Metis and violence in Machiavellian political theory
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14195/1984-249X_21_7Keywords:
Cunning rationality, Hubris of violence, Metis, Political power, PrudenceAbstract
The quest for winning and preserving political power in Machiavelli’s The Prince is led by the bellicose version of the pre-classical and mythological concept of metis or cunning rationality. In opposition to a domestic version of cunning rationality, understood as the rationality of the weak, Machiavellian metis is a prudential and deceptive rationality of the strong. Bellicose cunning rationality does not, however, prevent the prince from falling into the hubris of violence, and does not avoid undermining cunning rationality itself. Our article evaluates and circumscribes the contribution, as well as the theoretical and practical limits of the Machiavellian bellicose cunning rationality.
Downloads
References
ADAM, J. 1902. (ed.). The Republic of Plato. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.
ANNAS, J. (1995). Prudence and morality in ancient and modern Ethics. Ethics 105, nº. 2, p. 41-257. https://doi.org/10.1086/293699
ARENDT, H. (1954). Between Past and Future. New York, Penguin Book.
BAKER, J. (2009). Violence for equality: lessons from Machiavelli. Global Crime, 10, nº. 4, p. 306”“319.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17440570903248197.
BENNER, E. (2014). Machiavelli’s Prince: A New Reading. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
BLANCHARD, M. (1984). The Lion and the Fox. Politics and Autobiography in the Renaissance. Notebooks in Cultural Analysis, nº. 1, p. 53-85.
De CERTEAU, M. JAMESON F and LOVITT, C. (1984). The Practice of Everyday Life. Berkeley, CA University of California Press.
DETIENNE, M. and VERNANT, J. P. (1978[1976]). Cunning Intelligence in Greek Culture and Society (trans. Janet Lloyd). Chicago and London, The University of Chicago Press.
DIETZ, M. (1986). Trapping the Prince: Machiavelli and the Politics of Deception. The American Political Science Review, 80, nº. 3, p. 777-799. https://doi.org/10.2307/1960538
DOBEL, P. (2006). Mortal Leadership in Homer’s Odyssey. Public Integrity, 8, nº. 3, p. 215”“231. https://doi.org/10.2753/PIN1099-9922080303
FALLON, S. (1992). Hunting the Fox: Equivocation and Authorial Duplicity in the Prince. PMLA, 107, n. 5, p. 1181-1195. https://doi.org/10.2307/462873
FRAZER, E. and HUTCHINGS, K. (2011). Virtuous Violence and the Politics of Statecraft in Machiavelli, Clausewitz and Weber. Political Studies, 59, nº. 1, p. 56-73. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.2010.00841.x
GREENE, T. (1986).The End of Discourse in Machiavelli’s Prince. In: Parker, P; Quint, D. (eds.), Baltimore, Johns Hopkins UP, p. 63-77.
HARIMAN, R. (1995). Political Style: The Artistry of Power (New Practices of Inquiry). Chicago, University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226316284.001.0001
HERZOG, D. (2006). Cunning. New Jersey, Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01430690
HOMER. (1996). The Odyssey (trans. by Robert Flages). New York, Viking.
HÓ¦SLE, V. (1999). Morality and Politics: Reflections on Machiavelli’s Prince. International Journal of Politics, Culture, and Society, 3, nº. 1, p. 51-69.
INGERSOLL, D. (1968). The Constant Prince. Private Interests and Public Goals in Machiavelli. The Western Political Quarterly, 21, nº. 4, p. 588-596. https://doi.org/10.2307/446750https://doi.org/10.1177/106591296802100404
IRWIN, T. (1999). Aristotle. Nicomachean Ethics. Indianapolis Cambridge, Hackett Publishing Company Inc.
IRWIN, T. (2002) (ed.). Aristotle. The Politics (trans. Carnes Lord). Chicago, University of Chicago Press.
JAEGER, W. (1946 [1936]). Paideia. The Ideals of Greek Culture (trans. Gilbert Highet) vol. I. Oxford, Basil Blackwell.
KANH, V. (1986). Virtù and the example of Agathocles in Machiavelli’s Prince. Representations, nº. 13, p. 63-83.
KENNEY, M. (2010). Beyond the Internet: MÄ“tis, Techne, and the Limitations of Online Artifacts for Islamist Terrorists. Terrorism and Political Violence, 22, nº. 2, p.177-197. https://doi.org/10.1080/09546550903554760
LEONARD, J. (1984). Public versus private claims: Machiavellianism from Another Perspective. Political Theory, 12, nº. 4, p. 491-506. https://doi.org/10.1177/0090591784012004002
LUKES, T. (2004). Martialing Machiavelli: Reassessing bthe Military Reflections. The Journal of Politics, 66, nº. 4, p. 1089-1108.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0022-3816.2004.00291.x
MACHIAVELLI, N. (1996 [1531]). Discourses on Livy (trans. Harvey Mansfield and Nathan Tarcov). Chicago, University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226500331.001.0001
MACHIAVELLI, N. (1998 [1515]). The Prince (trans. Harvey Mansfield). Chicago, University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226500508.001.0001
MAJOR, R. (2007). A New Argument for Morality. Political Research Quarterly, 60, nº. 2, p. 171-179. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912907301705
MANSFIELD, H. (1981). Machiavelli’s Political Science. The American Political Science Review, 75, nº. 2, p. 293-305. https://doi.org/10.2307/1961365
McCANLES, M. (1983). The Discourse of Il Principe. Malibu, Undena.
MINTER, A. (1991). Machiavelli, Violence and History. The Harvard Review of Philosophy, 2, nº. 1, p. 27-39.
NICHOLS, R. L.; WHITE, D. M. (1979). Politics Proper: On Action and Prudence. Ethics, 89, nº. 49, p. 372-384. https://doi.org/10.1086/292124
NIKODIMOV, G. (2006). Machiavel, penseur de l’action politique, In: Nikodimov, G.; Ménissier, T. (eds.), Lectures de Machiavel. Paris. Ellipse, p. 259-292.
PITKIN, H. (1984). Fortuna is a Woman. Berkeley, University of California Press.
POCOCK, J. (1975). The Machiavellian Moment: Florentine Political Thought and the Atlantic Republic Tradition. New Jersey, Princeton University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0090591785013004004
POCOCK, J. (1985). Machiavelli in the Liberal Cosmos. Political Theory, 13, nº. 4, p. 559-574.
REBHORN, W. (1988). Foxes and Lions. Machiavelli’s Confidence Men. Ithaca, NY, Cornell University Press.
RIEU, P. (2003) (ed.). HOMER. The Iliad (trans. E.V. Rieu). London, Penguin Classics.
SCOTT, J. (1995). Seeing Like a State. How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed. New Haven and London, Yale University Press.
TARLTON, C. (2003). “Azioni in modo l’una dall’altra”: action for actions’sake in Machiavelli’s The Prince [Political Action, Machiavelli, Virtù and Fortuna, The Prince, Political Causality]. History of European Ideas, nº. 29, p. 123-140. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-6599(02)00106-7
VERNANT, J. P. (1990). Mythe et religion en Grèce ancienne. Paris, Seuil.
WOLIN, S. (2004). Politics and Vision: Continuity and Innovation in Western Political Thought, Boston, Little, Brown.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Given the public access policy of the journal, the use of the published texts is free, with the obligation of recognizing the original authorship and the first publication in this journal. The authors of the published contributions are entirely and exclusively responsible for their contents.
1. The authors authorize the publication of the article in this journal.
2. The authors guarantee that the contribution is original, and take full responsibility for its content in case of impugnation by third parties.
3. The authors guarantee that the contribution is not under evaluation in another journal.
4. The authors keep the copyright and convey to the journal the right of first publication, the work being licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License-BY.
5. The authors are allowed and stimulated to publicize and distribute their work on-line after the publication in the journal.
6. The authors of the approved works authorize the journal to distribute their content, after publication, for reproduction in content indexes, virtual libraries and similars.
7. The editors reserve the right to make adjustments to the text and to adequate the article to the editorial rules of the journal.
