I think Plato and Machiavelli are known as two orominent philosphers.Who brought out the creativity in the political life.Both them have many simiilarites in between them.The first similarity in them is that Plato wants only the best should be the head of the etate in his view socartes are the best suitable for that job where as Machiavelli thinks that the prince should be the head of the state because he think mostly price are capaable of doing many things which other people can not.Both Plato
Premium Political philosophy Government Democracy
level of understanding life as we have mentioned before; in this essay though we have decided to focus on two very influential readings in the prism of literature. The first one being that by Confucius entitled Analects and the second reading by Machiavelli entitled The Prince. We will be trying to compare the two authors based on different themes and concepts; but before doing that we must acquire a certain level of background about both the two authors and the two readings. The Analects of Confucius
Premium Confucius Morality Virtue
Pope Alexander VI‚ kings in Italy did not respect the popes and their authority. After him‚ other popes continued to increase the power of the church. Machiavelli suggests Lorenzo de’ Medici to make his position great through his goodness. One thing I can notice in this chapter is the ambition for power of the popes who they claim to be the
Premium Christianity Catholic Church Pope
1. When Machiavelli discusses that there are two kinds of combat‚ one with laws and one with force‚ what he is really talking about is that for a prince to be successful he must learn how to manage both. Machiavelli uses the lion and the fox example in order to make a metaphor out of the entire situation. A fox is cunning and smart and is therefore immune to traps. However‚ a fox cannot defend itself against a larger and more powerful animal such as a wolf — that’s where the lion comes in. A lion
Premium Human Lion Dog
HOW SHOULD BE A LEADER? There are a lot of intellectuals who have books and different thoughts about government and authority. One of them is Machiavelli who is reputed with his book the Prince’. This book includes some advice to leaders. Machiavelli claims in Prince’ (chapter XVI‚ XVII‚ XVIII) that a prince should be miser than liberal‚ should prefer being feared rather than being loved‚ and should not be faithful. In my opinion‚ a leader shuld not be miser and should prefer being loved
Premium Political philosophy Leadership Love
of government with of Machiavelli in the next selection. Consider what seem to be the ultimate purposes of government‚ what seem to the obligations of the leader to the people being led‚ and what seems to be the main work of the state. What comparisons can you make between Lao-tzu’s Master and Machiavelli’s Prince. Summary: The writings of Machiavelli and Lao Tzu indicate that they would disagree most strongly on the concept of how a government should run. Machiavelli believed that in strong
Premium Political philosophy
Lao-Tzu was an ancient Chinese philosopher during the 6th century. Conversely‚ Machiavelli was an Italian historian‚ author‚ diplomat‚ philosopher‚ and politician that lived almost two thousand years later during the Renaissance. Although both are from completely different times and cultures; neither would disagree that leadership is essential in the success or failure of society. After all‚ at its simplistic core government is just a hierarchy of leadership that exist to serve its fellow citizens
Premium Political philosophy Government United States
Lao-Tzu‚ Machiavelli‚ and the American Government Lao-Tzu’s "Thoughts from the Tao-te Ching" and Machiavelli’s "The Qualities of a Prince" both have the ultimate goal of making better leaders. The tactics that each writer chooses to present as a guide for the leader are almost opposite of each other. Today’s American government would benefit from a combination of the two extreme ideas. Lao-Tzu’s laissez-faire attitude towards the economy‚ as well as his small scale‚ home defense military is
Premium Political philosophy Federal government of the United States United States
MACHIAVELLI VS. KING GEORGE III During colonial times‚ King George III was a tyrant ruler. He was unstable and constantly inflicted hardship upon the people of the American Colonies. King George III thought that imposing more demands on the colonists would allow him to reach his goals such as bringing in more money for the British government. Machiavelli‚ on the other hand‚ thought that a ruler needed his subjects to be on his side so that there would be less resistance. King George III did
Premium Colonialism American Revolution Political philosophy
to a certain point‚ and familiarize their concerns about good government‚ order‚ and human nature. While many have argued that Machiavelli‚ Hobbes‚ and Locke are clearly distinguished from the ancient thinkers‚ this paper will argue that some of the ideas of Plato and Aristotle continued so for modern theorists. Primarily‚ this paper will recap the influences of Machiavelli‚ Hobbes‚ and Locke.
Premium Political philosophy Plato Aristotle