rahim salamatazar
Abstract
Religion and Morality in “The Prince” and “Siyasat-nama”, and also their differences, are the main subjects of this article. The comparative study is our method for the article. This study has supposed that Machiavelli’s opinion about the religion in “The Prince” ...
Read More
Religion and Morality in “The Prince” and “Siyasat-nama”, and also their differences, are the main subjects of this article. The comparative study is our method for the article. This study has supposed that Machiavelli’s opinion about the religion in “The Prince” is altogether utilitarian, realist, modern and of course un-scular. In fact, he recognizes the religion as an instrument only for people’s union, and he is also audacious, insensitive or even sometimes immeoral in morality. On the other hand, Nizam al-Mulk’s point of view about the religion in “Siasat-nama” is dogmatically, classic and conservatively and unlike Machiavelli, he not only respects the religion due to itself and it’s validity, but also is not unaware of the political affects of religion. furthermore, in morality, since he assume the morality has got rise of the religion (Islam), so he believed that moral will be existed even without government essence, namely, he does not consider morality based on government essence. All of these, as the hypothesis of this article, looked over with referring to the texts of mentioned books both.
