you can be sort of good ends up being paired with those so the is is paired with necessity I mean I'm always looking at this with an eye to how is he you know re-wrenching our understanding of you know the world and of necessity a man I think the idea that being is understood so in terms of necessity and political things too and not in terms of choice is is important here I'll just say I think common sensibly people not approvingly if you weren't to say this is nastily as he says it might I mean we have a phrase nice guys finish last I mean so so common sensibly people sort of into it that this is right I mean if you're gonna be good it's gonna cost and I'll even go further I would say I would say the moral man precisely as moral man wants there to be a cost it's it's not that he's good and therefore he's he's ruined or there's something bad that happens to him it's that it's morally good precisely because of the potential for something bad to come in I realized that somewhat paradoxical and maybe I haven't I know that I have a flush that out fully worthwhile but if I think that Machiavelli is pointing to I believe that more man holds I think he's pointing out that that's a little bit of a it's a little bit of intention with itself and he's he's picking one part of that tension and trying to amplify it so one hand I believe morality is good for me and I believe rally is bad for me and he's trying to exaggerate the badness of rally for me to get me to only focus on those things that would be good for me if that makes sense yeah it's it's it's morality is according to the way you're putting it good because it's bad right yeah it's good to to go into to be courageous why because you're gonna risk your life yeah it's good to be moderate why because you don't get why is it's you so so in all those respects where there's a kind of there's a and I mean this is why praise and blame and honor you know pervade the moral books of the ethics and he's pushing back against that but I would also go a little bit further though and say even though he is pushing back against that and taking this kind of immoralist turn we we do have to keep in mind he wants to write something useful right not for him right he's dead when he when he's publishing he wants something useful for somebody else and so there is a kind of and he's doing this with some fierce and trepidation and therefore exhibiting a kind of courage himself so it's not wholly immoral there is a kind of moral impulse but it is a sort of yeah it's definitely a different kind that has to do with reordering things such that you know humans in their base their desires can be satisfied but you mentioned that there's a kind of courage that he's making having recourse to as he writing this but isn't that courage kind of mitigated Alex and when he publishes a posh mostly I mean he's what the risks he's he's dead as you mentioned what risk is there to Machiavelli that's good real risk of reputation which is what you brought up yeah the martyr Machiavelli I don't know he was captured with me after he was tortured in his lifetime and just even having these papers about his philosophy would be cause would be you know what I'll just say one thing for one next paragraph the common misunderstanding or common misreading of Machiavelli is that we have to learn how to be bad period we have to learn not to be good period he says we have to learn to be able not to be good and to use this and not use it according to necessity so this is sort of a little we've been really emphasizing how immoral Machiavelli is but you have to do the good thing sometimes right you have to use the good and you can even say he's and he does this later in the chapters that follow where he goes to the point is that he even say he's pointing a finger at the writer of these imaginary public say Plato Aristotle I think we haven't mentioned him we should also mention a custom right and so what imagine of course would be the city of God the Kingdom of God but I think I think he would say look I understand you want to make a a principality republic that fits human beings at their best right you want something that cultivates their virtue that perfects human beings you know natural functions or works their erica and turns them into virtues right you want to do that because what it doesn't work it doesn't happen right and all you do is leave people to ruin they can't fit that so there's a kind of base level of acquisitiveness right and a kind of fearfulness that takes over in the midst of battle that makes people be overcome with lust and you know and transgress these these these moral bounds and so long as you focus on that you're actually doing something that's that's quite immoral I think I will say I mean hopefully people can see this dialectic we keep going back and forth but there's a kind of moralism and a root of that right I'm really saying I mean there's a strange way you can read this where it sounds hyper moral you guys who are telling people to be good all the time are leading into ruin I want them to succeed I want them to flourish and so stop being good all the time your life will get ruined I mean it's I realize I'm putting a lot of stuff that he's not necessarily saying but just the idea here that this will actually lead to you not being ruined I mean it's as though he's saying he's caring for people stop sacrificing your own good and start getting well he also wants with just a view to political expediency and in efficacy it's it's what I think this is where you get the progressive's can get tripped up because it's these it's what it's they're trying to effectuate an imaginary republic with many of their policies even something certain sure and I would and I would just add you know you know along those lines that it's because he has this revised understanding of human nature has this revised understanding of of the political community and to back up your point we brought this up last time but just because I think it's useful here I don't think you're reading too much into this because he does you know go on to say that being merciful to the extent that people want you to be merciful is actually cool right that's right being being cool to an extent that may be a you know a pretty awful person wants to be cool isn't going to help you either right so he is clearly his standard is clearly what allows for kind of safety right and a kind of stability and maybe we can move on sure okay so this is second paragraph of chapter I'm sorry one last thing sorry for myself I was poor myself over and that the the things for which princes are praised and blamed I think here again the idea is that these are what are commonly accepted these are what are conventional it's not what's truly good and so these things that are leading to people's ruin these people who are leading their lives based on what they what is held to be good right things that are praised and blame he's I think he's part of what he's doing is showing us that those things that you believe that are good are simply praised they're not simply good if that makes sense right right okay sorry next paragraph so I can we're paying by the minute yeah I want to add another thing but go for it go for it no no one thing I wonder just as we're talking about this is he doesn't say I mean he said he's making distinction between the should right the audience but he doesn't dispute that that is that how one ought to live I mean maybe I'm maybe I'm making too much of this one live because I'm thinking back to this effect truth right because the sexual truth you said is in part you know the quote unquote truth that just happens to move people right the fake news versus the real brass tax the thing nobody wants to say right and I think oftentimes you know I think we said this last time that you know Machiavelli charms you with his daring right with the things that he says and it's a kind of seductiveness and a kind of beauty that is sometimes somewhat imaginary right it's not always as as pretty as he makes it look you know they're how his machinations work so I do wonder whether he is kind of pushing us down pushing man into this or pushing us into this view of human nature precisely because when he's talking about imaginary Republicans talking about Christianity which has led to a kind of why repulsions I always take him or republic sorry no why republics I'm asking yeah I take a bit talking about I sort of it that I caught me for me is ancient Greek and Roman republics and Christian principalities I don't get my missing something there I mean this is I teach this and I'm not there a ton of my missing a Christian or public thing that I should be thinking of or is it or are we talking about city God we're talking about this power me God's the king right it don't push your politics on me pal I mean he's talking about ratings so yeah okay start start start good that's a very good point so the Republican politics city of God who else the book of revelations right yeah maybe yeah well my own hobby horses that this is against the epistle the Paulina pistols yeah yeah no I think that's a good case to be made oh yeah actually we'll get that next paragraph probably some of the adjectives are some of the qualities do line up well with some of the qualities that Paul D'S noted for some of the qualities that bring them either blame or praise this is seems to me to be a simply empirical statement yeah I've noticed that when people speak about human beings and prince especially princess the qualities that they speak of typically are things that for which they are blamed or praised right so think of anybody you think of from history and this is it's true right Caesar was a was a courageous military man a brilliant strategist strategist he's a strategic and a lot of things is an honest is a great singer right so we're weird I don't know that's true or not by the way I'm trying to stay here I think Greg is Greg is I think I guess no it's on this yeah I spotify play let's keep going oh so the point is I mean this seems as a simply empirical statement of fact that seems correct right when everyone speaks of men and princes we typically talk about qualities that were blaming appraising I mean this almost sounds like this be out of the rhetoric we're praising something that's right we're attacking that's right that's just seems that seems actually true to me yeah I think I think one thing you might want to emphasize here is that this is a comment about how things are obscured right oh okay right we so somehow the imaginary things obscure this fact yeah so or this is the way the imaginary obscures things right so we praise and blame people for being liberal or being a voracious right okay or patience cool or merciful whatever it is right and that's how we judge them is by the praise and blame the qualities that are of public public goodness or public disrepute right okay yeah which is not to say that right so what he's going to do is show you how those things that are praised and blame actually have a different reality and so I think what he's saying here yes that that are sort of public opinion and the way we point fingers are applauding people only shows us so much of that I say right does that make sense that so when we go ahead talk about someone we note only what is that interest to us no of course yes I took yeah very fun so I took to be saying so factual statement when people speak this is what they do that's not to say that their words are correct yes cut and that is to say that that therefore if there's anything else about them you might you will not see it just by taking your guidance by that praise and blame sometimes categories that are publicly blamed are in their being their imagine to be good but in their being very bad with excessive mercy or mercy can we also say this comes from some of the other chapters over that a prince can have some control over the things that are said about him his reputation in other words yes yeah yeah it's not very much it turns out yeah yeah okay but in all this is pass rate one consider we're gonna get this in that but considered what people think this that is how they're spoken of so on so forth all right let's get to it okay this is gonna be long that's what she said Greg it's a family I can listen to listen to your kids anyway and this is why someone I think my headphones cut out I didn't hear that I said that's what she said that cut out again so that's what all right and this is why someone is considered liberal someone mean using a Tuscan term because apparitious in our language is still one who desires to have something by Ray Pine mean we call one who refrains too much from using what is his someone is considered a giver some were patience someone cruel someone merciful the one a breaker of faith the other faithful the one a feminine and second pronounce this word pocellane mussus usel animus the other fierce and spirited the one humane the other proud the one the shivius the other chased the one honest the other astute the one hard the other agreeable the one great the other light the one religious the other unbelieving in the like perfect these are incredible dichotomies so I'm gonna start a list of any of these ones to be the three straws in some of this podcast if any of us make the list whatever help refrain from making a joke I wanted to make lisivius there we go yeah I've been able to pronounce pocellane mussusus usel animus I can't do it anyway I believe that there's an insult that's a shortened derived version from that word that you may know from seventh grade I'm used to install your friends it's actually not to write from that I think it's derived from a certain animal but no no this is very obscure Italian land I'm sure that seems like the much more like we can't all right I'm gonna start simple and build up so Alice and sure he's inside so much more that this is a higher law start very simple when I first thing that first thing that first thing when I read this it's true I mean you're gonna be thought of these things deeply I hope when I first thing when I read this the first time I read it and as I as I every time I read it the first thing I do is try to figure out if there's an order here so for example someone's liberal someone's mean okay so go back to the chapter title those things which men especially friends to praise and blame so I'm asking okay which one would we praise the Prince for which one would blame a Prince for I'm gonna just take us to have this this is a tentative hypothesis okay so liberal yeah that seems right sure that seems like something we might praise a Prince for mean no we would praise we would blame a Prince for me okay good next one let's see someone's a giver and someone's rapacious I'll come on giver it's got to be the praise and rapacious has to be playing and so I go through this I'm like okay so praise blame praise blame this makes sense but then someone cruel some mercurial on the earth seems to switch there now we're now we're blaming praise so I go through it's like well first it seemed like maybe it was a nice need order all the praises first and then blame second but as you go through it the order gets kind of confused and you ask maybe this list isn't as neat as I thought it was at first so that's my first step out of jumping yeah I would yeah I think so I think you know one way to view that switching back and forth is that it's a kind of sign of how he's gonna really mix up these words their actual meanings and I would connect that to his linguistic reflection his parenthetical linguistic reflection about how the meaning of words change right yeah so he says I'm gonna use the word mean it's a tussic term so that's very yes sorry go on a varo avaricious in our language it's still one who desires that something by repine right to take while we zero mean we call one who refrains too much from using what is it so he's trying to clarify I'm not talking about theft so what I think he might be slowly indicating is that not only is he he's gonna mix up these categories and therefore he's going to give words new meaning so if we're talking about his loads and orders I would suggest it has something to do also with the language or a new way you mean find words that's beautiful I couldn't say better myself so the next thing I would do after I realize that it's mixed up in this way and I'm a counter it seems to be a way this drive one of my good friends here by the way professor English and I read together he's a literature professor drives him nuts the way I read because I'll start counting and ask it's clear that he thinks that I'm taking something beautiful and destroying it by dissection so one thing I would do here is okay so we have we have these correct to describe so yeah maybe sometimes I'm on the show we can show how angry he gets at me for my sort of stupid ways for your naughtiness so I would count how many there are and my initial count comes out to eleven pairs academic reg this is exactly the first question I asked you oh you did yes what did you ask me anybody why did you take the Lord's name and that seems sorry sorry sorry it's okay but anyway I asked if anybody needs one's religious the other I'm believing the ones less civius you know which one that one is what were you gonna ask about the number I apologize for interrupt yes so you made the list no no no I wanted to hear yeah yeah so I'll just say the following my first list comes up with eleven right and then I think myself self what's the significance of what I'm not listening I just just to for the audience here what Greg is about to unfold is what causes people who admire the hermeneutics of Leo Strauss to come under considerable attack so pretty awesome Greg really messes this up or or he uncovers some of the beauty in the tax let's see how he does go on Greg no it's not like a play-by-play let's get an answer let's go back down and see how he's going so he's gonna line this up all right so here's my first crack at it I can take a break right now I'm gonna take a little I'm sure no I won't get too much in the weeds I'm playing great relax damn it all right so I count eleven pairs do you count eleven pairs am I a win same page yeah I think some of them are blurry yeah I'm the second count is 10 why is your second content I can't I can't count well that's a good question so as I count this I try to count him like how many are there you literally get 11 when you recount them it's possible that the first pairing is repeated liberal and mean might be repeated as give her in repacious because the connection between avarice and repine right so that might be the same now why does that matter I'm getting 10 11 well there's a significance I believe this is gonna be a little bit a little bit a little bit numerological but I think it connects with what we went before and so insofar as it confirms and is consistent with our earlier analysis I think we're on solid more solid ground we're not on simply solid ground we're on solid ground so here's what I have mine so if it's 11 why is that never significant well and the incoming key ethics Aristotle comes up with 11 virtues so earlier we mentioned that one of the one of the key targets for Machiavelli was the ancient Greek so this would confirm that Machiavelli in this muddling that Alice just laid out so beautifully one of the things he's trying to do is muddle the ancient Greek conception of virtue now 11 that explains 11 but if we're at 10 how do we how do we explain 10 and the obvious candidate there for me is well the Bible gives a list of 10 things one ought to do a little life well the Decalogue so here again with his 10 or 11 lists of qualities I think Machiavelli again is letting you know that he has in his sights the Bible and Plato slash Aristotle yeah I mean it's another way to do a similar conclusion I think I'm one thing I focused on with the list in the number I start to see weird things happen like Raker of the Faith and Faithful but then he's the one religious the other unbelieving and maybe one could try to make a decision but it's hard the one honestly other student is hard to distinguish which one is what does that mean yeah honest I sometimes has the sense of kind of foolishness I speak to honest but also grave and light is kind of different similar to hard and agreeable and so I always like to eventually just come down throughout my hands and say and the like the like they're all like right which is to say that that you can distinguish into many virtues the way that the ancient state the way the ancient had to right the distinctive mark of the classes in the city and speech in the Republic writer moderation courage and wisdom these are virtue for each class and so because there are different types of people you'll have different virtues and volume you can do that or you can reduce it and so in chapter 19 he begins by saying after he's gone through a few of these he says I want to discourse on the others briefly under this generality of avoiding contempt and hatred so I think he's he's trying to say you can go through these one by one but above all the most important thing is avoiding contempt and hatred and if you can do that you've reduced them this is again just to get back to my point that I like to make about Machiavelli and you know that a lot of early moderns if you can reduce human beings to sort of basic passions and keep them on sort of on the sort of same level all of a sudden it gets a lot easier to work politics but that might that might first require persuading them that this is what they are that would be again another way of looking at the factual truth from two angles I've two small points one small point one maybe a little bigger on the list of 11 your idea that this list could be different it could be bigger it could be smaller we could grow it Aristotle else you remember I don't remember but I know I'm pretty sure that the number of virtues that he lists in the Udamean ethics is not the same as the income key and ethics no idea yeah I think it's a different list so that's my point so even Aristotle this guy who goes to 11 they're different in different book yeah but the second point is to agree and echo with what you said about chapter 19 I think that by 19 he said you kind of get the point I don't need to go through the rest because they're all the same and here's I just want to confirm and take a different route that confirms what you just said regarding why he moves on so that the last sentence of the first paragraph which we write you have to learn to be able not to be able to use this and not use it according to necessity so the way when I teach this the students I sort of walk through it and I think okay so should you be liberal or should you be mean and they sort of confused and then I sort of get them to see well maybe sometimes you should be liberal maybe sometimes you should be mean maybe the answer just to the chase is that sometimes you should use liberality and sometimes you should not use it according to necessity and if you can bring that point home then all of these things are things that sometimes you should use or be and sometimes things you should not use or be sometimes you should have you should be your patience sometimes you should be a get-with sometimes you should be cool at other times you should be merciful sometimes you should be a feminist and pusillanos and sometimes you should be fierce and spirited sometimes I should be a feminist pusillanos anybody out there I was this me may find sorry to leave because I was not always the hulk of a man that you see before you I mean you are now so yeah but I was a bit of a wimp in junior high school and I recognized that sometimes there was an advantage to playing that up that sometimes people would leave me alone so playing up that smallness of soul or lack of man is it's something that actually makes sense you never played dumb right I mean so even things that are obviously weaknesses anyone's or disrespect right or King David from chapter 13 yeah sometimes it makes sense to pretend to be less than you are that is also a proven thing to do and that sort of fun thing to get students to see that sometimes you should do these things that seem like qualities not really would quickly dismiss no no even those qualities sometimes you should pretend to be you know what it would allow to dissy as to to you know to take back his home right to go back to Ithaca was pretending to be a beggar that's wrong and I think one could draw a connection right there I'm not suggesting Machiavelli has the obviously in mind it had no sense that well he does have he does have David mind I'll talk about it for you but I do think you know he plays a kind of a dissy as beggar type at the beginning of his book hiding his security completely really certainly that kind of a feminine quality do you mind if I go to Jesus I'll sit with me miss yeah no question I can go back to David just a moment he this is the only biblical example he uses in the book the prince and in that example I mean the way that he mischaracterizes the story leads you to go back and think through what's going on so in the in Machiavelli's retelling David has a slingshot in the knife but in the Bible he never not get a cane or a staff excuse me and so when I went back rereading this passage from the Bible I sort of thought what I might be like this change what's going on and then you think to yourself what's the what I changed from a life to a staff and when you read the story David I'm sure you remember this from Sunday school I out sent her you to go Sunday school you wouldn't but when when David approaches that's a joke in my existence you'll see why not are real listeners know why that's right are real really really so anyway when David goes to approach a life he has a slingshot and the staff and I've always been puzzled by this I'm in Sunday school asking about this and the best I come up with the best answer I received from others was that the staff was a symbol of his being a shepherd or son let's do it who bring a symbol to a fight but you know but then I thought about it is Goliath says to David do you think I'm a dog that you're coming at me with that sign right and so it's clear that it's clear from the basis of the Bible that David is using the staff as a decoy to lure Goliath into close combat so that he can hit him with the stones from slingshot and so even King David and by the way King David also pretends to be mad at a certain point right yeah awesome versus example and so even King David sort of pretended to be something weaker than what he really was so that he could be victorious and so I think that that's perfectly mindful what I was doing here yeah I agree for sure should we should wrap up the whole paragraph yes I think you know we've got a little over but I think really got his great detail I think so I should mention by the way that David thing the Robert Alter translations really helped me I think it drew my attention to that possibility yeah and now they very helpful and he's finished the whole to knock which is wonderful I just bought it yeah okay so let me let me take us out chapter 15 and I and I know that everyone will confess that it would be a very praiseworthy thing to find in a prince all of the above-mentioned qualities that are held good but because he cannot have them nor wholly observe them since human conditions are not permitted it is necessary for him to be so prudent as to know how to avoid the infamy of those vices that would take his state from him and to be on guard against those that do not if that is possible but if one cannot one can let them go on with less hesitation and furthermore one should not care about incurring the fame of those vices without which is difficult to save one state for if one considers everything well one will find something appears to be virtue which if pursued would be one's ruin and something else appears to be vice which if pursued results in one's security and well-being yeah we show up we don't want chunk there's so much in there I think a very rudimentary point that's probably you know obvious to listeners but with noting is appears to be virtue appears to be vice this is a sign that he is changing the meaning of the word right so again another linguistic a suggestion here a very small point we mentioned Latin earlier and furthermore like four five lines from the end of paragraph is in Latin just a small point the religious language everyone will confess that a prince these kinds of things a moment ago I mentioned that all of these qualities a prince should use and not use according to necessity there seems to be one exception there seems to be only one quality I think I think that a prince always ought to have and that's prutes which seems to be the judicious use of these qualities according to necessity yeah yeah that would be the meaning of the like right right if they're all somehow alike and there's avoiding hatred and contempt that's somehow what makes them all common then there wouldn't be virtues there would be virtue and it would be the virtue of prudence understood as what allows you to keep your state preserve your rule and and not come to ruin specifically by not becoming too hated for the things that appear to be vices that give one infamy so let me push back a little help me understand this but both of you how is this an improvement upon Aristotle and in Aristotle's use of the concept of prudence he's the first to really introduce it as a virtue and I don't understand it and so I'll stop very no no that's a great question now David I think very simply very very simply everything is everything is subordinated to concerns your own security and well-being for Machiavelli here so it's the prudent use of all of these qualities even even vicious qualities apparently blame for each other so for Aristotle prudence is always will do aerosol at some point another time I'll give the sort of superficial view of yourself for Aristotle prudence is always bound in some way by the other one over to you so if you have a capacity to quickly figure out how to achieve your end Aristotle distinguishes a kind of cleverness for prudence that Machiavelli doesn't make that distinction and there's no there's no morally good morally bad use of prudence prudence is simply the ability to use things according to necessity that will lead to your security loading reputation for vice-adand yeah that for me that's it for me I agree I agree I think I mean I would suggest that that prudence ends up he initially tries to tie it to more over to and then it kind of breaks free I think maybe we should table this question might be good to have a conversation maybe it's a follow-up to this on courage in the ethics because I think it's it's pretty explicit there or you can pretty much see it clearly there and that would be a good counterpoint to this this Machiavelli understand sure let's do that but I do think that I do think that reduction to prudence is absolutely the case but it's definitely a prudence focused on security which I don't think either a notion of prudence in in Aristotle has that sense unless unless we think of the prudence of Machiavelli himself maybe there's a similarity that he he avoids publishing his work till he's dead and so that he can still enjoy a kind of contemplative life of a certain kind yeah you know the other thing I wanted to say but before we do it just the last deep dive into the section is for a chapter whose heading promises so much it seems that we get so little so I'm picking this up in my palazzo and I'm like okay those things for which men and especially princes are praised and blamed I'm opening up and I'm okay this is gonna be great I'm gonna get a list and I'll say all right Don Barr do not do this do do that this is how you hold power like here's here's mine you'd be nothing but a beggar in my palazzo and I am and but Machiavelli doesn't do that he gives you lists of opposites but he doesn't tell you when and then he kind of says well there's this big prudence and a sexual truth of all the blind you're kind of left like well what was I expected a blueprint what it seems a little odd right I guess I a question or maybe a comment and then I kind of I at least have one way that maybe we could try to end this or wrap this up I don't know if it's successful but look it's not worth a talk isn't I hope not although the audience probably is really deeply invested in that at this point look David I think you know going back to that very the very first paragraph in the what second sentence a third sentence he's writing something useful to understand I mean I think that when we're perplexed David when you're perplexed when I read this and don't get it I want that list I don't I don't immediately put myself in that category people understand and so it sort of pushes me it urges me on to figure out what more does Machiavelli have to teach us and I think that you know reading and reading this book I must have read it 50 or 100 times at this point it's gonna be very helpful so I hope we've at least scratched the tip of the iceberg to try and figure out that's not I just mixed in any event I hope we can kind of we've at least laid the groundwork for trying to answer some of those questions can I have a silly question to end on maybe no this is helpful for it we've all read this book many times we've taught it we've written about it this is a this is David just raised the question right this is supposed to tell us how it lives is it changing anything for you either of you how do you mean well this is how you live your life yeah I mean I read early modern thought I mean it has an incredibly because you can you know as you read it more and more and you see what's right it has a kind of alienating effect on me at least where I start to realize how you know all advertising is a fear and greed right that you know the economy makes me worried about money and my health you know and all that sort of stuff I do see how it does it but then you read this and you realize that's part of life a necessary part of life absolutely is right about that on some level but it's an exaggerated necessity I think you know Mansfield in one of his essays makes a point that there's might be something of a myth of necessity going on here kind of exaggeration of how much necessity plays a role in our life it's the goddess for tuna you can say right and I think that noticing that helps me think a little bit differently about my life but you know at the end of the day it's it's really I mean you're right it deeply informs how we think about things yeah I am I this book leaves me cold frankly I'm sorry I don't know what to tell you I've never I mean when I sit down and read it with thoughtful people it comes alive but rhetorically it doesn't charm me or seduce me in a way that Nietzsche would or Xenophon would his muted Gemma Faunes his beautiful muted charm go read Greg McBrayer's translations Xenophon the best book ever but but the prince just doesn't do it I mean it takes I thought you were religious it takes it takes effort by purely human hand it takes effort in the book seems it's very transactional almost it's like look you want this look you better chase down like so anyway but I'm in the minority speaking speaking speaking of this I'm willing to speak in sort of transactional nature please subscribe to our podcast please tell your friends