The Prince

Thoughts on The Prince? I read it earlier this summer and it was actually really interesting. The skills for statesmanship can also be applied to everyday life. I've been able to manage people a lot better ever since applying his lessons.

Attached: Machiavelli.jpg (199x253, 5K)

Why his head so smoll

llol

Being good Bad
Being bad Good

It doesn't say anything new that a modern person would not have already had in their intuition. It is a good insight into history of Ren. Italy though.

Like others have said, it was about convincing the good princes of Europe that you have to be bad sometimes to do good things.

This is why Yea Forums is a zoomer hellhole

Machiavelli was Entp masterrace, along with

>Alexander the Great
>Socrates
>Walter Raleigh
>Da Vinci
>Hume
>Wagner
>J. E. B. Stuart
>Edison
>Mel Gibson(fucking based!)
Just a few.

T. Entp (pic related)

Attached: Sorta smug Wojak.png (680x574, 127K)

The thing that I remember most about the Prince is how Machiavelli paints this portrait of the different amounts of information that agents in different positions have and how this affects their behavior and strategies. That we can necessarily never know what the other person is thinking or going to do so that ambiguity has to be taken into account. It's like game theory hundreds of years ago.

I dont remember him ever really explciitly laying it out like that, but after dozens of examples of him discussing the psychology behind certain interactions it started to kind of jump out at me.

>entp

Attached: 1536490628018.jpg (2864x3448, 1.74M)

smooth brain brain interpretations. the patrician understanding of The Prince is that it is a work of satire meant to extol the virtues of republican government while laying bare the moral, ethical deficiencies and inherent self destructive methods that always characterize tyrannical, despotic, rule.

smooth brains cannot understand that within the historical context of The Prince, Niccolò was directly referencing politics of the day and each of his examples corresponds to the ultimate failure of tyrannical methods described within the book.

Niccolò wrote a manual for failure, so that great leaders may learn what some tempting strategies ultimately lead to and perhaps so that smooth brain narcissists can fall into the trap of following the strategies that undo the actors.

Attached: charlie.png (264x240, 86K)

This. Don't know why this is on every self help book list in existence.

Yeah, unemployed Machiavelli just recently tortured will send a satire to the most powerful man in Florence. Not true at all.

MBTI is pseudo-science, you fucking retard. Kys

I don't understand why people always spread this meme that it's actually satire because of how 'shocking and unprecedented' the content was. It's not shocking or unprecedented whatsoever; the Guelph-Ghibelline wars had led to centuries of the worst kind of treachery imaginable in Italy.

Entp is way too undervalued in that pic, he's always been one of the prime movers of history. At the very least the third or fourth most influential and important. We're geniuses though we accept the game, we understand the joke, and so we are freed from it thereof. As Wagner said:

>So long as we have to fulfil the work of the Will, that Will which is ourselves, there in truth is nothing for us but the spirit of Negation, the spirit of our own will that, blind and hungering, can only plainly see itself in its un-will toward whatsoever crosses it as obstacle or disappointment. Yet that which crosses it, is but itself again; so that its rage expresses nothing save its self-negation: and this self-knowledge can be gained at last by Pity born of suffering—which, cancelling the Will, [245] expresses the negation of a negative; and that, by every rule of logic, amounts to Affirmation.

Our seemingly extroverted charisma is merely a product of our peculiar genius. Infj has Infp, Intp Intj and vice versa. Entp is alone. Destined to a life no one understands and so he simply walks among men. All Australians are by default Entp.

I shall say it, as how should it definitively 'be'. Entp is fine as Pepe (I would prefer you changed it but it's fine). Add him commentating on every frame - after all he is the master critique (and so fixer; redeemer) and is seeing all - perceiving the happenings and going from mocking them to supplying philosophical intrigue thought upon the spot with as ever much as genius, as the Intp is renowned for finding through long excitation. Now you don't have to add this last bit but everything prior to this statement is necessary. You must find him at the end of the game leaving through the door.

>he doesn't get a joke
>he also doesn't understand that it's still a correct judgement of faculty
>that is to say employed will
>something between the very innate and effectual
Though I do prefer the original Jungian typology. You can't deny the difference it measures?

In politics, this is correct.

>The Prince is a work of satire

Attached: 1508406285061.png (645x729, 112K)

thinking the Prince is satire is so fucking stupid Im not even going to respond to you

Academics tend to be extremely effeminate and hellbent on maintaining the status quo. Some of them are disingenuous and call it satire to dissuade any encouraging quality in the work, while some of them are genuinely delusional and think everything that isn't part of their ivory tower of infantile womanliness is necessarily wrong.

Huh?

The prince is for idiots and midwits. Nothing more

Modern bureaucracy and decentralization of executive powers has made the prince a completely obsolete work

We got ourselves a joker here boys!! ey ey? So watcha wanna extrapolate upon?

>Reading The Prince at face value
>Ignoring effectual truth

>being such an autist that he doesn't realise if we blindly placed value only on the effectual as 'something' then there would be no judgement to cast considering the indefiniteness of the effectual

You’re almost correct but the Prince is not just a work of satire. It is a book calling for a “republican” leader (rather monarch, hence the title) to come into power and unify Italy against other European great powers.
Its morality is essential in that it announces political modernity. This book, alongside La Boétie’s, is a direct attack on the traditional view of the Christian feudal Prince. It theorises the power of the people, departing from the traditional view of the people-as-a-mob (which still present in La Boétie).

In short, you cannot understand The Prince if you do not look into its specific context (which I guess you’re familiar with).

I haven't seen a single respectable academic calling it satire, only Yea Forums sticks to that meme so obsessively.
Though it's not really encouraging either, except for the last section.

why his attire so big¿

If you read Machiavelli and Sun Tzu’s “The Art of War” you’ll learn everything you need to know about controlling all of the brainlets you deal with all day long.