Humanities & Classics 1002
|
|
Renaissance Forum
Humanities & Classics 1002 |
    |
|
In Reply to: PLEASE POST YOUR SECOND REQUIRED POSTING AS FOLLOWUPS TO THIS POST posted by Tom Bacig on January 13, 1999 at 21:59:54:
What is a Renaissance man? Views on what a Renaissance man was differed during the Renaissance, the views of three contemporary individuals are examined below. All three views contain a common thread - a Renaissance man is the best example of what man is capable of coming, and the ideal to strive for.
Alberti
Alberti was a true Renaissance man. He was a mathematician, architect, engineer, musician and a playwright, his many talents indicate that universal skill is a trait of the Renaissance man. Virtue is a matter of action, not of right thinking. Knowledge known badly might as well be known not at all, and virtu must be cultivated not inherited like a title. Idleness and sloth are the greatest enemies of human achievement, a Renaissance man must exhibit the exact opposite traits. A Renaissance man is capable of doing anything he wants.
Castiglione
Castiglione’s version of the Renaissance man placed an emphasis on physical perfection. Men of war needed to be well built and skilled in the use of weapons. However, the ideal man should show courage and prudence in all things, and only chose to fight when honor demands it. When a Renaissance man is resting from physical exercises he should concentrate on painting and music, and be versed in language and poetry.
Machiavelli
His work “The Prince” defines how a prince - the most qualified type of individual to become a Renaissance man, must behave to be a successful prince. It is not a theoretical work on how he thought princes should be but instead a guide on how they are. A prince must know how to treat his enemies and his friends. He should know how to obtain power and retain it. Perhaps’s most importantly a prince must study history to avoid the mistakes of the past and to imitate its successes.