In the past, many writers and philosophers have concocted stringent guidelines on how humans, as servants of God, should properly conduct themselves. These elite thinkers, such as Augustine and Dante, are deeply religious and vehemently scorn those who stray from the Lord. To them, a life of sacrifices is the only appropriate way to live. Their beliefs have been so deeply imbedded in the morale of society that anyone who opposes them is destined for ridicule. However, despite the good odds of criticism against such ideas, a newer breed of writers in the middle ages began to preach ideas of pragmatism: a kind of partial morality. One such writer is Niccolo Machiavelli, who, in The Prince and in the play "Mandragola," preaches synonymous controversial ideas against his society's Catholic norms. Christine De Pizan preaches similar unique ideas in A Medieval Woman's Mirror of Honor: The Treasury of the City of Ladies, when she appears to teach Catholicism but rather contradi!
             cts herself by encouraging pragmatism. Both writers give identical and realistic guidelines, rather than religious guidelines, to how one should act in society. De Pizan's overall work, however, is confusing in comparison to Machiavelli's because she leads the reader to confusion as a result of the contradictions in the text. In this way, Machiavelli's works are far more effective.
             Although they differ in seriousness and style, Machiavelli's The Prince and "Mandragola" convey the same pragmatic idealism. In The Prince, Machiavelli systematically discusses the proper edicate to which a prince should adhere if he wants to be successful. He strongly preaches the necessity for the absence of morality and virtue in many situations. He explains when he says:
             ...the gulf between how one should live and how one does live
             is so wide that a man who neglects what is actually done for what
             should be do...