One can begin to see the development of political philosophy and political science through these three texts. Confucius mostly created the realm of political philosophy by studying past rulers and gathering a group of disciples. With the Analects, he told people how they could better themselves and become leaders, and once they became leaders how they should lead through being a role model of sorts for the society to follow. Plato kind of expanded on Confucius ideas when he built his perfect city in The Republic. He further developed the system of specialization where each citizen chose their respective trade to do solely so they could professionalize and supply the city with their product. Plato then created a non-birth related caste system where all the kids are raised separately and get to choose their profession, from which are …show more content…
With these questions comes Machiavelli and his book The Prince where he applies a cynical view of the human race, a more realistic view of politics compared to Plato’s completely idealistic system. Machiavelli says that men are “ungrateful, fickle, liars, and receivers, they shun danger and are greedy for profit” (Prince Chapter 17) and teaches that the leader not only cannot be virtuous but they, in fact, should not try to be. He believes that they should only put on a façade of virtuousness and do their dirty deeds behind the backs of the citizens. Machiavelli brings along a great deal of knowledge with The Prince with the fact that war is never gone, it is just pushed off until one side has the upper hand. He also relates the fact that to successfully win a battle or war one must fight it with their own army or they have not really gained anything. With all these bits of knowledge from Confucius to Plato to Machiavelli, it becomes apparent why some civilizations were successful and others were