"“If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.” ...

Student’s Name:

Instructor:

Course:

Date:

Balance, Justice, Power, Perceptions of Reality, Science and Ethics

The conflict of Balance relative to Power/Justice, perceptions of reality, and ethics has been an issue of concern in the history of political philosophy. A number of prominent philosophers have established an imaginary world that acts as the baseline of their entire theories. Most of them opine that there is an ideal model of state that acts as the final objective of the human society and it functions as the guidance on the correct manner to realise this goal. As a result, the exploration of this final objective is more crucial. Nonetheless, there are still a growing number of philosophers such as Niccolo Machiavelli that have a different opinion since they doubt the feasibility of the existence of an ideal state. In essence, they opine that without the development of realisable technique of realising the goals from the day to day operations, the end is unachievable hence making it useless. As a result, it is interesting to explore the different roads that philosophers such as Machiavellian, and Aristottle took in explaining what the synthesis of balance relative to Justice/Power, perceptions of reality, science, and or ethics since they are crucial in explaining the feasibility of an ideal state or balance.

Among other many philosophical thinkers, it is imperative to note that Machiavelli has the largest impact on the later generations. He is of the opinion that individuals do not adhere to the philosopher’s prescriptive instructions on the issues they need to do. However, they function based on their own interest (MACHIAVELLI, 2). He argues that the gap that exists between how individuals ought to behave and how they act is extensive. He goes ahead to state that anyone who ignores the everyday reality to meet the expectations of the ideal society will soon realise that they have been following a path to destroying oneself and not how to preserve themselves (Erica ). In other words, human beings are selfish in nature and most of them strive to achieve the self-interests. In contrast, Aristottle states that human beings are classified as political animals by nature. They possess an innate propensity to create and develop communities that are highly complex. What makes it possible for human beings to exist in such a community is their capacity for rational speech. Essentially, they are able to make clear of what is harmful or beneficial and differentiate between the unjust and the just. According to him, he believes that h defining principle of human beings lies in their rationality.

According to Aristottle, as a political animal, man functions success in his rationality especially in making traditions and laws that implies sacrificing there own interest for the benefit of others. He also points out that individuals naturally establish city-state so as to realise self-sufficiency and live well. In a community, people must look after the interests of others and some time despise their own for the benefit of the entire society and community. In essence, it is rationality that guides a person to engage in such practices since they comprehend that they rely heavily on the community. The sacrifice that is caused by moving away from self-interests and extending beyond establishes the most innate and primitive goodness of human nature according to Aristottle. On the contrary, it is imperative to note that Machiavelli believes otherwise. He states that the power of rulers is issued by election of his subjects, which later becomes hereditary (MACHIAVELLI, 2). He also indicates that kings have no devine rights. He dismisses Aquinas and Augustine’s political ideology of divine power that in the process eliminates catholic framework of thinking from the political regime. In the process, he applies his human nature theory to discover the natural order of states through empirical evidence and rational deduction. Machiavellian argues that what matters is the end and one needs to make a choice of whatever means they can use to achieve it. In other words, any means however wicked, brutal or ferocious can be employed. He also argues that ruling and power is an art and to find unity, one has to depend heavily on power to overcome barriers.

Although the renaissance period is one of the historical timeliness that failed to produce an exemplary moral or ethics philosophes, Nicollo Machiavelli has gone down in history as one philosopher whose work is of significance to history of ethics. He offered advice in his book the ‘Prince’ on how rulers behave to realise their purpose and secure their power. The importance of the book to ethics (MACHIAVELLI, 3). In other words, he postulates that it is necessary for a ruler to look for ways and gain knowledge on how not to be good, and whether to make use of such information and not to use it, based on the necessities of the scenario. Since the Greek Sophists, the world had never seen such a frank rejection and ignorance of ethics and morality. As such, he attempts to strike a close relationship between Balance relative to ethics and power by showcasing how in reality human beings are like. IN simple terms, he also makes it clear on how people in reality purpose to maintain power with no intention of making ethical decisions or passing moral judgement on matters affecting the state (John and Robert). Despite the increasing level of criticism levied at Machiavelli, his work was instrumental in leading to a sharper appreciation of the variation between the lofty ethical systems associated with classical thinkers and the practical realities that exists in real world.

There have been questions and growing concerns on whether to classify ethics as a science or a philosophy. The response to such issues has often polarised some of the growing world scholars in moral issues. Some of them have inclined towards seeing ethics as an avenue of philosophical reflection based on the tradition upon which it is related such as Aristotles. Some view it by its discourse nature that plainly shows its vocation of universality and synthesis spirit. Moreover, there are also others that emphasise those ethical standards needs to be emphasised especially in the horizon of post-modernism. In the process, they bring an additional information about a unique segment of reality known as morality backed with specific scientific methods and means. For this reason, it is imperative to note that ethics is a systematic theoretical reflection that unwinds the ethical principles and moral values with a double status (Devin and Karen). It is either scientific or philosophical without easily noticing or pointing out the side that is more significant. However, at some point, when it comes to balance in relation to ethics, either the scientific or philosophical interpretation has a higher chance of prevailing. It is important to acknowledge that the essence of good and the classification of nature as the primary category of ethics cannot be made purely based on speculations. IT need proper exploration through research on the real moral life of communities and individuals in all its complexity and richness (Devin and Karen). In other words, although ethics is seen by many as being philosophical, it possesses a dimension of science.

According to Aristottle along with other traditional philosophers, for a theoretical expression to be seen as a science, it needs to realise a few requirements. First, it should possess an object of research such as a reality field upon which reflections is consulted (Devin and Karen). Yet, ethics is seen as a moral spiritual practice for communities and individuals. It is a hypotastatsis of the social fact in general circumstances. In the end, it makes sense that it finds itself in the middle of a tussle between disciplines having relations with social sciences (Devin and Karen). Furthermore, it shares another connection in terms of research methodology that is a crucial element of scientific approach.

Niccolo Machiavelli offers a contrasting opinion on Ethics by emphasising on striking a Balance on perceptions of reality. He believes that instead of acting morally, a respectable reputation is important since it assists in parallelling the public image (MACHIAVELLI, 3). Individuals will tend to make judgement in everything their ruler says and does which will finally become the public perception on is behaviour. As a result, he suggests that a prince ought to be careful to an extend that he does not let anything slip out of his mouth that is not replete with saving his image. In other words, everyone who sees him might believe that he is faithful, merciful, upright religions and humane. Therefore, individual perception of reality is different (John and Robert). Everyone views what an individual appears to be rather than what they really are. In this case, it is vital for a ruler to strike a Balance between individuals perception of reality and their self-interest since for a leader, people only make judgements based on the results.

In conclusion, exploration of different roads of thinking that philosophers such as Aristottle and Machiavelli took in explaining the synthesis of balance relative to power, justice, perceptions of science, reality and ethics reveal conflicting relationship. Machiavelli with his political way of thinking has had the largest impact on the latest generations. Through his belief that human beings focuses on meeting there self interests, it is clear that it goes against ethics principles. Yet, Aristottle offers a contrasting idea that human beings are political animals. Through these two ideologies, the perceptions of reality, ethics, and science are seen in contrasting views. Despite the growing level of criticisms that tis two scholars have encountered throughout their lifetime, there work is instrumental in leading to a sharper appreciation of the differences that exists between various systems of science, balance, power/justice, ethics and reality.

Works Cited

Devin Henry and Karen Margrethe Nielson (eds.), Bridging the Gap between Aristotle's Science and Ethics, Cambridge University Press, 2015, 304pp. $110.00 (hbk), ISBN 9781107010369.Retrieved from: https://ndpr.nd.edu/news/bridging-the-gap-between-aristotle-s-science-and-ethics/

MACHIAVELLI, NICCOLO. "POWER AND STATE. Accessed on 23rd November 2019 from: "http://archive.mu.ac.in/myweb_test/TYBA%20study%20material/Politicals%20Sci.%20-%20V.pdf

John T. Scott and Robert Zaretsky. Why Machiavelli Still Matters. The New York Times.2013. Accessed on 23td November from: https://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/10/opinion/why-machiavelli-matters.html

Erica, Benner. Have We Got Machiavelli all Wrong? The Guardian. 2017. Accessed on 23rd November2019 from: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/mar/03/have-we-got-machiavelli-all-wrong