Philosophers have shaped the way in which we look at how societies function to better understand the universe. Niccolo Machiavelli and Thomas Hobbes are considered to be two of the most influential philosophers in history that have guided the way of thinking about human nature. Machiavelli is most famous for “The prince,” which praised and hoped to persuade rulers to enforce a republican government. Hobbes is best known for his work “leviathan,” which outlines the needs for a sovereign to rule and a social contract to be made. Both philosophers are realists and both identify the need for a ruler. Throughout the examination of the philosophers, both Machiavelli and Hobbes have identified similar theories about political power, however have different views on how the sovereign should behave, methods on becoming and staying in power, as well as his duties when it comes to the people. I personally believe that Hobbes approach and motive behind his theories is more beneficial as the main purpose is to protect society while Machiavelli’s approach motivated by self-interest and creates a corrupt ruler.
Machiavelli and Hobbes both support the idea of a sovereign however have very different views on how the sovereign should behave. The
…show more content…
Hobbes believed that natural state of humans was violent and therefore needed order and control to ensure a just and equal society (Robinson 2016, 4). However Hobbes believed that a sovereign could maintain power without deceit and manipulation. Hobbes believed in the social contract which is when people could have a moral understanding about right and wrong to avoid the chaotic violent human nature. Hobbes believed in the idea of utilitarianism which would “maximize the most good and minimize the pain” (Robinson 201, 4). This would ensure that the sovereign was doing things for the right reasons and not to better himself but to better society as a