Machiavelli vs thomas more

One noted difference between Utopia and The Prince is that citizens in Utopia do not own private property. Yet it cannot be called talent to slay fellow-citizens, to deceive friends, to be without faith, without mercy, without religion; such methods may gain empire, but not glory.

However like More, Machiavelli also espoused a code of honor among rulers that must never be broken. Nevertheless a prince ought to inspire fear in such a way that, if he does not win love, he avoids hatred; because he can endure very well being feared whilst he is not hated, which will always be as long as he abstains from the property of his citizens and subjects and from their women.

Instead, they are like parasites, who prosper through the labors of others. Now, we have a context in which to discuss the differences and similarities between Utopia and The Prince.

More than anything, these rulers work to set a good example for those they lead. More, being a devout Catholic, was incensed that the king would callously put away his devout Catholic queen, Catherine of Aragon. So, both More and Machiavelli agreed that structure in government was necessary for the preservation of order and unity.

During his fourteen years as a diplomat after the temporary fall of the ruling Medici family, Machiavelli took the time to hone his political acumen to perfection. Today, he is known as the father of modern political theory. In The Prince, Machiavelli states that a strong country or acquired principality is always necessarily governed by a monarch.

His personal convictions can be seen in his famous work, Utopia, which highlights an imaginary country defined by the common interest and simultaneously governed by secular, humanist values. Both men and women contribute to the common welfare.

In Utopia, Hythloday describes the city of Amaurot, which structures its government similarly to every other city in Utopia. They just differed on how the government should be structured. Machiavelli died in Florence on June 21, He cited the grievous example of Agathocles of Syracuse, who rose to power through heinous means.

The subjected peoples should also be allowed to live under their own laws.

This is significant because More believed that war and violence was often inspired by the wicked ambitions of hegemonic rulers. You can read all about this in Chapter 8 of The Prince.

Interestingly, in order to prevent the Tranibors from conspiring with the Prince to subjugate the people, Syphogrants are given first authority in any matter concerning the populace. Machiavelli stated that such a ruler could achieve power, but never lasting glory.

Accordingly, thirty families appoint a leader, called a Syphogrant; ten Syphogrants are overseen by a Tranibore. As his treatise is primarily concerned with conquest, the successful rule of new principalities always takes three steps this can be found in Chapter 5 of The Prince: During the last years of his life, he found himself at odds with his king and benefactor, the inimitable King Henry, who wanted to style himself the head of the new Anglican church.

There is no self-interest, but rather, common interest, which is the prevailing philosophical ideal espoused by all Utopians. While More proclaimed a government based on equality, Machiavelli was more focused on domination.

Machiavelli hypothesizes that this method of governance is best for preserving peace and unity in any kingdom. All the Syphogrants choose a Prince, who rules for life.

A new prince inspires fear, but never hatred, if he wants his new domain to prosper. His treatise on governance, The Prince, focused on strong leadership amid the vagaries of political turmoil.Machiavelli's society is more realistic and more likely to be viable.

Leadership is a major issue when it comes to whether or not a society is going to be viable. It seems that if the leader is a good leader, a leader that puts his people first and wants the best for his country, then the land and the society should flourish.

More and Machiavelli's differing backgrounds gave rise to two distinctive works about politics and governance. Sir Thomas More was a devout Catholic who served under King Henry VIII in his native. Below is an essay on "Machiavelli vs More" from Anti Essays, your source for research papers, essays, and term paper examples.

The Prince by Nicollo Machiavelli and Utopia by Thomas More paint pictures of very effective states. “For it is a good general rule about men, that they are ungrateful, fickle, liars and deceivers, fearful of danger and greedy for gain,” said Machiavelli in.

Utopia by Thomas More and The Prince by Machiavelli Thomas More’s Utopia and Machiavelli’s The Prince both concern themselves with the fundamental issues of how a society works and maintains itself. Thomas More believes his idea of Utopia could happen if the world consisted of kind people and that philosophy could influence politics.

Machiavelli believes that it cannot happen because there will always bad in everyone.

Machiavelli vs thomas more
Rated 5/5 based on 39 review