Preview

Compare And Contrast Machiavelli And Hobbes

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1306 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Compare And Contrast Machiavelli And Hobbes
While in exile, Niccoló Machiavelli and Thomas Hobbes wrote about their political views on how to inaugurate a sturdy government. During each of their lives, they both contributed political philosophies that had differences and similarities. In Machiavelli’s The Prince and Hobbes’s The Leviathan, their philosophies are portrayed on how to maintain a stable government. Hobbes is recognized as the founder of the most later Western political philosophy in response to the social contract theory he established in his 1651 book Leviathan. Machiavelli is also a founder of an important term that has a lot of meaning in history. He is the founder of “Machiavellianism”, the person considers their goals to be of prime importance and that any method may be used to achieve them. …show more content…
According to Machiavelli, the first method for estimating the intelligence of a ruler is to look at the men he has around him. As I read this quote I concluded that Machiavelli was trying to say that if you look at the people that surround a ruler, they can only be people that he thinks is as intelligent as him. On the contrary, Hobbes belief on the nature of men states that men might see other people that have different characteristics then their own, but they need to realize that these kind of people who do not portray the same qualities as themselves do exist. Machiavelli was a risk-taker, he believed that people should choose leaders who were able to live with the risks that they took. Machiavelli stumbled upon conclusions through his observations of how individuals actually behaved rather than the way they should behave in a theoretical

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    The lack of an impartial judge is a defining characteristic of the state of nature, and this lack of a common judge can lead to confusion and violence therefore leading to the state of war. The state of nature and the state of war are not two separate concepts but the state of nature has the fundamental problem and civil government is the solution for the problems of the state of nature.…

    • 397 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    When comparing Hobbes,’ Sandel’s and Machiavelli’s viewpoints regarding which of Aristotle’s three main categories of knowledge is the most significant for establishing good political systems or making good political decisions, one must consider what each theorists considers to be a good political system and create a link between the two. The most important category of knowledge for establishing and making good political systems for Aristotle is practical knowledge, the purpose of politics is to produce good, virtuous citizens, the law promotes just actions, purpose of legislators is to establish good laws. The most important category of knowledge for Hobbes is scientific knowledge, the absolute sovereign represents the commonwealth of its citizens, the absolute sovereign must uphold their self preservation, and all laws…

    • 1957 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    The understanding of human nature and the effects it has on the individual and society has been a serious topic in the philosophical world. Nicolo Machiavelli and Thomas Hobbes were well known for their crucial roles in forming the foundation of political philosophy. While reading through Machiavelli’s The Prince and Hobbes’ Leviathan, both introduced a common focus on political theory even though living approximately 100 years apart. While learning about these two philosophers and their proposed theories, I noticed an innate relationship in the discussion of society’s human nature. Machiavelli ([1532] 2006) in The Prince theorizes the qualities that a dominant leader should have to gain and maintain power.…

    • 292 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Machiavelli was an author and an aspiring political figure who had a strong influence on several aspects of Europe’s government. Due to his critical writings in The Prince, many historians see Machiavelli as a cruel and diabolical political figure whose true intentions were to gain power for himself. However, after looking further into Machiavelli’s political past, one can see that Machiavelli is in fact an intelligent man who possesses a hidden motive to write his novel. In his work, he covered several topics that were used by future city-state leaders to help them become successful. Machiavelli proves to be an astute political mind who used his political experience to assess the actions of famous princes and to write The Prince as a noteworthy…

    • 931 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Niccolo Machiavelli was an Italian historian, politician, diplomat, and philosopher during the late 1400s early 1500s. Machiavelli is considered the father of modern political theory; and his theories are most prominent in his short book, “The Prince”. Machiavelli’s “The Prince” is main purpose is to tell rulers how to remain in power once they have gained it. The best way to go about ruling according to Machiavelli is to simply rule well. However if this does not work Machiavelli recommends several different strategies such as the use of violence. During Machiavelli’s time his theories were not widely accepted and because of this he died in shame. Machiavelli acted on his thoughts and beliefs despite what society taught and believed. However once time passed Machiavelli’s philosophies were better understood and accepted. Other philosophers began take portions of his philosophy to add to their own. This brought upon a new respected look to Machiavelli rather than the shameful look he died with.…

    • 439 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Hobbes Vs Machiavelli

    • 121 Words
    • 1 Page

    Lastly, both Hobbes and Machiavelli agree in their opinion of man what is one that is very negative. In the novel The Prince, Machiavelli states that men are “ungrateful, fickle, deceptive, and deceiving, avoiders of danger, eager to gain” (Machiavelli < 1542 > 2006). Similarly, in the novel Leviathan, Hobbes states how the life of a man is “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short” (Hobbes < 1651 > 2009). This shows how both Machiavelli and Hobbes see men and their lives as very negative aspects, but differ in what there perspectives are of it. Machiavelli explains how men are unreliable and not worth trusting when Hobbes is explaining how life naturally is terrible and without sovereignty, life and man are nothing.…

    • 121 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Many philosophers, such as John Locke and Thomas Hobbes, have discussed over the years if he human race is naturally good or evil. People than choice their side of the argument, one side believing that humans have a basically good nature that is corrupted by society, while the other side believes that humans have a bad nature that is kept in check by society. As John Locke believes that the human race is good, it is reasonable to accept as true because we are born neutral, with free will, and fear of a higher power.…

    • 577 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Thomas Hobbes and John Locke were two of the great political theorists of their time. They both provided wonderful philosophical texts on how our government should govern us. This paper will show the largest differences and some of the similarities between Thomas Hobbes' Leviathan and John Locke's Second Treatise on Civil Government. Although they do have some similarities, Hobbes and Locke have different views on most of their political arguments, and I will expand on their differences on the state of nature, government, and social contract.…

    • 841 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    His writings are maddeningly and notoriously unsystematic, inconsistent and sometimes self-contradictory. He tends to appeal to experience and example in the place of rigorous logical analysis. Yet succeeding thinkers who more easily qualify as philosophers of the first rank did (and do) feel compelled to engage with his ideas, either to dispute them or to incorporate his insights into their own teachings. Machiavelli may have grazed at the fringes of philosophy, but the impact of his musings has been widespread and lasting. The terms “Machiavellian” or “Machiavellism” find regular purchase among philosophers concerned with a range of ethical, political, and psychological phenomena, even if Machiavelli did not invent “Machiavellism” and may not even have been a “Machiavellian” in the sense often ascribed to him.…

    • 1016 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Machiavelli believed in the idea of a strong leader. The leader should be feared more than he is loved, if he is even loved at all. A leader shouldn 't be hated, a hated leader will be rebelled and possibly killed, but a leader can not be loved at all. He believes that if a leader is loved, he wouldn 't be feared and no one will listen to him or what he wants to do. Machiavelli believed that war was needed and a nation should keep a strong military at all times. War shouldn 't be high on taxes though, because taxes have a possibility to cause a rebellion. A rebellion is an act of hatred and could possibly lead to death of the…

    • 1162 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Machiavelli V. Bush

    • 603 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Niccolo Machiavelli’s ideal princely duties include “all mercy, all loyal, all sincerity, all humanity, all religion” (Rebhorn). Italian born, he carries a passionate enthusiasm for the Florentine republic. The Da Vinci of politics, Machiavelli manipulates deceit and duplicity to pursue political goals. Machiavelli presents his political ideals of princely responsibility via his legacy “The Prince”. Claimed as a paramount political activist and a brilliant strategy thinker, Machiavelli’s philosophy soared centuries ahead of his time.…

    • 603 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Niccolo Machiavelli, known as the founding father of modern Political Science, lived between 1469 and 1752 in Florence in what is known today as Italy. He is not only known for his work in politics and diplomacy, as he was also a well-versed historian. He employed the method of citing historic figures and events in his justification for the suggestions he made in his famous book: The Prince. In the book that was dedicated to Lorenzo Medici, Machiavelli raises many important aspects relating to the political environment, governance and ethics of an individual in possession of political power citing political actions that should and should not be taken, the state briefly and violence in governing which is studied by political philosophers today as there are many ancient concepts…

    • 1933 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    In Discourses on Livy, Machiavelli argues that the purpose of politics is to promote a “common good.” This statement holds true in Machiavelli’s The Prince, albeit differently than one might expect. It is evident in The Prince that Machiavelli believes ensuring the common good of the community should hold high priority; therefore a primary duty of the Prince to fulfill. Machiavelli’s view on how this should be obtained, however, drastically opposes the opinions and views of political philosophers of his time.…

    • 802 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Human Nature and Power

    • 1324 Words
    • 6 Pages

    During the Renaissance, many brilliant philosophers have explored the concept of human nature. The question, what motivates humanity has been taken into consideration in the composure of virtually every society. By establishing that premise, many went on to create an ideal society with the intention of developing that thought. Niccolo Machiavelli and Thomas More are outstanding representatives among them. In both More's Utopia and Machiavelli's The Prince, perfect societies are constructed. However, More and Machiavelli have different opinions about the human nature in relation to the role of power and authority.…

    • 1324 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    The basis of both Leviathan written by Thomas Hobbes and Niccolo Machiavelli's The Prince revolves around the use of Natural Law as well as the methods of governing people vis-à-vis the writers' perspectives on virtues and morality in the existence of a monarch. In my understanding, both books provide an interactive and discursive yet subjective extension towards the idea of government and its people, more so to the rights as well as the nature of human beings. Both books give insights to the intellectual minds of their writers, allowing me to delve into issues which I have never thought before, some of which are still applicable till today. I shall begin with my version of practical criticism on Leviathan, thereafter move to Machiavelli's The Prince, giving my perspectives on what I feel is a better form of government and the reasons I deem as appropriate to answer the requirement of this assignment; on the role of government as a socializing agent as well as the role of morality in the effectiveness of social control.…

    • 2866 Words
    • 12 Pages
    Powerful Essays