Comparison And Contrast Of Machiavelli And Lao Tzu

831 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Lao tzu vs machiavelli

Comparison and Contrast of Machiavelli and Lao Tzu
War is an organized and often prolonged conflict by a leader that is carried out by states or non-state actors and is generally characterized by extreme violence, social disruption and economic destruction. Now, some may say that war is needed for a country to succeed as would the Italian philosopher by the name Nicollo Machiavelli who explains characteristics and plans that these war leaders must follow in order to succeed. However, some also may say that war is a path of evil and a country should live in peace as taught by an ancient Chinese philosopher by the name of Lao Tzu. Equally important that these two different ideals may be, countries can use some of the ideas from both philosophers to help in times of battle.
“A prince, therefore, must not…take anything as his profession but war…” these are the words of Nicollo Machiavelli and which he exclaims very clearly in his philosophies, that a good ruler must be great at the art war to succeed. One of the ways M shows his outlook on war, is by explaining how important it is to bear arms at all times and to never be without a weapon, for weapons are the tools of war and if used correctly and intelligently you will prevail over all during times of war. Secondly, M explains that a necessary induced order, unity, and fealty to the leader of a nation by projected and incited fear of that leader or leadership is the only way a leader can be looked can be respected by his own military. Moreover, with the respect of that military, a leader must have a good knowing of his home terrain in order to plan both offensive and defensive actions, and also to know history of great past leaders bouts with other countries, for this knowledge gai...

... middle of paper ...

...s the topic under discussion. Granted, both of the lists of guidelines that these two philosophers give may seem very strong for a leader, they are not feasible alone in a society of one today due to the extremes of both sides. Whereas Machiavelli’s ideas would slightly idolize a dictatorship; thus causing more problems in today’s world than could be handled and Lao Tzu’s focus being too relaxed; seeming so submissive that one’s country would fall if war ever broke out. So in other words, the concepts separately aren’t ideal, however if conjoined in parallel could lay some very good grounds for a great leader and country to grow on.

Work Cited
Jacobus, Lee A., ed. A World of Ideas: Essential readings for College Writers. Boston:
Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2010. Print.
Lao- Tzu. ”Thoughts from the Tao-te Ching” Jacobus 203-215
Machiavelli, Niccolo. “The Qualities of th

Show More
Related

  • Comparing and Contrasting Mirandolla and Machiavelli

    610 Words  | 2 Pages

    This compare and contrast essay will focus on the views of leadership between Mirandolla and Machiavelli. Mirandolla believes that leadership should not be false and that it should follow the rule of reason. He believes that leaders should strive for the heavens and beyond. On the other hand, Machiavelli believed that leadership comes to those who are crafty and forceful. He believed that leaders do not need to be merciful, humane, faithful or religious; they only need to pretend to have all these qualities. Despite both of them being philosophers, they have drastically different views on leadership, partially because of their views on religion are different. Mirandolla was very religious, and Machiavelli was a pragmatist, which means that he was not interested in religion.

    Read More

  • Where Men Win Glory, by Jon Krakauer

    1088 Words  | 3 Pages

    War is the means to many ends. The ends of ruthless dictators, of land disputes, and lives – each play its part in the reasoning for war. War is controllable. It can be avoided; however, once it begins, the bat...

    Read More

  • Comparison of Lao-tzu and Machiavelli

    726 Words  | 2 Pages

    author of Prince. They are both philosophers but have totally different perspective on how to be a good leader. While both philosopher’s writing is instructive. Lao-tzu’s advice issues from detached view of a universal ruler; Machiavelli’s advice is very personal perhaps demanding. Both philosophers’ idea will not work for today’s world, because that modern world is not as perfect as Lao-tzu described in Tao-te Ching, and not as chaotic as Machiavelli illustrated in Prince.

    Read More

  • Machiavelli vs. Lao-Tzu

    284 Words  | 1 Pages

    Perhaps the most distinct differences between Machiavelli's and Lao-Tzu's are their beliefs in how a government should be run. Whereas Machiavelli writes about the qualities a prince should have while instilling a totalitarian government, Lao-Tzu strongly believes that one cannot have total control, so everything should run its course.

    Read More

  • The Qualities Of A Prince Rhetorical Analysis

    740 Words  | 2 Pages

    Machiavelli strongly believes that a prince should be involved in the military and understand all military matters. A prince must always be concentrated on war. Whether his country is at war or not, he must always be prepared. He must continuously be training, mentally and physically, and know the terrain around him. Machiavelli believes that a prince who does not attain these military related qualities will fail as a leader. In addition, during times of war, a successful prince should always question all outcomes of possible battles and prepare himself for the future by studying past wars. Studying the

    Read More

  • A Comparison Of Chiang Kai Shek And Mao Ze Dong?

    1157 Words  | 3 Pages

    Chiang Kai Shek and Mao Ze Dong are the two leaders that have the different ideology and the development based on their culture and social aspect. Chiang Kai Shek is the political leader of China who remembered led China during the Japanese-Chinese war that began in 1937. He previously led the Kuomintang forces before becoming leader of the Republic of China in 1928. He applied nationalist ideology that has a nice orderly target to achieve its own collective governance, regional integration, and cultural identity. Chiang Kai-shek was conservative thinker. He promotes traditional Chinese culture through the new life movement and rejects western democracy (Kaplan, 2015).

    Read More

  • The Tao-te Ching by Lao-Tzu and The Prince by Machiavelli

    1754 Words  | 4 Pages

    Throughout history, it can be argued that at the core of the majority of successful societies has stood an effective allocation of leadership. Accordingly, in their respective works “The Tao-te Ching” and “The Prince”, Lao-Tzu and Machiavelli have sought to reach a more complete understanding of this relationship. The theme of political leaders and their intricate relationship with society indeed manifests itself within both texts, however, both Lao-Tzu and Machiavelli approach this issue from almost entirely opposite positions. Lao-Tzu appears to focus the majority of his attention on letting problems or situations take their course and allowing good to prevail. On the contrary, Machiavelli advocates the necessity for a successful leader, or prince, to take control of his endeavors, and the skills or qualities necessary to maintain power, at any cost. Since these thinkers both make an inquiry to what is essentially the same dilemma of effective leadership, it becomes almost a natural progression to juxtapose the two in an effort to better understand what qualities a prosperous leader must possess. In this sense, when we utilize the rhetorical strategy of compare/contrast as a vehicle to transport us to a more enlightened interpretation of Lao-Tzu and Machiavelli’s conclusions, it becomes apparent that Machiavelli’s effort is much more successful as his practicality serves its purpose much more effectively.

    Read More

  • Leadership in Thoughts from the Tao-te-Ching and The Qualities of a Prince

    626 Words  | 2 Pages

    Lao-Tzu’s “Thoughts from the Tao-te Ching” and Machiavelli’s “The Qualities of a Prince” both have the ultimate goal of making better leaders. The tactics that each writer chooses to present as a guide for the leader are almost opposite of each other. Today’s American government would benefit from a combination of the two extreme ideas. Lao-Tzu’s laissez-faire attitude towards the economy, as well as his small scale, home defense military is appealing to a liberal person. Machiavelli’s attitude towards miserliness and lower taxes, while being always prepared for war, would appeal to a conservative person. The writers are in agreement on some issues, such as taxes, but other ideas, such as government involvement in the everyday lives of citizens are completely opposed to one another.

    Read More

  • Ideas of Rulers in "Tao-te Ching" and "The Prince"

    508 Words  | 2 Pages

    When comparing Tao-te Ching to The Prince there are numerous differences. The authors of these two documents had almost completely opposite ideas of how a ruler should behave and how a government should be run. One believed that the ruler could accomplish the most by doing the least; the other believed that by controlling how the public perceived a ruler was what would make him a success or a failure. Machiavelli believed that to rule the prince must do things that would win approval with his people, and that the prince must always keep and maintain arms to remain in power. On the other hand Lao-tzu believed that the master ruled with as little involvement as possible, he believed that to “not do” would have the greatest effect, and that to use arms as only a last resort. With just these two examples it becomes clear how different the authors viewed leadership and government.

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast John Locke And Machiavelli

    1447 Words  | 3 Pages

    Machiavelli believed that, ethics and morality were considered in other categories than those generally known. He does not deny the existence of, but did not see how they can be useful in its traditional sense as in politics and in the government of the people. According to Machiavelli, a man is by nature a political angry and fearful. Machiavelli had no high opinion of the people. It is assumed that a person is forced to be good and can get into the number of positive features, such as prudence and courage. The prince can only proceed gently and with love, because that would undermine the naivety of his rule, and hence and the well-being of the state. He thought that, the Lord must act morally as far as possible, immorally to the extent to

    Read More

  • Lao-Tzu: Characteristics of a Good Leader

    1837 Words  | 4 Pages

    Government is the essential power of a country, which directly influences society because it provides somewhat of a security blank for those who are affected by it. Lao-Tzu’s, “Thoughts from the Tao-te Ching,” along with Niccolo Machiavelli’s, “The Qualities of the Prince,” both discuss multiple characteristics that a leader should possess to be a successful. While their goal is similar, in which they both describe what it takes to become a better leader, their ideas concerning leading are conflicting.

    Read More

  • On War by Carl Von Clausewitz

    1315 Words  | 3 Pages

    Current military leadership should comprehend the nature of war in which they are engaged within a given political frame in order to develop plans that are coherent with the desired political end state. According to Clausewitz, war is an act of politics that forces an enemy to comply with certain conditions or to destroy him through the use of violence. A nation determines its vital interests, which drives national strategy to obtain or protect those interests. A country achieves those goals though the execution of one of the four elements of power, which are diplomatic, informational, military and economical means. The use of military force...

    Read More

  • Western Way Of War Essay

    1404 Words  | 3 Pages

    War, in its purest form, is an act aimed at imposing one’s will over another’s. Throughout history, there is no lack of evidence to illustrate the importance of warfare and the effects of its aftermath. Ranging from its conduct and organization, to its influences on governance and the social contract paradigm, war has shaped the modern world. Nowhere in history; however, has the evolution of warfare had such long-lasting global affects than the practices found in western cultures. Described as the western way of war, armed conflict in western cultures reveals an undeniable linkage between war and political motive. From this understanding, one can appreciate the western way of war as more of a rational approach to warfare, focused on gaining a marked advantage over an adversary to achieve a deeper strategic goal. This then begs to question: how has the western way of war shaped conflicts, as historical actors endeavored to successfully enforce their will

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast Plato And Machiavelli

    947 Words  | 2 Pages

    Likewise, Plato’s philosopher king also uses the same concept but calls it “Justice” or “Good.” Similarly, to Machiavelli, who needs his Prince to have virtù to lead the people, Plato necessitates that his king use philosophical knowledge and emphasize justice to guide the unenlightened masses towards a just and stable society as well. When Socrates discusses the allegory of the cave, he remarks how when rulers must descend “to the general underground abode” where the masses “reside,” the ruler “will see a thousand times better than [the inhabitants of the cave]…because [the ruler has] seen the truth about things admirable and just and good” (Plato 520c). Plato believes that by seeing beyond the cave, and understanding the situation he exists in, the leader will have the appropriate ability to bring foresight and intelligence when making difficult decisions. While Plato’s and Machiavelli’s means of educating, changing and legitimizing political communities differ, the two philosophers share the same goal of using the benevolent dictators’ attained knowledge to lead the masses and their governments to prosperity and good fortune.

    Read More

  • Machiavelli Princedom In The Prince

    618 Words  | 2 Pages

    Being ruled under a princedom, you expect your prince to be able to protect your land in times of threat. It is important to have your ruler be educated in the field of military to prevent outside forces taking over. A prince should be able to have strategy and efficient tactics to protect his people. Machiavelli states, “He attained success, as is shown above, not by the favour of any one, but step by step in the military profession” (13). If a prince has little knowledge in military, other princedoms may grow to see him as an easy target. This is an important quality for a ruler to possess to keep his land and maintain his people in a constant state of safety. If a prince lacks this, his people may flee to a neighboring princedom to feel more

    Read More

More about Comparison And Contrast Of Machiavelli And Lao Tzu

Open Document