The Philosophies Of Machiavelli, Hobbes, And Locke

1881 Words 8 Pages
Between the philosophies laid out by Machiavelli, Hobbes, and Locke, political thought in regards to politics, governmental structure, and the rights of man have increased throughout time. Through my essay, I aim to discuss how Hobbes built on Machiavelli’s thoughts, and how Locke built on Hobbes, while discussing their differences in view points. Subsequently, I will also discuss how the views of each philosopher mentioned compares and contrasts to the ideas of Plato discussed in the Socratic dialogue, The Republic.
Machiavelli essentially laid out his ideal blue print for government in his works, The Prince. It is here where he addressed issues of potentially influencing and winning over the citizens of the respective princedoms. An advocate
…show more content…
The nature of man, as Machiavelli described it, was that “all men are ready to change masters in the hope of bettering themselves. In this belief, they will take up arms against their master” (Machiavelli 5.)
With the publication of Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes brought his beliefs on the foundation and extent of government to the next level of political thought. Hobbes touched base with Machiavelli’s notion of the nature of man, agreeing with the idea that every man has the want to benefit himself, but then extended that theory into what he called the “state of nature”. While Machiavelli focused more on the aspects of rule from a prince’s perspective, Hobbes focuses more on the idea of man. Hobbes gives us the definition of the state of nature and the purpose of man’s existence in Leviathan. Once again, “every man for himself” is the theme. Hobbes state of nature is essentially an endless drive of desire and the will of man to do anything to attain that want. In the state of nature, this drive for power is fundamental and no matter how much is
…show more content…
Plato believed each individual in society served a function and possessed distinct qualifications that made him suitable for a particular task therefor essentially stating there is an inherent line to such. Those at the top of society, would be possessed certain traits that made them morally superior to others. It was believed to be a necessity because with out it, people would fall prey to desires. Hobbes in difference believed in the idea that there was no elite class in society that could claim to have a complete possession of truth but still believed a governing body to rule society was a necessity. Hobbes believed that no man was intrinsically better than another. “Yet when all is reckoned together, the difference between man and man is not so considerable” (Hobbes

Related Documents