| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "MACHIAVELLI HOBBES RIDLEY SCOTT GLADIATOR": |
|
|
Machiavelli, Hobbes and Ridley Scott's "Gladiator", 2002.
An analysis of the representation of power and its abuse according to Machiavelli and Hobbes as seen in the world of Ridley Scott's "Gladiator".
3,150 words (approx. 12.6 pages), 4 sources, $ 115.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper will examine the political philosophies of Machiavelli and Hobbes in application to the question of the use and abuse of power in "Gladiator". It will be seen that Machiavelli and Hobbes would agree that the insane villain, Emperor Commodus, was actually an insightful political leader. While the movie collapses the distinction between the personal and the political - with the whining, incestuous Commodus contrasted unfavourably with the "family values" of Maximus - neither Machiavelli nor Hobbes considered personal morality of any significance in the arena of political life.
| |
|
"Gladiator" by Ridley Scott, 2007.
This paper discusses the epic film, "Gladiator" by Ridley Scott.
1,718 words (approx. 6.9 pages), 7 sources, MLA, $ 55.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper looks at the main character of Maximus in the film "Gladiator". The paper examines the reception of Maximus in three different nations; Canada, Great Britain and Australia and discusses how the respective cultures of each land embraced or rejected him according to their tastes. The paper shows how trans-national responses to Hollywood productions are culturally-determined responses that offer a great insight into the political economy of nations.
From the Paper
"Ridley Scott's "Gladiator" was one film that endured anything but an uneventful production and filming process. For one thing, veteran actor Oliver Reed died before he completed all of his scenes; for another, the elaborate battle scenes which are one of the chief attractions of the film were frequently logistical and artistic "nightmares". Additionally, the live tigers used in the making of those unforgettable scenes occasionally got "too close for comfort" - at least for Scott. Finally, the film was expensive, with the eventual production cost running to US$103 million (Mantz, para.5). With regard to other features of the filming and creation of the motion picture, it must be noted that the overall cost of not only making the film but also promoting it eventually ran to US$145.7 million. A pricey thing, to be sure, but the movie grossed $187 million in U.S. theatres and a further $269 million overseas ("Gladiator," sec.2), thereby suggesting that the film's main character of Maximus enjoyed an international following."
| |
|
Locke, Machiavelli, Hobbes and Rousseau, 2002.
Compares the philosophies of John Locke, Niccolo Machiavelli, Thomas Hobbes and Jean Jacques Rousseau.
1,523 words (approx. 6.1 pages), 1 source, MLA, $ 50.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The philosophies of Machiavelli, Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau encompass a spectrum of thought on how a state should be governed. This paper discusses how at one end is the cynicism of Machiavelli and, to some extent, Hobbes. Their ideas are countered by the democratic optimism of Locke and Rousseau. It shows how, at the heart of each of these essays is each philosopher?s assessment of the fundamental character of people and how much they can be trusted to govern themselves.
From the Paper
"Throughout The Prince moral codes seem irrelevant to the business of running a state. The survival of the sovereign is the highest priority. At times Machiavelli seems to be writing guidelines for tyrants. According to him, a prince is safer if he is feared rather than loved. It is easier, Machiavelli maintains, for people to offend, or betray, someone they love than someone they fear. How is that fear instilled? ?Fear is maintained by a dread of punishment which never fails.? ( Santoni 120 ).
In Leviathan , Hobbes, like Machiavelli, stresses the importance of a powerful sovereign, however his philosophy of government seems less tyrannical than that of Machiavelli. ?During the time when men live without a common power to keep them all in awe, they are in that condition which is called war, and such a war as is of every man against every man.? (Santoni 143)."
| |
|
Niccolo Machiavelli and Thomas Hobbes, 2005.
This paper describes and compares the political philosophies of Niccolo Machiavelli and Thomas Hobbes.
3,765 words (approx. 15.1 pages), 15 sources, MLA, $ 103.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that Machiavelli lived during the Renaissance, nearly 150 years earlier than Thomas Hobbes, yet it was he who envisioned the basis for the political pragmatism of the twentieth century; while Thomas Hobbes, who lived in the 16th century, was a political materialist in the classical tradition of Plato and Galileo. The author stresses that Machiavellianism, as a term, has been used to describe the principles of power politics and the type of person who uses those principles in political or personal life is frequently described as a Machiavellian. The paper includes a comparison of the Table of Contents of "De Cive" by Thomas Hobbes and of "The Prince" by Machiavelli to demonstrate that Hobbes is looking for a universal law of politic; whereas, Machiavelli is looking for a practical means of surviving real politics. Several very long quotes.
From the Paper
"For Machiavelli, historical change has two forms: (1) the motion of nature and, (2) the order or ordering that man intends. Nature's changes are unreliable; they can be good or bad, but man does not feel safe or grateful. Machiavelli lumps unreliable nature with fickle fortune as the first element of his view of the opposing forces of history. Human order, or as Machiavelli describes it, "orders and modes" (Preface), is devised by human virtu to overcome this sense of being at the mercy of nature or fortune and is the second element of the equation. Simply put, his context of history is a contest between virtu and fortuna. Machiavelli is not a mere observer of this contest. As a humanist historian, he bases his advice, or lessons if you will, on the contest. But unlike the other historians of his day, he does not teach the lesson by what was done, but rather by what should have been done. This clearly places Histories in the political instead of historical genre by modern standards."
| |
|
Machiavelli and Hobbes, 2002.
A look at the view of philosophers Machiavelli and Hobbes on leadership.
1,220 words (approx. 4.9 pages), 2 sources, MLA, $ 41.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the conditions on which an interloper can be accepted or rejected by the citizens of a newly captured country. The conditions are based on the philosophical works of Thomas Hobbes and Machiavelli. The paper shows that both Hobbes and Machiavelli believe that it is futile to reject someone off hand because such rejection would only result in waste of energy and nothing else. They feel that there are some important attributes which make a ruler strong and worthy of our respect and thus he should be rejected only if he doesn?t possess the right attributes.
From the Paper
"A ruler who is able to command respect whether through the use of force or otherwise need not be rejected because he is likely to prove more beneficial for the country than the weak leader he overthrew. In the light of our current understanding of politics, we may find this argument rather strange in nature. But the truth is that today we do not think in terms of what is good for our country and rather become irrationally sentimental when someone threatens to overthrow our government. We must remember that as long as a ruler is capable of running the country well and is respected by his people, he need not be rejected. In the case of an interloper, we must first study the situation from all possible angles before deciding on our next course of action."
| |
|
Machiavelli and Hobbes, 2006.
A look at the contribution to philosophy of Niccolo Machiavelli and Thomas Hobbes.
1,304 words (approx. 5.2 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines how Thomas Hobbes and Machiavelli gave us some highly acclaimed philosophical works, which contain their views on every subject connected with politics, government and rights of citizens. It looks at how Thomas Hobbes was positively influenced by Machiavelli in his views on politics and government. It also looks at how Machiavelli in his book "The Prince" focused on factors such as fear and force when describing the attributes that he felt a ruler must possess in order to rule effectively.
From the Paper
"Human nature was another very important subject of the political theories of both Hobbes and Machiavelli. Hobbes and Machiavelli's views on human nature cannot be seen as aligned to each other since the latter basically focused on wretchedness of human soul while the former was more concerned about the factors that influenced or basically created the human nature. According to Hobbes human nature could be explained in terms of voluntary and involuntary motions. (p. 118) He was of the view that men are motivated by passion such as anger, hunger, despair, joy etc. This resulted in action which could be termed either good or evil based on how it affects mankind. Machiavelli on the other hand did not believe in Hobbes' implied equality of men. "
| |
|
Political Failure in Machiavelli and Hobbes, 2008.
A comparison of the causes and consequences of the political failure of Thomas Hobbes and Niccolo Machiavelli.
2,672 words (approx. 10.7 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 80.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the causes and consequences of political failure for Thomas Hobbes and Niccolo Machiavelli. It shows how the causes for each of their political failure were different, as reflected in their views of man and in the actions of men within their respective forms of government. The paper presents both Hobbes' and Machiavelli's views and then compares the results of their political failure.
From the Paper
"Hobbes favors an authoritarian government where the welfare of the people is assured by the paternal care of the Sovereign because it would make no sense that a Sovereign should oppress his people. The consequences of political failure are to plunge men back into the chaos of the state of nature, the "Warre of everyone against everyone, in which case everyone is governed by his own reason" (Lev., ch. 14, p. 64). Only when men subjugate themselves and their reason to the Reason of the Sovereign does the Power of the Sovereign ensure "peace and commodious living". It is in this way that "we make the commonwealth ourselves" (Six Lessons, Ep. Ded., p. 184)."
| |
|
Machiavelli, Hobbes and the Good Society, 2008.
This paper analyzes the ideal society in Niccolo Machiavelli's "The Prince" and Thomas Hobbes' "The Leviathan".
1,010 words (approx. 4.0 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 35.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
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."
| |
|
Machiavelli and Hobbes on Glory, 2002.
Looking at Niccolo Machiavelli?s and Thomas Hobbes? modern political theories as they related to the concept of glory.
1,257 words (approx. 5.0 pages), 2 sources, MLA, $ 42.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper compares these philosophers' theories and shows how in Machiavelli?s ?The Prince?, he breaks away from traditional theories by stating that the ruling Prince should be the sole authority deciding what is best for the state. In his opinion, glory was an important tool in upholding the authority of the state. By contrast, Thomas Hobbes believed that only a very centralized government, with an absolute power, could create social order. However, he did not believe that glory was a useful tool.
From the Paper
"In Machiavelli?s opinion, the existence of the state and the acquisition of power become ends in themselves. If the purpose of an action is to preserve the community and its way of life, then any action is permissible. That action can be war, human experiments, and many other things. Under Machiavelli?s system, a reason of state becomes the highest good. A reason of state has precedence over everything else. According to Machiavelli: ?It must be understood that a prince cannot observe all those things which are consider good in men, being often obliged, in order to maintain the state, to act against charity, against humanity, and against religion. (p. 38)? Basically, Machiavelli believed that the end justifies the means. To destroy an enemy state, anything is allowed. If the state faces danger, ?no considerations of justice, humanity, or cruelty, nor of glory or of shame, should be allowed. (p. 40)? "
| |
|
Niccolo Machiavelli and Thomas Hobbes, 2001.
This paper examines a "The Prince" by Niccolo Machiavelli and "Leviathan" by Thomas Hobbes.
1,365 words (approx. 5.5 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 45.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
A look at these philosopher's views on the nature of human relationships, how it is that we join together to form societies, what the best form of human society might be, and the ways in which what is natural in human nature can be overcome by the goodness that lies in collective action ? or exacerbated by the concatenation of so many humans working in concert with each other.
From the Paper
"While both of these philosophers will reject the idealized image of ?imagined republics? ? both as ideals and as possible realities ? Machiavelli proves himself in the end to be more of an heir to their writings than does Hobbes ? which is hardly surprising, given that Machiavelli, as a writer of the Italian Renaissance is much more clearly an historical heir to the classical thinkers."
| |
|
"I, Robot" ( Isaac Asimov ) & "Blade Runner" ( Ridley Scott ), 1999.
Compares robots in Asimov's novel & replicants in Scott's film.
1,125 words (approx. 4.5 pages), 2 sources, $ 39.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Compares robots in Asimov's novel & replicants in Scott's film. Discusses the paradox that , even as human beings in the real world seek to develop machines that can think, it is also apparent that these same human beings fear such machines.
From the Paper
" Artificial intelligence is a dream of mankind, but it is also an elusive one. Science has created machines that can emulate certain human thought processes at high speed, but these machines cannot really be said to think. In fiction, however, the problems involved can be solved, and robots have been presented in fiction which are very human in the way they think. However, even as human beings in the real world seek to develop machines that can think, it is also apparent that these same human beings fear such machines. In fiction, this is often addressed by the development of rules for the conduct of robots and androids, and yet often these rules can be bent quite far by the intelligent machines at which the rules are directed. Isaac Asimov created perhaps the most famous set of such rules in his Three Laws of robotics, logical rules that the author uses to.."
| |
|
"Thelma and Louise" by Ridley Scott, 1994.
An examination of the film's female protagonists' behavior as deviant and the criminal response to a male-dominated society.
1,350 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 7 sources, $ 47.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"The recent film Thelma and Louise presents two women who turn to criminal activity as part of their way of dealing with the world of males, and their way of dealing with men can be labeled deviant. Indeed, the film presents the development of this deviant behavior as itself a response to the deviance of males in American society. As presented in the film, this instance of female criminality is a case of crossing over, specifically indicating that these women are using countermeasures to male deviance that will themselves be deviant. This instance of deviant behavior will be used as the subject for the application of the ideas of crossing over and criminal organization and honor to illustrate the nature of, development of, and consequences of this deviant behavior.
It is interesting that the film under discussion is itself..."
| |
|
"In A Lonely Place" by Nicholas Ray and "Blade Runner" by Ridley Scott, 1994.
A comparison of the 1950 and 1982 films as examples of film noir genre. Includes sociohistorical contexts, direction, the psychology of characters and iconography.
1,350 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 3 sources, $ 47.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"One of the most potent film genres in terms of subsequent influence was the so-called film noir, so-called because no one making a film noir at the time of its creation and ascendance ever used the term or even assumed that they were working in a genre or style that might deserve a name of its own. the term was applied long after by French critics who noticed a stylistic shift in American films in the 1940s, and as Thomas Schatz notes, this style dominated films in the late 1940s and early 1950s to such a degree that it came to identify both the narrative-cinematic style of those films and also the historical period during which they were produced (Schatz 112).
The style would have an influence long after that historical period ended. Indeed, it continues to have an influence today..."
| |
|
"Blade Runner" ( Ridley Scott ) &" Double Indemnity", 1997.
Compares film noir style, characters, plot & setting of 1982 & 1944 works.
1,125 words (approx. 4.5 pages), 3 sources, $ 39.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"Blade Runner (1982) and Double Indemnity (1944) might at first glance seem to have little in common, the first being a science fiction film about a man who hunts down and kills androids and the other a film about an insurance investigator and a woman who team up to kill her husband for his insurance. Both films derive their power, their style, and their "look" from the same source, the film noir style of the 1940s that developed spontaneously in response to the paranoia and uncertainties of World War II. In the 1940s, the style was used primarily for urban crime dramas, and the style is marked by sharp angles in both the setting and the use of the camera, night scenes, darkness, wet city streets, and sudden violence. The plots center on moral dilemmas, a sense of paranoia that often proves to be justified, the woman as lure for the male, and the male as.."
| |
|
"Alien" ( Ridley Scott ), 1999.
Analyzes the extraterrestrial creatures in 1979 film, comparing them to insects.
1,350 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 5 sources, $ 47.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"This paper is a discussion of the ways in which the extraterrestrial creatures in Ridley Scott's 1979 science fiction classic Alien are similar to and different from insects. Designed by H. R. Giger to be fearsome and horrific monsters, the creatures combine the characteristics of many different Earth-bound organisms, with fictional elements added to make them harder to kill and more terrifying to movie audiences. Examining the insect-like elements of these creatures provides a fascinating means of understanding what defines insects and separates them from other types of creatures, however similar. The monsters of Alien are a distinct breed, yet their morphology is insect-like in a number of very interesting ways.
Scott's film, using a screenplay written by Dan O'Bannon, introduces an alien life form that has now survived through four.."
|
|
|
