Outside Readin-Machiavelli's The Prince-Ryan Webb

While reading and discussing Lewis' Space Trilogy, the class drew upon a very interesting topic, the pursuit of power and the consequences of might vs right. All throughout political philosophy, questions concerning the nature and realities of justice are answered in a multitude of different ways. For example, Plato's philosophy focuses on the virtue of good meaning the intent to create order in a world of chaos and the concept of bad meaning intent to embrace chaos actively destroy that order. In contrast, Machiavelli's philosophy suggests that the proper role of a ruler is to obtain and control power in any way possible while morality and virtue are secondary. For example, Machiavelli insists that it is more important for a ruler to be feared than loved and must create a certain perceived reputation at any costs. While, for Plato, virtue seems to be the way to properly obtain and appropriately handle power, Machiavelli seems to insist that power itself is the goal while virtue and morality are merely tools to deceive the ruled. The better side of me is inclined to favor Plato's philosophy which rests on morality and virtue, however, I cannot help but view Machiavelli's analysis as the most viable and accurate avenue to rule. Thus, instead of asking the question which is better, virtue or power, my question is this: Which way to rule provides for the most stability, sustainability, and corporal worth?