Abstract

The dissertation argues that the notions of self-interestedness and rationality constitute the foundation of Machiavelli's political thinking. Although many political thinkers from Thucydides on have taken it as self-evident that political actors compete, try to be effective in their actions, and want to succeed rather than fail, Machiavelli was the first to develop that assumption into a systematic method. ;After a brief presentation of Machiavelli scholarship and the historical background of the thinker's life and work , the dissertation presents a detailed analysis of his thought's conceptual framework. Chapter 2 concentrates on two basic desires---acquisitiveness and ambition---which, according to Machiavelli, push human beings to political action. Chapter 3 presents the self-centered, if not purely egoistic, nature of those desires and human nature in general. Chapters 4 and 5 illustrate what is the rote of reason and how the egoistic passions can be controlled in a reasonable fashion. Finally, in Chapter 6, the dissertation introduces Machiavelli's model of political order in which self-interested and rational individuals can coexist peacefully and cooperate. ;The crucial role of self-interest and rationality in his thought makes Machiavelli a forerunner of Mandeville, Adam Smith, and all those who believe that social stability and prosperity can be a product of individual self-interested efforts. Although selfish avarice and ambition are always dangerous, they also constitute a significant part of Machiavelli's solution to the problem of political order. Insofar as the ambitious are interested in recognition and prestige---as charismatic leaders, skillful politicians and victorious commanders---their individual achievements coincide with the vital interests of others. According to Machiavelli, it was the passionate ambition, pride and competitiveness of the ancient Romans and the modern Swiss that contributed to their countries' greatness and prosperity. ;Thus, a recently celebrated interpretation of Machiavelli, placing him within the tradition of "classical republicanism" and "civic humanism," appears very questionable. Contrary to J. G. A. Pocock, Quentin Skinner and Anthony Parel, Machiavelli's political ideal is not founded on citizens' civic virtue and devotion to the common good. Rather, individual freedom and "countless good institutions" framing rivalry among individuals make the civic life flourish