In this essay I will be discussing the similarities and differences discovered in the writing of Niccolo Machiavelli, The Prince and Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan. Primarily, I will begin by explaining each of the authors approaches to obtaining and maintaining political stability; I will then identify the differences in their approaches. Secondly, I will discuss and compare each of their ideologies concerning humanity and then I will be highlighting their commonalities on the subject. Lastly, a conclusion will be provided consisting of my opinion.
Thomas Hobbes notes, “The Passions that encline men to Peace, are Feare of Death; Desire of such things as are necessary to commodious living; and a Hope by their Industry to obtain them” ([1654] 2009). …show more content…
For example, Hobbes believed the way to initiate and sustain social order and political power was through the development of a social contract, one in which is developed through self-interest; individuals voluntarily decide to relinquish their natural rights and laws and agree to be governed by an all mighty Leviathan ruler, finally becoming subjects of a monarch with the promise of security and prosperity. Machiavelli on the other hand commits to his belief of reputation, laws and arms. Unlike Hobbes Machiavelli suggests the way for a prince to achieve and sustain power is through immoral practices and by military force which will provide him with the opportunity to be feared rather than despised. Although the comparison of Hobbes and Machiavelli’s methods of how to develop and stabilize internal political power has identified specific disagreements the following comparison regarding humanity will demonstrate an agreement between the two …show more content…
I agree with both authors that if there was no authority to instill some degree of fear into humanity, a significant portion would consciously live in the state of nature or revert back to that state without the fear of repercussions. For example: If the university did not have a strict policy concerning plagiarism, a significant amount of intellectual property may be stolen but as a result of the development and enforcement of strict consequences concerning plagiarized materials such as academic misconduct resulting in expulsion, a significant number of students fear the consequences of such actions and therefore avoid plagiarizing all together. Ultimately proving that fear does have an impact on how humanity conducts themselves. Although I agree with Machiavelli and Hobbes concerning their concept of political stability my opinion differs when it comes to certain aspects of their approach. For instance, I do not think it is necessary for an authoritarian to be cruel of immoral in order to enforce social order or the state’s overall political stability. I ultimately believe leaders should lead by example therefore if the ruler desires a civilized state one should demonstrate civilized behaviors to his/her citizens. I do however agree with Machiavelli concerning the need for a significant military
Thomas Hobbes notes, “The Passions that encline men to Peace, are Feare of Death; Desire of such things as are necessary to commodious living; and a Hope by their Industry to obtain them” ([1654] 2009). …show more content…
For example, Hobbes believed the way to initiate and sustain social order and political power was through the development of a social contract, one in which is developed through self-interest; individuals voluntarily decide to relinquish their natural rights and laws and agree to be governed by an all mighty Leviathan ruler, finally becoming subjects of a monarch with the promise of security and prosperity. Machiavelli on the other hand commits to his belief of reputation, laws and arms. Unlike Hobbes Machiavelli suggests the way for a prince to achieve and sustain power is through immoral practices and by military force which will provide him with the opportunity to be feared rather than despised. Although the comparison of Hobbes and Machiavelli’s methods of how to develop and stabilize internal political power has identified specific disagreements the following comparison regarding humanity will demonstrate an agreement between the two …show more content…
I agree with both authors that if there was no authority to instill some degree of fear into humanity, a significant portion would consciously live in the state of nature or revert back to that state without the fear of repercussions. For example: If the university did not have a strict policy concerning plagiarism, a significant amount of intellectual property may be stolen but as a result of the development and enforcement of strict consequences concerning plagiarized materials such as academic misconduct resulting in expulsion, a significant number of students fear the consequences of such actions and therefore avoid plagiarizing all together. Ultimately proving that fear does have an impact on how humanity conducts themselves. Although I agree with Machiavelli and Hobbes concerning their concept of political stability my opinion differs when it comes to certain aspects of their approach. For instance, I do not think it is necessary for an authoritarian to be cruel of immoral in order to enforce social order or the state’s overall political stability. I ultimately believe leaders should lead by example therefore if the ruler desires a civilized state one should demonstrate civilized behaviors to his/her citizens. I do however agree with Machiavelli concerning the need for a significant military