Comparing Hobbes and Machiavelli

Paper Summary:

The beginning of the paper talks about the foundations of modern political theory and how much of our understanding evolved from the work of these two authors, Machiavelli and Thomas Hobbes, two of the earliest political theorists. The paper takes key arguments from both authors through their texts, "Leviathan" by Hobbes and "The Prince" by Machiavelli, on their views of human nature and how best to resolve the issues that arise from each of the works. Both arrive at the conclusion to allow the existence of an absolute monarch because, ultimately, his arbitrary rule benefits us.

From the Paper:

"The ideas of good government and stability resonate throughout their works, leading us to surmise that both would favor a strong stable government as opposed to a weak or anarchical society. Government exists to protect its citizens from each other, to ensure their survival and prosperity; government regulates men and their interaction and therefore inevitably stabilizes society. Both men differ in their words alone, but the meaning behind those words are the same. Further, these words resonate in political theory today not as they spoke them but as fancy terms such as "Prisoners Dilemma" or "chaos theory", yet their origins come from political theorists long since deceased."

More papers on Comparing Hobbes and Machiavelli:

• Comparison Essay # 70153 : "Hobbes and Machiavelli"
• Comparison Essay # 41680 : "Hobbes and Machiavelli Compared"
• Comparison Essay # 103102 : "Authority: Hobbes and Machiavelli"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: