Hobbes and Machiavelli each concentrate on different aspects of the people’s relationship to their government, especially in regards to the purpose for its existence and the limitations of power a government might have. In Leviathan, Hobbes’ expresses the fundamental belief that the establishment of government is necessary to prevent society from descending into man’s natural condition, which he defines as uncertainty that ultimately leads to anarchy. Hobbes’ beliefs regarding the role of government in society are primarily influenced by the English Civil War that took place during his lifetime, as he views it as an instance where people were in a state of extreme turmoil as a result of having an unstable government. As a result, Hobbes
…show more content…
It is clear that Hobbes and Machiavelli both share a pessimistic view of humanity and that they believe that fear is the most effective way of governing people, likely since they both lived in turbulent times in history and experienced political upheaval firsthand. In The Last Days of Socrates, Socrates shares a similar disdain for the political leaders who have brought him to be executed, as he believes that they do not possess the wisdom necessary to govern. He ultimately does not concern himself with politics, but deeply values and believes that wisdom, the pursuit of the truth, and admitting one’s ignorance are the keys to an intelligent and secure society. It can be concluded that Socrates would not fully agree with either Hobbes’ or Machiavelli’s ideas regarding the role of government as neither of them focus on wisdom, but rather, Hobbes’ priority is to prevent the regression to man’s original state of nature, and Machiavelli concerns himself with attaining and preserving political power. However, Socrates might agree with some of Hobbes and Machiavelli’s ideas as being conducive to establishing a just political regime since they both strive to benefit society as a whole, although he is more likely to agree with …show more content…
In short, Socrates believes that men who are not aware of their ignorance plague society and that wisdom of this knowledge would bring great benefit to society, whereas Hobbes deems that the most important facet of the state’s role in society is the stability it ensures as a result of the social contract. Socrates would also not entirely agree with Hobbes’ concept of the social contract to its full extent. In Leviathan, Hobbes states that “a subject who brings an action against the sovereign, brings it against himself” under the terms of the social contract which provide that people gave the authority to the sovereign in the first place (Hobbes, 2008, p. 151). Although it may seem as if Socrates will not accept Crito’s plan to rescue (what is being rescued?)from execution because he feels that it would be against the law, his fundamental concern is that it would be unjust to do so. Socrates asks Crito several times about whether it would be better to worry about what “people in general will say or “the expert in justice and injustice…the single authority and with him, the truth itself” (Plato, 2003, p. 86). This “single authority” is not the group of people governing Athens that are in control of whether he lives or dies. This demonstrates how although Socrates does
It is clear that Hobbes and Machiavelli both share a pessimistic view of humanity and that they believe that fear is the most effective way of governing people, likely since they both lived in turbulent times in history and experienced political upheaval firsthand. In The Last Days of Socrates, Socrates shares a similar disdain for the political leaders who have brought him to be executed, as he believes that they do not possess the wisdom necessary to govern. He ultimately does not concern himself with politics, but deeply values and believes that wisdom, the pursuit of the truth, and admitting one’s ignorance are the keys to an intelligent and secure society. It can be concluded that Socrates would not fully agree with either Hobbes’ or Machiavelli’s ideas regarding the role of government as neither of them focus on wisdom, but rather, Hobbes’ priority is to prevent the regression to man’s original state of nature, and Machiavelli concerns himself with attaining and preserving political power. However, Socrates might agree with some of Hobbes and Machiavelli’s ideas as being conducive to establishing a just political regime since they both strive to benefit society as a whole, although he is more likely to agree with …show more content…
In short, Socrates believes that men who are not aware of their ignorance plague society and that wisdom of this knowledge would bring great benefit to society, whereas Hobbes deems that the most important facet of the state’s role in society is the stability it ensures as a result of the social contract. Socrates would also not entirely agree with Hobbes’ concept of the social contract to its full extent. In Leviathan, Hobbes states that “a subject who brings an action against the sovereign, brings it against himself” under the terms of the social contract which provide that people gave the authority to the sovereign in the first place (Hobbes, 2008, p. 151). Although it may seem as if Socrates will not accept Crito’s plan to rescue (what is being rescued?)from execution because he feels that it would be against the law, his fundamental concern is that it would be unjust to do so. Socrates asks Crito several times about whether it would be better to worry about what “people in general will say or “the expert in justice and injustice…the single authority and with him, the truth itself” (Plato, 2003, p. 86). This “single authority” is not the group of people governing Athens that are in control of whether he lives or dies. This demonstrates how although Socrates does