Paper Summary:

The paper discusses Hobbes' ideas of leadership as the means to a good society by manipulating or instilling fear and Machiavelli's emphasis on how a ruler should appeal to human nature in creating order. The paper explains how both theorists believed that the natural state of affairs without leadership was bound to be chaos. The paper discusses how Hobbes saw political violence as a clear sign of a social order falling back into the natural state of chaos, just as Machiavelli perceived this violence as a sign of a ruler having failed to do what was required to preserve and protect a social order.

Outline:
Introduction
Machiavelli on the Ruler
The Good Society
Conclusion

From the Paper:

"Niccolo Machiavelli (1469-1527) and Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) knew turbulent times. Machiavelli experienced the 1498 French invasion of Florence and the flight of the Medici family, and Hobbes's views owed to the very violent English Civil War, his The Leviathan's ideas said to have been achieved by the War's time in the human personality as motivated by fear. This influenced his ideas of leadership as the means to a good society by manipulating or instilling fear. Machiavelli shared an emphasis on how a ruler should appeal to human nature in creating order. The natural state of affairs without leadership was bound to be chaos."

Sample of Sources Used:

• Hobbes, Thomas. The Leviathan. New York: Dutton, 1960.
• Machiavelli, Niccolo. The Prince. Trans. George Bull. London: Penguin, 2003.
• The Discourses. Trans. Harvey C. Mansfield Jr. and Nathan Tarcoy. New York and London: University of California Press, 1995.

Visitors who viewed this Comparison Essay also liked these:

• Book Review # 132631 : "Good Society in "The Prince" and "The Leviathan"
• Essay # 6254 : "Niccolo Machiavelli and Thomas Hobbes"
• Comparison Essay # 67775 : "Political Philosophers"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: