Since the ancients, philosophers, theologians, and political actors have pondered the relationship between the moral realm and the political realm. Complicating the long debate over the intersection of morality and politics are diverse conceptions of fundamental concepts: the right and the good, justice and equality, personal liberty and public interest. Divisions abound, also, about whether politics should be held to a higher moral standard at all, or whether, instead, pragmatic considerations or realpolitik should be the final word. Perhaps the two poles are represented most conspicuously by Aristotle and Machiavelli. For Aristotle, the proper aim of politics is moral virtue: “politics takes the greatest care in making the citizens to be of a certain sort, namely good and capable of noble actions.” Thus, the statesman is a craftsman or scientist who designs a legal system that enshrines universal principles, and the politician's task is to maintain and reform the system when necessary. The science of the political includes more than drafting good laws and institutions, however, since the city-state must create a system of moral education for its citizens. In marked contrast, Machiavelli's prince exalted pragmatism over morality, the maintenance of power over the pursuit of justice. Machiavelli instructed that “a prince, and especially a new prince, cannot observe all those things which are considered good in men, being often obliged, in order to maintain the state, to act against faith, against charity, against humanity, and against religion.”