Political Philosophy of the Period
Machiavelli, More, and the political thinkers of the Renaissance: the secularization of political theory and the emergence of the modern state concept.
Renaissance political philosophy marks the decisive secularisation of political theory — the emancipation of politics from its subordination to moral theology. Niccolò Machiavelli (1469–1527) is the founder of modern political science: The Prince analyses the acquisition and maintenance of political power purely in terms of effectiveness, entirely abstracting from moral considerations ('the end justifies the means' as a political maxim). Thomas More (1478–1535) offered a contrasting Christian humanist vision in Utopia, describing an ideal commonwealth governed by reason and natural virtue. Jean Bodin (1529–1596) developed the concept of absolute sovereignty as the defining attribute of the state. Francisco de Vitoria and Hugo Grotius laid the foundations of international law on natural law principles. The overall movement is the progressive autonomy of political philosophy from moral theology — a development that, carried to extremes, leads to totalitarianism.
Article 4. Political Philosophy of the Period The Renaissance, or, more accurately, the Humanist movement, brought to light the works of ancient legislators and political philosophers, and these were studied with great zeal by the votaries of the new fad of studying and excessively valuing “everything human” in the treasury of the universe. This study, plus the spirit of rebellion against authority, ecclesiastical and civil, which the Reformation induced, as well as a new devotion to the so-called Principle of Nationality (which holds that each nation should constitute its own civil society) occasioned the emergence of many social philosophies in the 16 century. Not a few of these were opposed to the Social Ethics of Scholasticism. Of the Political Philosophers of the Period we mention only three : i. Niccolo Machiavelli (1469-1527), who expressed his political philosophy in a work called The Prince (Il Principe). ii. Bl. Thomas More (1480-1535), English martyr, whose Utopia describes an imaginary island-republic so governed as to procure absolute equality for its citizens and to promote universal happiness—an ideal impossible of attainment. iii. Hugo de Groot (Grotius 1583-1645), a learned Dutch divine (Protestant), who wrote on The Right of War and of Peace. Machiavelli teaches that the chief aim of civil society is the development of The State. The State must be made supreme in all things, and all means are lawful to achieve this great end. The ruler need feel himself bound by no law, natural or human, but may manage things at will, so long as he works consistently in the direction of State supremacy. Machiavelli warred against Christianity, which he found in conflict with his ideal of State apotheosis. De Groot was much more of a philosopher than either Machiavelli or Thomas More. He distinguishes right as divine and human, and subdivides human right into natural and civil. He calls civil or social right voluntary because he believes that while man has a tendency towards life in society, he has actually assumed social obligations and privileges by a sort of free compact, at least implicitly. He declares that in the state of original innocence community of goods among men was assured; the right of individual ownership became necessary as a consequence of sin; and this necessary right secured recognition in the world by at least a tacit agreement or compact among men.
MODERN PHILOSOPHY (17 Century to the Present Day) PRELIMINARY REMARKS The anti-Scholastic movement, which originated in the 13 century and increased in power and scope during the three following centuries, destroyed the prominence and influence of Scholasticism but did not replace it by any complete and comprehensive system of philosophy. Matters philosophical were in a formless ferment. In the 17 century, however, systematized anti-Scholastic philosophies were formulated by René Descartes in France and Holland, and by Francis Bacon in England. Following the lead of these noted philosophers, thinkers of the 17, 18, 19, and 20 centuries have evolved numberless systems of nonScholastic and anti-Scholastic philosophy, all more or less unstable and ephemeral. Our own day sees continuous changes in the character and principles of the predominating anti-Scholastic systems. Negatively to characterize modern philosophy we may say, generally speaking, that it rejects the Scholastic doctrines of knowledge, Universals, matter and form, the substantial union of body and spiritual soul in man, and many other cardinal tenets of Scholasticism. Modern philosophy, impatient of anything resembling authority, holds itself strictly apart from connection with Revelation, and refuses to accept the services of revealed truth as its light and guide. Not all modern phi- 275