Locke And Marx Compare And Contrast

Improved Essays
Why is society the way it is today? Most will say, “Because of history.” Yes that is correct, but why? Society is the way it is today because of influential beliefs, and philosophers who portrayed and evolved these beliefs. Of these philosophers, the ones being studied are Niccolo Machiavelli, John Locke, and Karl Marx. While Machiavelli believed that the kings and monarchs should have all control over the people, Locke and Marx believed in the opposite. Locke and Marx believed in human reason, while Machiavelli did not. This is the major difference between Machiavelli, Locke, and Marx. Marx and Locke had very similar beliefs, but differed in some ways. Machiavelli set the precedent for societal beliefs, then followed Locke who completely countered Machiavelli’s beliefs, and last was Marx, who agreed with Locke, but expanded and evolved his ideas. …show more content…
Not only is equality a major factor of human reason, but living peacefully amongst one another is another. A peaceful world is attainable through Locke and Marx’s beliefs of human reason because society is remaining equal and creating their own equal opportunities. Contrary to Locke and Marx’s beliefs, Machiavelli believes that the Prince and Monarch’s should have absolute power over the citizens. He expanded on this in his book The Prince, which basically stated all the necessary rulings of the Prince and how to be successful. The difference between the two beliefs is that with Marx and Locke, all man is equal from birth, but with Machiavelli, man is born to whatsoever their circumstances are and so they must

Related Documents

  • Great Essays

    Fredric Bastiat and Karl Marx thought themselves to be able to see the future, to be able to see where history was going, to where the world was progressing to. Perhaps they saw themselves to be men of vision, able to predict not only how things would become but how they should become. Whether one considers them to be visionaries or perhaps men with high and unobtainable ideals, is up to one’s self. By some they were thought to be visionaries, some took their words to heart, others would consider their works and their words nothing more than worthless drivel. Both Karl Marx and Fredric Bastiat lived during a similar period of the nineteenth century.…

    • 2117 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Niccolò Machiavelli and Alvar Núñez Cabeza de Vaca went through different experiences that led them to have their own perspectives in human nature and create their ideals for good governance. The simple fact that Cabeza de Vaca was unfortunate enough to have a hard time throughout the expedition made him more open minded about human nature, while Machiavelli had a set idea of what human nature was and how it ties to good governance. Machiavelli's view on human nature is the same as what is a good governance a good leader and a good human being is someone who knows how to be respected and feared without being hated and how that leads to have the people the Prince governs happy and on his side. Cabeza de Vaca has a more down to earth view on human nature but that differs…

    • 2016 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Beginning in the 1600s, European philosophers began thinking about how a nation should be governed. Many of these philosophers began moving towards a democracy, rather than the absolute monarchy they were under. Two of the most influential Enlightenment thinkers were John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Although John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau lived at different times during the Enlightenment period, Locke from 1632 to 1704 and Rousseau from 1712 to 1778, their thoughts on society and its political form are comparable. Both Locke and Rousseau believed that the people should form a government, however, their ideas of government differed.…

    • 1235 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    He argues that the main factor in the development of history is human need for unity and well-organized community. He points out that from basic needs of human, which include food, water, shelter and clothes comes a greatest of all: the need for close interaction between people. Since the beginnings of every civilization people realized that living together in a close relations is very beneficial. Even though Freud argues men are very aggressive, they tend to overcome this inclination and try working together to attain happiness. The need for individual interest is lost as members of the community discover that one will not be able to survive alone without the help of others.…

    • 907 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Throughout history philosophers have argued over every topic one could imagine however one of the most explored topics is the rights of citizens. What must those who enter a society under their free will give up to be an active member? Is the government allowed to ask you to give up some of your rights for the betterment of society? Questions such as these and countless more have been answered and debated by philosophers for years. Some of the most prominent arguments have been made by John Stuart Mill and John Locke.…

    • 1161 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Locke believed in a limited, representative government while Rousseau believed in a direct form of government by the people. Locke believed that the powers of the government are to be limited. He believed the government should only exist to protect life, liberty, and property and if the government were to overstep that authority, then the public would have a right to overthrow the government. As I said before, Thomas Jefferson paid homage to these ideals during his drafting of the Declaration of Independence. Along with separation of powers between the House of Commons and House of Lords,2 Locke’s ideals greatly influenced American government where power is vested in a bicameral legislature along with an executive and judicial branch.…

    • 1297 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    In the written work “The Prince” by Niccolo Machiavelli the author elaborates on how a prince can only be a strong leader if he engages in duplicity. Machiavelli focused on a more realistic and immoral strategy to keep the people of his time unified, realpolitik a system based on practical rather than moral considerations. The author, Niccolo Machiavelli, goes through great depths to explain why it takes rulers who are “cruel, dishonest, duplicitous, and manipulative.” There are many great examples to prove his ideology, however, the writing is very subjective and bias as Machiavelli does not give a rebuttal to the different kinds of ruling. He writes “The Prince” after the current leading family of his time falls in order to keep the stability…

    • 1637 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Niccolò Machiavelli spent a large majority of his aristocratic platform defaming the many intrinsic characteristics of human emotion and experience. He consciously ignored the essential acts of care and compassion while promoting a message of fear and hate. His teachings offered detailed instructions on the succession and maintenance of a fear-abiding society encapsulated by submission. His philosophy stated that the best interest of the general public was to irrefutably follow the rule of law. To Machiavelli, a human life could be explained as an expendable resource, awaiting its designated task to serve the ruling class.…

    • 904 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Karl Marx and Sigmund Freud came from two different eras as well as two different modes of thinking. At first, Marx and Freud to be taken together in academic field seem to be inappropriate. Marx concerns himself to the society, on how to free man from the alienation brought about by the capitalism. Freud concerns himself on the workings of the mind on the root cause of why man is acting this way and that way. The endeavor to put the two different fields of study in a nutshell and put them in the same circle would appear to be a futile effort because it would mean to break the importance of the ideas of each scholar.…

    • 1202 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    look at John Locke and Niccole Machiavelli John Locke and Niccole Machiavelli are two philosophers from the Renaissance period, who focused their work on creating a better society and government. Their work consists of theories of how rulers should rule their land and how they can get their subjects support. Locke’s Two Treaties of Government of Civil Government, is contrary to Machiavelli’s book The Prince. Whereas, Locke’s book is to justify the revolution of when King James II was removed from power, Machiavelli’s book is about how a ruler should exercise his power and gain control. Machiavelli’s theory is similar to dictatorship and Locke’s theory is the basis for classical liberalism.…

    • 880 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    “The lion cannot protect himself from traps, and the fox cannot defend himself from wolves. One must therefore be a fox to recognize traps, and a lion to frighten wolves.” Machiavelli uses this analogy as an attempt to teach the masses how to embrace their human significance. Machiavelli wrote The Prince at a time where there was political unrest and confusion in Italy, which is why it can be interpreted in many different ways, such as a political satire or epilogue of his political views; however, while the content may be confusing the true meaning of The Prince is to be understood as a satire. Machiavelli is continuously sarcastic through out the course of the novel about the government standings and the changing world.…

    • 1412 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Philosophers John Locke and George Berkeley agreed that knowledge is derived from experience. However, while Locke argued that knowledge is also acquired through our senses, such as, primary qualities, the perception, and secondary qualities, the object perceived, Berkeley argued that our minds and ideas are the sole essence of most knowledge, except knowledge of self and knowledge of God. As a subjective idealist, he believed that physical objects only exist as they are perceived. More specifically, there are no primary or secondary properties of objects in themselves, and also, matter cannot be discovered through sensory perception. Both philosophers claimed that knowledge comes through experience, but Berkeley argues that material objects cannot exist if not experienced.…

    • 575 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    The sovereign exercises legislative power, but a government is needed to exercise executive power. Although Rousseau and Marx share similarities in their thoughts regarding how property and property ownership separates society into different classes, Marx is more radical thinker. He is more concerned with the economics portion of property and society, rather than politics like Rousseau. Marx doesn 't want property to be a part of politics, while Rousseau 's theory regarding the emergence of society is based solely off of that. Marx believes private property should be…

    • 1114 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Second Paper- Marx vs. Weber Sociologist, Karl Marx and Max Weber, have spent their sociological careers researching and developing theories of how to make a good society. Both Marx and Weber, go about answering this question slightly different. Karl Marx believes there can be no such thing as a good society as long as history lasts, while Max Weber on the other hand believes in a good society, only when the society and its individuals are free. Max Weber is a sociologist associated with the German tradition of sociology. To answer the question of if it is possible to make a good society, Weber would respond with yes, it is possible to create a good society, however a good society is only formed when the society is free (Lecture 11/01/16).…

    • 993 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Two philosophers that have heavily influenced the world of philosophy as we now know it, René Descartes and John Locke, have not always agreed on the same beliefs. In fact, they almost always argued on what each other felt was true except for the unlikely agreement on a few things. This brings me to one particular argument dealing with the issue on innate ideas. Descartes side of the argument believes that we born with ideas (innate ideas) and Locke believes our ideas come from experience and the senses. Ideas have to stem off of something and the only way for us to have that base for an idea is to experience it.…

    • 1385 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays