Text in French / This thesis is focused upon the political philosophy of Niccolò Machiavelli. It is a study of both the philosophical presuppositions of this philosophy and its practical implementation. The aim is to determine and evaluate the reliability of its claims in the light of the pursuit of “the common good” from the standpoint of philosophical anthropology. Machiavelli espouses a philosophical anthropology that vacillates between the good and the bad of the human being in pursuit of “the common good”. In the practical implementation of his philosophy, the bad frequently overshadows the good of the human being. It is precisely this obliviousness of the good of the human being that the thesis defended here intends to restore through anthropolitics as the “new science” of the human being. The restoration is at the same time the refutation of the bad side of the human being as the foundation of “the common good” as Machiavellism holds. The centrality of the good side of the human being as the starting point of the anthropolitics defended here assures the inscription of values in politics consistent with the practical pursuit of “the common good” truly beneficial to all human beings. There is no doubt that “anthropolitics” is the starting point of an urgent and a relevant contribution to the international politics of our time. / Compendium critique sur les prétentions de sa fiabilité Cette thèse est axée sur la philosophie politique de Nicolas Machiavel. Il s'agit d'une étude analysant à la fois les présupposés philosophiques de cette philosophie et sa mise en oeuvre sur le plan pratique. L’objectif est de déterminer et d'évaluer la fiabilité de ses prétentions, du point de vue de l'anthropologie philosophique, et ce, à la lumière de la poursuite du “Bien commun” comme idéal. Machiavel épouse une anthropologie philosophique qui vacille entre le bien et le mal de l'être humain quant à la poursuite de “l’intérêt commun”. Dans la mise en oeuvre pratique de sa philosophie, souvent le mal occulte le bien de l'être humain. C'est précisément cette inconscience ou négligence de l'être humain face à la prise en compte du bien que la thèse défendue ici a l'intention de rétablir par le biais de l’anthropolitique en tant que “nouvelle science” de l'être humain. Ici, la restauration sous-entend nécessairement, toujours et en même temps la réfutation de mauvais penchants de l'être humain, lesquels constituent le “contre-pied” au fondement du “bien commun”, dont le machiavélisme s’avère le spécimen parfait. D’où l’hypothèse de centralité humainement sensée, comme point de départ de l’anthropolitique défendue ici, garantit l'inscription des valeurs politiques compatibles à la poursuite des pratiques du «bien commun», lesquelles sont véritablement bénéfiques pour tous les êtres humains. Il ne fait aucun doute que l’anthropolitique constitue, de ce fait, le point de départ d'urgence et la pertinente contribution à la politique internationale de notre temps. / Philosophy / D. Litt. et Phil. (Philosophy)

Text in French / This thesis is focused upon the political philosophy of Niccolò Machiavelli. It is a study of both the philosophical presuppositions of this philosophy and its practical implementation. The aim is to determine and evaluate the reliability of its claims in the light of the pursuit of “the common good” from the standpoint of philosophical anthropology. Machiavelli espouses a philosophical anthropology that vacillates between the good and the bad of the human being in pursuit of “the common good”. In the practical implementation of his philosophy, the bad frequently overshadows the good of the human being. It is precisely this obliviousness of the good of the human being that the thesis defended here intends to restore through anthropolitics as the “new science” of the human being. The restoration is at the same time the refutation of the bad side of the human being as the foundation of “the common good” as Machiavellism holds. The centrality of the good side of the human being as the starting point of the anthropolitics defended here assures the inscription of values in politics consistent with the practical pursuit of “the common good” truly beneficial to all human beings. There is no doubt that “anthropolitics” is the starting point of an urgent and a relevant contribution to the international politics of our time. / Compendium critique sur les prétentions de sa fiabilité Cette thèse est axée sur la philosophie politique de Nicolas Machiavel. Il s'agit d'une étude analysant à la fois les présupposés philosophiques de cette philosophie et sa mise en oeuvre sur le plan pratique. L’objectif est de déterminer et d'évaluer la fiabilité de ses prétentions, du point de vue de l'anthropologie philosophique, et ce, à la lumière de la poursuite du “Bien commun” comme idéal. Machiavel épouse une anthropologie philosophique qui vacille entre le bien et le mal de l'être humain quant à la poursuite de “l’intérêt commun”. Dans la mise en oeuvre pratique de sa philosophie, souvent le mal occulte le bien de l'être humain. C'est précisément cette inconscience ou négligence de l'être humain face à la prise en compte du bien que la thèse défendue ici a l'intention de rétablir par le biais de l’anthropolitique en tant que “nouvelle science” de l'être humain. Ici, la restauration sous-entend nécessairement, toujours et en même temps la réfutation de mauvais penchants de l'être humain, lesquels constituent le “contre-pied” au fondement du “bien commun”, dont le machiavélisme s’avère le spécimen parfait. D’où l’hypothèse de centralité humainement sensée, comme point de départ de l’anthropolitique défendue ici, garantit l'inscription des valeurs politiques compatibles à la poursuite des pratiques du «bien commun», lesquelles sont véritablement bénéfiques pour tous les êtres humains. Il ne fait aucun doute que l’anthropolitique constitue, de ce fait, le point de départ d'urgence et la pertinente contribution à la politique internationale de notre temps. / Philosophy, Practical and Systematic Theology / D. Litt. et Phil. (Philosophy)

The evolution of the State was a process which went through many stages. Analysis of the modern State tends to begin with the Enlightenment; however, Dante Alighieri, Niccolo Machiavelli, and Martin Luther each represented early phases of this evolution. The theories of these men were closely tied to their evaluation of man's nature. Their main objectives were separation of the State from the Church and the definition of the rulers obligations to his subjects. Although humanism influenced all of them to varying degrees, each developed unique views of the State. Elements of these views can be detected in more modern theorists.

This study aims to theoretically investigate the concepts of the interpersonal actions 'to motivate' and 'to manipulate' and also to examine possible differences and similarities between the two. The method used is a conceptual review based on the Self-Determination Theory, related to the concept of motivation, and Machiavellianism, related to the concept of manipu-lation. The results show that 'to motivate', according to Self-Determination Theory, concerns influencing the intrinsic or extrinsic motivation, where intrinsic motivation is related to the feeling of self-determination, inner locus of causality, being or feeling competent and exercise activities for the pleasure of it, whilst extrinsic motivation is related to external locus of cau-sality, external pressure and engaging in activities for the purpose of reaching a goal or re-ward. 'To manipulate' is according to Machiavellianism based on the manipulator doing whatever it takes to reach a certain goal and gain something for himself with no regard of what methods being used. The comparative analysis showed that the crucial difference in how an behaviour is interpreted as either, or both, motivating and manipulative is based on who is doing the interpretation, what information she has and which aspects that are focused on.

In the following thesis, I argue that to contextualize Machiavelli’s republican thought in his Italian humanist heritage permits us to understand how Machiavelli reaches back not only to an Italian pre-humanist inheritance of liberty as freedom from servitude, but to a Stoic conception of agency which he inherits and shapes in that concept of liberty. While my analysis of Machiavelli and his humanist heritage is in fundamental agreement with that of Quentin Skinner in The Foundations of Modern Political Thought, it develops however the implications of two theses that Paul O. Kristeller outlines in his works on Italian humanism: the eclectic nature of humanist ideas and their rhetorical focus. From this I draw a slightly different picture of the humanist heritage and its polemics with Augustine, and from these an understanding about Stoic agency and how it is inherited and shaped in Machiavelli’s conception of the citizen and civic duties.

Le présent mémoire a pour objectif de défendre la thèse selon laquelle Machiavel est un nationaliste italien et démontrer que le concept de nationalisme italien peut philosophiquement servir de fil conducteur entre le Prince et les Discours sur la Première Décade de Tite-Live. / The aim of this essay is to defend the thesis according to which Machiavelli is an Italian nationalist, and to demonstrate that the concept of Italian nationalism can philosophically be used as a thread between the Prince and the Discourses on Livy.

O presente trabalho tem por intuito, por meio de uma perspectiva interdisciplinar, analisar de que maneira, no início da Era Moderna, podemos encontrar uma dimensão trágica na relação entre poder e justiça nas obras de dois autores fundamentais para a história do pensamento político e da arte: Maquiavel e Shakespeare. Por meio de uma leitura cruzada dos dois autores, defende a hipótese de que existem semelhanças desconcertantes entre eles e, ao mesmo tempo, diferenças importantes que imprimem maneiras diametralmente opostas de conceber a relação entre poder e justiça. O trabalho sustenta que Maquiavel pode ser lido como um autor trágico, principalmente devido a uma interpretação analítica do Príncipe, e que, para este autor, poder e justiça estão inevitavelmente separados. Ao mesmo tempo, argumenta que, para Shakespeare, nas chamadas grandes tragédias Hamlet, Otelo, Rei Lear e Macbeth , poder e justiça estão indissociavelmente unidos e que é justamente esta ligação que possibilita a legitimidade política. A partir de uma investigação do sentido do trágico, procura, ao desenvolver as dimensões jurídicas, políticas e artísticas envolvidas nesta forma de expressão, mostrar filosoficamente os contornos de uma teoria da justiça e do poder na modernidade e visualizar as condições de possibilidade de uma compreensão desta problemática em nosso próprio tempo. / The research has the purpose of, by means of multidisciplinary approach, analyzing how, in the beginning of Modern Age, we can find a tragic dimension between power and justice in the two main authors work of arts to History of Law and Political Thinking and art: Machiavelli and Shakespeare. By means of cross-referencing these two authors, the assumption that there are confusing similarities between them is defended and, in the same way, important differences that demonstrate diametrically opposing views of conceiving the relationship between power and justice. In this paper, it is defended that Machiavelli can be considered as a tragic author, mainly, because of The Princes analytical interpretation, and that, for this author, power and justice are inevitably separated. Simultaneously, it is argued that, for Shakespeare, in the big tragedies Hamlet, Otelo, King Lear and Macbeth , Power and justice are inseparably united, and this union makes possible the political legitimacy. From an investigation in the tragic sense, the search, when developing legal, political and artistic dimensions involved in this way, showing philosophically the power and justice theory characteristics in the modernity and to observe the conditions of possibility of understanding this problematic in our own time.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:20:41Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 VICENTE CLAUDIO JANNARELLI.pdf: 532783 bytes, checksum: 3414753206a18426d4a22c420bc3427b (MD5) Previous issue date: 2011-12-02 / The agonistic feature of relity in the Machiavelli s political reflections reveals an intense contrast im relation to the reality identified in the Marcuse s one-dimensional society . If, on one hand, Machiavelli understands the social conflict as being the own cement for the political system stability; Herbert Marcusse, on the other hand, describes, specially in One-Dimensional Man , a kind of society in which happens the weakening and even the disappearance of all radical critique, of all conflict and, as consequence, occurs the integration of all potential opposition in the established system. To present, for reflection, elements resulting from this intense contrast between the Machiavelli s thought on the social conflict and the Marcuse s critical analysis which identifies the disappearance of conflict in the advanced industrial society is the core objective of this present dissertation / O aspecto agonístico da realidade presente na reflexão política de Maquiavel contrasta intensamente com a realidade das Sociedades Unidimensionais identificadas por Herbert Marcuse. Se, por um lado, Maquiavel vê no conflito social o próprio cimento responsável direto pela estabilidade do sistema político; Herbert Marcuse, por outro, identifica em sua obra, especialmente em A Ideologia da Sociedade Industrial Avançada , uma sociedade na qual ocorre o enfraquecimento e mesmo o desaparecimento de toda crítica, de todo conflito, e a conseqüente integração de toda a oposição no sistema estabelecido. Apresentar, para reflexão, elementos decorrentes do contraste entre o pensamento de Maquiavel em relação ao conflito social e a análise crítica de Marcuse, que identifica a tendência ao desaparecimento desse conflito nas sociedades industriais avançadas, é o principal objetivo da presente dissertação

In the following thesis, I argue that to contextualize Machiavelli’s republican thought in his Italian humanist heritage permits us to understand how Machiavelli reaches back not only to an Italian pre-humanist inheritance of liberty as freedom from servitude, but to a Stoic conception of agency which he inherits and shapes in that concept of liberty. While my analysis of Machiavelli and his humanist heritage is in fundamental agreement with that of Quentin Skinner in The Foundations of Modern Political Thought, it develops however the implications of two theses that Paul O. Kristeller outlines in his works on Italian humanism: the eclectic nature of humanist ideas and their rhetorical focus. From this I draw a slightly different picture of the humanist heritage and its polemics with Augustine, and from these an understanding about Stoic agency and how it is inherited and shaped in Machiavelli’s conception of the citizen and civic duties.

Le présent mémoire a pour objectif de défendre la thèse selon laquelle Machiavel est un nationaliste italien et démontrer que le concept de nationalisme italien peut philosophiquement servir de fil conducteur entre le Prince et les Discours sur la Première Décade de Tite-Live. / The aim of this essay is to defend the thesis according to which Machiavelli is an Italian nationalist, and to demonstrate that the concept of Italian nationalism can philosophically be used as a thread between the Prince and the Discourses on Livy.