The methodology of Machiavelli’s work «The Prince»: Is Machiavelli an early positivist?

PDF (ελληνικά)
Published: Feb 19, 2019
DOI: https://doi.org/10.12681/grsr.19752
Keywords:
Methodology of International Relations positivism Machiavelli The Prince
Evaghoras L. Evaghorou
University of Piraeus
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9677-5980
Abstract

The identification and evaluation of the way Machiavelli elaborated his work «The Prince» is a process that refers to the examination and analysis of the characteristics of the author’s methodology. This process leads to the test of the hypothesis whether «The Prince» has positivist characteristics with regards to the way it had been structured. Presenting the main principles of positivism which had been developed the 1970 decade in the science of International Relations, it is examined the correlation between Machiavelli's methodology in «The Prince» and the positivist characteristics. The research concludes that Machiavelli’s methodology in «The Prince» has several elements of the positivist methodology although in some of them deviates.

Article Details
  • Section
  • Articles
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g. post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (preferably in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
Author Biography
Evaghoras L. Evaghorou, University of Piraeus
Assistant Professor at the Department of International and European Studies, School of Economics, Business and International Studies
References
Ανδρεάδη, Η. (2006). Σημείωμα της μεταφράστριας. Στο Ν. Μακιαβέλι, Ο Ηγεμόνας (μτφρ.: Η. Ανδρεάδη) (σελ. 7-12). Αθήνα: Κάκτος.
Γκίλμπερτ, Φ. (1986). Μακκιαβέλλι: η αναγέννηση της τέχνης του πολέμου. Στο P. Paret (επιμ.), Οι δημιουργοί της σύγχρονης στρατηγικής: Από το Μακκιαβέλλι στην πυρηνική εποχή (μτφρ.: Ε. Κατσάνης) (σελ. 21-44). Αθήνα: Κωνσταντίνου Τουρίκη.
Κώνστας, Δ. και Αρβανιτόπουλος, Κ. (1997). Διεθνείς Σχέσεις: Συνέχεια και μεταβολή, Τόμ. Α΄. Αθήνα: Σιδέρης.
Μακιαβέλι, Ν. (2006). Ο Ηγεμόνας (μτφρ.: Η. Ανδρεάδη). Αθήνα: Κάκτος.
Μακρής, Σπ. (2002). Η θεωρία των Διεθνών Σχέσεων στην εποχή της παγκοσμιοποίησης: Κονστρουκτιβισμός vs Ρασιοναλισμός. Αθήνα: Παπαζήσης.
Παπαγιαννόπουλος, Η. (2016). Η ποιητική της κυριαρχίας: Για τον Μακιαβέλι του Παναγιώτη Κονδύλη. Φρέαρ, 14, σελ. 128-160.
Σαλκίτζογλου, Τ. (2006). Επιλεγόμενα ή Αναδρομική Εισαγωγή στο Νικκολό Μακιαβέλλι. Στο Ν. Μακιαβέλι, Ο Ηγεμόνας (μτφρ.: Η. Ανδρεάδη) (σελ. 179-229), Αθήνα: Κάκτος.
Φακιολάς, Στ. (2003). Η συζήτηση δρώντος-δομής στη θεωρία των Διεθνών Σχέσεων: Μια συνοπτική παρουσίαση. Εξωτερικά Θέματα, 11, σελ. 78-84.
Carr, H. E. (2015). Τι είναι Ιστορία; Σκέψεις για τη θεωρία της Ιστορίας και τον ρόλο του ιστορικού (μτφρ.: Α. Παππάς). Αθήνα: Πατάκης.
Heywood, A. (2013). Διεθνείς Σχέσεις και Πολιτική στην Παγκόσμια Εποχή (μτφρ.: Χ. Φραγκονικολόπουλος και Φ. Προέδρου). Αθήνα: Κριτική.
Jackson, R. and Sørensen, G. (2006). Θεωρία και μεθοδολογία των Διεθνών Σχέσεων: Η σύγχρονη συζήτηση. Αθήνα: Gutenberg.
Morgenthau, H. J. (2011). Επιστήμη και πολιτική της ισχύος (μτφρ.: Π. Τσακαλογιάννης). Αθήνα: Τουρίκη.
Waltz, K. N. (2011). Θεωρία διεθνούς πολιτικής (μτφρ.: Κ. Κολιόπουλος). Αθήνα: Ποιότητα.
Baker-Smith, D. (1992). Introduction. In N. Machiavelli, The Prince (pp. xi-xxiv). New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
Benner, E. (2013). Machiavelli's Prince: A new reading. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Celenza, Chr. S. (2015). Machiavelli: A portrait, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Churchland, P. M. and Hooker, Cl. A. (eds) (1985). Images of science: Essays on Realism and Empiricism with a reply from Bas C. van Fraassen. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.
Forde, St. (1995). International Realism and the science of politics: Thucydides, Machiavelli, and Neorealism. International Studies Quarterly, 39 (2), pp. 141-160.
Hale, J. R. (1961). Machiavelli and Renaissance Italy. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Halfpenny, P. (2015). Positivism and Sociology: Explaining social life. London and New York: Routledge.
Hammersleya, M. and Traianou, A. (2011). Moralism and research ethics: A Machiavellian perspective. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 14 (5), pp. 379–390.
Hollis, M. (1996). The Last Post?. In St. Smith, K. Booth and M. Zalewski (eds), International theory: Positivism and beyond (pp. 301-308). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Knorr, Kl. E. and Rosenau, J. N. (eds) (1969). Contending approaches to International Politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Kolakowski, L. (1969). The alienation of reason: A history of positivist thought. New York: Doubleday.
Machiavelli, N. (1992). The Prince. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
Morgenthau, H. J. (1967). Common sense and theories of International Relations. Journal of International Affairs, 21 (2), pp. 207-214.
Nelson, Br. R. (2015). Western political thought: From Socrates to the age of ideology, 2nd ed. Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.
Nicholson, M. (1996). The continued significance of Positivism?. In St. Smith, K. Booth and M. Zalewski (eds), International theory: Positivism and beyond (pp. 128-145). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Parel, A. (1992). The Machiavellian cosmos. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.
Philp, M. (2007). Political conduct. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Pocock, J. G. A. (2016). The Machiavellian moment: Florentine political thought and the Atlantic republican tradition. Princeton and Woodstock: Princeton University Press.
Popper, K. R. (2002). The Logic of Scientific Discovery. Abingdon and New York: Routledge.
Singer, J. D. (1969). The behavioral approach to International Relations: Payoff and prospects. In J. N. Rosenau (ed.), International politics and foreign policy: A reader in research and theory, Rev. Ed. (pp. 65-69). New York: Free Press.
Skinner, Q. (1998). The foundation of modern political thought: The Renaissance, 1st Vol. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Smith, St. (1996). Positivism and beyond. In St. Smith, K. Booth and M. Zalewski (eds), International theory: Positivism and beyond (pp. 11-44). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Steans, J., Pettiford, Ll., Diez Th. and El-Anis, I. (2013). An introduction to International Relations: Perspectives and theme (3rd Ed). Abingdon και New York: Routledge.
Strauss, L. (1957). Machiavelli’s intension: The Prince. The American Political Science Review, 51 (1), pp. 13-40.
Viroli, M. (2014). Redeeming the Prince: The meaning of Machiavelli’s masterpiece. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Wendt, A. E. (1987). The agent-structure problem in International Relations theory. International Organization, 41 (3), pp. 335-370.
Wight, C. (2006). Agents, structures and International Relations: Politics as ontology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.