Hobbes Vs Machiavelli
Political Theory
Final Paper
Foucault vs. Hobbes, and Machiavelli Power by definition is the possession of control or command over others; authority; ascendancy. The question is now not what power is but how do the means of which power is exerted form and who or whom enforces these means. There are several ways to answer this question, none of which are entirely correct. By looking at the theories provided by Michel Foucault and comparing them to Machiavelli and Thomas Hobbes we will gain a general understanding of these philosophers response to the ideas Foucault has about power and the correct ways to coerce society. “This enclosed, segmented space, observed at every point, in which the individuals are inserted in a fixed place… …show more content…
All three theorists agree on the fact that the people have coerced the power among themselves. Of the two contrasting theorists to Foucault, the evidence provided by Thomas Hobbes argues a better answer parallel to the ideas presented by Foucault. How should power be exercised among the people was the question imposed. Reiterating on Foucault’s answer in that power is an invisible force that lacks physical discipline. Society, out of knowledge of the constant gaze, manipulates their actions to conform to the norms of society and behave accordingly. This self-coercion is successful because it is widespread, lightweight, and easy to enforce. Hobbes has similar notions as to the expression of power in society. People coerce the power among themselves by willing their rights to the Leviathan. The Leviathan is a separate body that is not involved in the social contract that these individuals enter with each other. Being that the Leviathan requires loyalty and is viewed as always being right there is no controversy in the matter, making the delegation of power a peaceful and light process. Hobbes also is in consent with Foucault in that you do not need to exercise discipline to make power work. Power will work if people know that their actions are being accounted for and they can be held responsible for them. Although Machiavelli gives some credible notions as to how power should be exerted, these are the many main concepts as to why Thomas Hobbes provides the better answer to the exercising of power in accordance to
Final Paper
Foucault vs. Hobbes, and Machiavelli Power by definition is the possession of control or command over others; authority; ascendancy. The question is now not what power is but how do the means of which power is exerted form and who or whom enforces these means. There are several ways to answer this question, none of which are entirely correct. By looking at the theories provided by Michel Foucault and comparing them to Machiavelli and Thomas Hobbes we will gain a general understanding of these philosophers response to the ideas Foucault has about power and the correct ways to coerce society. “This enclosed, segmented space, observed at every point, in which the individuals are inserted in a fixed place… …show more content…
All three theorists agree on the fact that the people have coerced the power among themselves. Of the two contrasting theorists to Foucault, the evidence provided by Thomas Hobbes argues a better answer parallel to the ideas presented by Foucault. How should power be exercised among the people was the question imposed. Reiterating on Foucault’s answer in that power is an invisible force that lacks physical discipline. Society, out of knowledge of the constant gaze, manipulates their actions to conform to the norms of society and behave accordingly. This self-coercion is successful because it is widespread, lightweight, and easy to enforce. Hobbes has similar notions as to the expression of power in society. People coerce the power among themselves by willing their rights to the Leviathan. The Leviathan is a separate body that is not involved in the social contract that these individuals enter with each other. Being that the Leviathan requires loyalty and is viewed as always being right there is no controversy in the matter, making the delegation of power a peaceful and light process. Hobbes also is in consent with Foucault in that you do not need to exercise discipline to make power work. Power will work if people know that their actions are being accounted for and they can be held responsible for them. Although Machiavelli gives some credible notions as to how power should be exerted, these are the many main concepts as to why Thomas Hobbes provides the better answer to the exercising of power in accordance to