Machiavelli And Lao Tzu Analysis

Words: 452
Pages: 2
Open Document
Each individual has a special attitude and personality. People have different thoughts and opinions. They need a connection that unites them. They need someone to guide and inspire them as one society. People need a leader to follow. But how should a leader lead? Is it by force or by being peaceful? Niccole Machiavelli and Lao Tzu two of the best philosophers were able to discuss this matter.

Machiavelli dedicated “ The Prince” – a 16th century political treatise - to the new ruler of Florence trying to procure his support, but he was unsuccessful and forced to retire. “The Prince” shows the rulers how to accumulate and maintain power. He always stated that rulers must be cruel, dishonest, tough and manipulative in order to control the people. On the other hand, Lao Tzu in “Tao Te Ching” attempts to teach rulers how to be peaceful and connect with their Inner Peace. Tzu said, “ The best fighter is never angry.” He believes that …show more content…
Machiavelli felt the absolute most imperative thing is to be powerful and cruel even if that means war. When Machiavelli was asked whether it be better to be loved than feared or feared than loved? He said “ It may be answered that one should wish to be both, but, because it is difficult to unite them in one person, it is much safer to be feared than loved, when, of the two, either must be dispensed with.” Machiavelli stated that a leader should be strict and brutal. In addition, there has to be rules and laws in order to keep humans under control because humans are inherently bad. .” Lao-Tzu in opposition felt that war should only be attended if necessary. “The self controlled man does not hurt men. The master also does not hurt men”. Therefore, they unite in manifesting Te …” (Tao Fe Chung 60) At the same time, Tzu claims that leaders don’t need to use power because humans are moral by nature. Therefore, they need no
Show More

Related Documents: Machiavelli And Lao Tzu Analysis

Lao Tzu And Machiavelli Analysis

productive social order has stood a very powerful allotment of authority. In the readings, “The Tao Teh King” and “The Prince”, Lao-Tzu and Machiavelli have tried to achieve a total comprehension of this relationship. The subject of political leaders and their complex association with society undoubtedly shows itself inside both writings, but Lao-Tzu and Machiavelli approach this problem in different perspectives. Despite the fact that both readings express the approach to oversee a people, the…

Words 1150 - Pages 5

Lao Tzu Vs Machiavelli Analysis

The question of whether it is better for a leader to be loved or feared is something that has been pondered for centuries. Lao-tzu proposed that it is better for a leader to be loved, whereas Machiavelli argued that it is better for a leader to be feared, as long as he is not hated. Throughout each of their writings, both have thoughts on war and military matters, human nature, and how they view a leader/think a leader should act, which are the bases of comparison between the two. Throughout their…

Words 1067 - Pages 5