Discussion Starter: Machiavellian Epistemology

Both The Discourses and The Prince are treatises on epistemology; more specifically, a detailed discourse of knowledge pertaining to political science and sociology. In both texts, Machiavelli relays his perception of the field of gaining and sustaining power and the nuanced field of statehood with all of his acumen and experience. Because almost every example that he describes is a mixture of history, theory, and use of personal judgment, Machiavelli’s strategies appear both valid and meticulous. He describes every possible predicament that could befall a state and the different outcomes that may occur based on actions and decisions of rulers and the nature of the principality. It is easy to believe Machiavelli because he is straightforward, unabashed in his sometimes unpopular opinions, and articulates everything pragmatically and logically. The tactics and situations he proposes can thus be understood by a wide audience, even if they are only appreciated by a smaller group.

Whereas The Discourses relies more on relevant historical examples, The Prince utilizes more conjecture and tactic, but both are equally as credible. The Prince persuades readers of its truth with its pragmatism, rejecting the notion of idealism in political theory. This is seen in both how Machiavelli obtains the concepts of his strategies, via observation and analysis, and in how he applies it, via direct application based on the current political situation of a principality and its ruler. For example, when describing ecclesiastical states, Machiavelli examines Italy’s past international affairs and involvement by the popes to deduce a theory on ecclesiastic power in the state. He concludes the nature of the relationship between ruler and subjects in an ecclesiastical state (secure and happy), a sociological factor, by comparing histories of different European states. Thus, Machiavelli arrives at suggested strategies and concealed characteristics of states by analyzing his own observations of historical, sociological, and epistemological phenomena. Any idealized theories are disregarded in favor of practical strategic devices that have been proven to work in varying situations. This practicality endows The Prince with authenticity.

Machiavelli’s texts act as reservoirs of knowledge. They are collections of observations and analyses aimed at improving the knowledge of others, presenting a flow of knowledge from the world itself to Machiavelli to the reader. Though his texts appear objective and entirely educational, The Prince and The Discourses diverge from other typical informative texts in their obvious role of guidance. The knowledge is present and straightforward, but the historical anecdotes and observations are relayed with a purpose that represents a distinct category of epistemology. These facts may be articulated or construed differently if they were in a different epistemological context, such as a book of knowledge of the same subject, but lacking the purpose of giving the reader advantage in ruling. This is to say, intent must be factored into the understanding of objective or subjective discourse that ostensibly seek to purely convey knowledge.

Machiavelli also aims to alter the political climate with epistemology. More than one factor influencing another, they are mutually affected. Through his account, he attempts to bring change to the politics of Italy with knowledge that was previously underutilized or unknown. In this way, political science and epistemology are reciprocally affected. What is the significance of this relationship? Does one evolve because of the other?