Compare Plato Locke And Machiavelli
HOW DO PLATO, LOCKE AND MACHIAVELLI ADDRESS THHOW DO PLATO, LOCKE AND MACHIAVELLI ADDRESS THE CONCEPTS OF POWER, AUTHORITY AND LEGITEMACY?
Plato, Locke and Machiavelli deal with addressing the concepts of power, legitimacy and authority through illustrating constant contrasts and the underpinning of authority.
Plato deals especially with the legitimacy of those in power focusing on the morality of politics and the need for the enlightenment of authority (Spragens, 1997:41), but looking at the status quo with an air of introspection; with The Apology being a core example of the crisis of legitimacy. Locke further builds on the notion of the crisis of legitimacy when dealing with the social contract, to argue that rulers rule at the behest
of the ruled. Stating that, “the masses will resist political usurpation” (Spragens, 1997:34).
Unlike Locke, Hobbes deals with the power of authority saying that during times of crisis and war man reverts to nature and there is a war of all against all resulting in no civil society; advocating that a strong state is imperative to maintaining order and control.
Machiavelli brings forth a similar ideal to that of Hobbes which is in contrast to the notions of Plato. In talking about power, through his book The Prince we are faced with the concept of ruling with an iron fist, “A wise prince will take action in peaceful times in order to resist adversities when fortune changes. Thus force is the central tenet in the maintenance of power” (Machiavelli, 1532). Machiavelli speaks about Francesco Sforza and Cesare Borgia when dealing with the notion of fortune versus virtue, making it clear that in dealing with morality one is dealing with reality and not on assumptions of perfectibility, arguing that the principle foundations of all states are good laws and good arms.
Through this brief analysis it has been shown that politics and political theory is constantly intertwined and constantly contrasting. Illustrating the importance of constant intellectual commentary on the status quo.
References
Thomas A, Spragens. 1997. Understanding Political Theory. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Translation by Benjamin Jowett. 1909-14. Plato. The Apolgy, Phædo and Crito, Vol. II, Part 1. The Harvard Classics. New York: Collier and Son
Plato, Locke and Machiavelli deal with addressing the concepts of power, legitimacy and authority through illustrating constant contrasts and the underpinning of authority.
Plato deals especially with the legitimacy of those in power focusing on the morality of politics and the need for the enlightenment of authority (Spragens, 1997:41), but looking at the status quo with an air of introspection; with The Apology being a core example of the crisis of legitimacy. Locke further builds on the notion of the crisis of legitimacy when dealing with the social contract, to argue that rulers rule at the behest
of the ruled. Stating that, “the masses will resist political usurpation” (Spragens, 1997:34).
Unlike Locke, Hobbes deals with the power of authority saying that during times of crisis and war man reverts to nature and there is a war of all against all resulting in no civil society; advocating that a strong state is imperative to maintaining order and control.
Machiavelli brings forth a similar ideal to that of Hobbes which is in contrast to the notions of Plato. In talking about power, through his book The Prince we are faced with the concept of ruling with an iron fist, “A wise prince will take action in peaceful times in order to resist adversities when fortune changes. Thus force is the central tenet in the maintenance of power” (Machiavelli, 1532). Machiavelli speaks about Francesco Sforza and Cesare Borgia when dealing with the notion of fortune versus virtue, making it clear that in dealing with morality one is dealing with reality and not on assumptions of perfectibility, arguing that the principle foundations of all states are good laws and good arms.
Through this brief analysis it has been shown that politics and political theory is constantly intertwined and constantly contrasting. Illustrating the importance of constant intellectual commentary on the status quo.
References
Thomas A, Spragens. 1997. Understanding Political Theory. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Translation by Benjamin Jowett. 1909-14. Plato. The Apolgy, Phædo and Crito, Vol. II, Part 1. The Harvard Classics. New York: Collier and Son