Kevin ZhaoProfessor JanaraPoli 340

From Earth to Heaven

Like Thucydides, Machiavelli keeps his feet firmly on the ground and looks calmly at the inescapable miseries and evils of human condition. Armed with extensive knowledge of the past and numerous historical examples, he navigates his way through the chaos and contradictions of human affairs to come up with the practical way of governing and building a lasting society based on the maximization of advantages. Augustine, after examining the transience, grave evils and absurd injustice of the human world, decides to look beyond the earth and build an image of an all-knowing, morally perfect God and an incorruptible heavenly city where humans can find lasting peace and happiness (Augustine, p148). Because of their fundamental approaches in deal with the imperfection of the earthly realm, Augustine and Machiavelli differ sharply on their views of morality. In particular, Machiavelli upholds a utilitarian notion of morality based on the imperative of doing what the circumstance demands in the dangerous, uncertain earthly realm while Augustine advocates an absolute concept of justice and virtues that is free from human interference. Also, Machiavellis emphasis on the influence of fortune on our lives tells us that we have to sacrifice our moral integrity and adapt to the changing conditions while Augustine argues that we should always remain faithful and live dutifully according to Christian virtues because there is one universal unchanging God that will provide everlasting happiness for us in the afterlife.In the book Prince, Machiavelli reveals himself as a thoroughly pragmatic thinker who emphasizes the necessity of gaining power and advantage in an unpredictable world that is consisted of a vast majority of fickle, morally flawed individuals. The distrust that Machiavelli shows for the morality of the populace is evident throughout his writing. In the world that Machiavelli portrays in Prince, most individuals are described as calculating, self-interested and corrupt and therefore not worthy of being treated virtuously as he writes, but since men are wicked and will not keep faith with you, you need not keep faith with them (p54). Machiavellis pessimistic view of human nature and morality can also be found in his other book Discourses in which he remarks, men never do anything that is good except when forced to (p93). This Machiavellian world resembles that of the amoral Darwinian world of struggle for survival where self-preservation is the only ultimate goal and the standard by which we measure our successes and outcomes of life. The ruler can choose either to adapt to the present conditions of the world or perish. Morality is useful only in so far as it advances the interest of the preservation of oneself or the society. For Machiavelli, morality is equated with the imperative of self-preservation because practicing moral virtues without compromises does not work in a morally corrupt world and will only result in our destruction. This argument is quite compelling and relatable to most readers since our virtues depend upon the very condition that we are kept alive and free from dangers that may threaten our life. Machiavelli employs the word destroyed to highlight the primacy of self-preservation in a society full of morally corrupt individuals. As he writes, any ruler who relies simply on their promises and makes no other preparations, will be destroyed (Machiavelli, 52). Both politics and the state of nature operate on the same principle of power, self-interest and survival in an anarchic world. Therefore, in order to rule over people and preserve the existence of society, the ruler has to rely more on cruelty rather than benevolence, fear rather than love, and deception rather than honesty. Here Machiavelli reveals himself as a highly utilitarian thinker who advocates the so-called vices only to the extent that they are beneficial for the preservation of the state and individuals. As Machiavelli argues, the ruler should aim only to inspire fear among the populace and always avoid hatred, which will cause his own demise (Machiavelli, p53). Similarly, as Machiavelli shows in another example, it is appropriate for a ruler to be moderately compassionate by imposing cruelty on a few individuals and using it as a deterrent, but excessive compassion will only cause disorder and more harm than good (p51). Therefore, the maximization of the happiness in a world where every action has a trade-off seems to Machiavelli a sensible and morally justifiable principle. This is related to his claim that we should always take actions that have the fewest disadvantages (Machiavelli, p100). On the other hand, the Christian philosopher Augustine, who is more concerned with the absolute, eternal notion of virtues that can only come from God, places less emphasis on the practical necessity of self-preservation in this world. Augustine states that everyone should live virtuously in this life, but we should only do so in accordance with the Christian teaching and for the purpose of attaining eternal goods in the afterlife (Augustine, p211). Unlike Machiavelli who tries to confront and solve the problems of the world diligently with practical solutions, Augustine, recognizing the inherent insignificance of human striving and the vulnerability of human morality, invents a heavenly city where men are incorruptible and the good is everlasting. While Machiavelli admits the fallibility of our moral characters and tries to manipulate them for the advantage of ruler or the state, Augustine chooses to bypass the messy state of human affairs in which the best and most virtuous individuals can be corrupted. As Augustine asks, And who is so utterly wise as to have no conflict at all with his lusts? (p145). Therefore, Augustine can also be called a moral realist who recognizes the irreparable state of human condition, but unlike Machiavelli, looks to heaven instead for an answer. Specifically, Augustine argues that since no human being has a moral character strong enough to live virtuously, we need intervention from God who can persuade us to voluntary poverty, continence, benevolence, justice, concord, true piety and the other bright and powerful virtues of life (Augustine, p211). Machiavelli is concerned that virtuous rulers might suffer from evil or death when they are excessively benevolent, but Augustine would respond that while preservation of earthly goods including the life of mortal beings is important, the end of life in this world is not the end of it all and we will gain immortality and eternal happiness in the heaven. Augustine remarks, only evil people obtain transitory and earthly goods and only good people suffer the same kind of evils, then such a situation could be referred to the judgment of God, which is just and even kind (Augustine, p166). It can also be interpreted from Augustines point that the fear that judgment of God creates in the minds the people drives them to act more virtuously in this life so that they will avoid eternal punishment. This is again a pragmatists view but based on a religious and ideal premise. Furthermore, contrary to Machiavellis belief in overcoming evil with evil, Augustine, being a true Christian, advocates the Christian virtue of conquering evil with benevolence so that the evil-doer will be afflict with guilt and repent (Augustine, p207). Using the argument of a moral realist, Augustine explains that the reason that we should return evil with good is for the benefit of the earthly city, namely the earthly peace (p207). On the contrary, Machiavelis emphasis on self-preservation does not solve the problem of evil. Also, if we all choose to endure the evil we suffered instead of seeking revenge, then our actions will contribute to the increase in the number of good and the decrease in the number of evils in our society (p208). This argument is quite compelling and utilitarian in nature. Therefore, according to Augustine, practicing benevolence can never harm us because it contributes to the increase in earthly good in the long run and in the chance of obtaining lasting heavenly good. In addition, the premise of an all-powerful God and the day of judgment that Augustine establishes implies that good people can live a virtuous life in accordance with the commands of God without worrying about the dangers that might cause the destruction of their lives because they will receive eternal good from God in the afterlife. From the perspective of Augustine, a ruler might lose power or his own life by exercising excessive virtues, but he will be justly compensated in the afterlife. What is important is not desire for security and power in this life but faith in God. As Augustine succinctly puts it, in action, no one ought to love honor or power in this life, because all is vanity under the sun (159). Machiavelli asserts that because the world is unpredictable and fortune interferes with our plans, we have to adapt to our environment, which means that we have to be ready to change our character. He writes, and so, the cautious man, when it is time to be headstrong, does not know how to act and is destroyed. But, if one knew how to change ones character as times and circumstances change, ones luck would never change (Machiavelli, p107). Again, Machiavelli equates morality with utility and the urgency of self-preservation. Augustine, on the other hand, argues that the best way to live is to always hold on to ones belief in God and truth and be willing to die for ones belief as he writes, the latter, not resisting, were killed so that they might teach that dying for faith in the truth is a preferable victory (Augustine, 224). This is a proof of Augustines disdain for the perishable earthly good and faith in the everlasting good in the afterlife. Morality is therefore for Augustine a form of unconditional belief in an external power and the exclusion of self, which is the polar opposite of Machiavellis sense of morality that centers on self-preservation. By comparing the two divergent views of morality of the two thinkers, one might be likely to favor the more pragmatic argument of Machiavelli because of its relevance to this world and our present state here and now, but on a theoretical level, Augustines argument seems to be more appealing as it vastly expands the boundaries of our thoughts and possibilities that are not constrained by our context. One has to note that Augustine is not encouraging resignation and idleness in this life, because in his philosophy, one is required to live virtuously in this life in order to attain heavenly good. Augustine is only opposed to earthly good when people see it as an end in itself. As he writes, Godgave to mankind certain goods suitable for this life (p155). Although Machiavellis notion of utilitarianism and preparation for the caprice of fortune are practical and compelling, his philosophy remains grounded in this imperfect human world, which for Machiavelli is an end in itself since he sees nothing outside of it. As a result, trapped under the myopic struggles for power and the darkness of our earthly world, we find our sense of morality vulgarized and we become incapable of seeing the nobility of perfection. On the other hand, the humane and morally uplifting philosophy of Augustine can be seen as a source of consolation and hope for all the poor, downtrodden and forgotten people of the earthly world who may one day receive eternal prosperity and happiness in the heavenly city. The moral purity and perfection of God can serve as a source of inspiration for individuals who wishes to emulate his boundless virtues, which can over time lead to an increase in the number of good individuals and peace, thereby accomplishing the same goal as the plan of Machiavelli. As Augustine remarks, if it is said, honor your father and your mother, God commands it (Augustine 136). The power of authority God projects therefore compels us to live dutifully and virtuously.

BibliographyMachiavelli, Niccolo. Selected Political Writings: edited and translated by David Wootton. Hackett publishing company.Augustine. Political writings: translated by Tkacz. Hackett publishing company.