The Weaknesses Of The Tao-Te Ching And The Prince

How should leaders approach the ideas of peace and war? This question has fascinated those in positions of power for ages. Ancient Chinese philosopher Lao-Tzu believes that war should only take place in the direst of situations and should not be considered virtuous (61; sec. 31). On the contrary, Niccolo Machiavelli, a fifteenth-century Italian philosopher, states, “A prince, therefore, must not have any other object nor any other thought, nor must he take anything as his profession but war…” (86). While Lao-Tzu formulates an ideal approach to war and Machiavelli a practical one, neither one of their strategies would be effective in the real world; leaders must conduct their military with a balance of serenity and brutality.

On the other hand, Lao-tzu admits that being the best leader, partly depends on how people feel about him/her. As he said in his book, “Next best is a leader who is loved. Next one who is feared. The worst is one who is despised.” (Lao-tzu 17) There are many examples of how successful leaders can be when they are being loved by their people. It is a natural act that affects them in being let to stay in power or not. Similarly, governments at the moment face this fact too and as we see throughout the world, governments are being overthrown because of their people’s distaste and hate. That is

Nicolo Machiavelli’s The Prince and Sun Tzu’s The Art of War both both provide directions for leadership with similar goals. The Prince is primarily geared towards providing valuable information about how a ruler of many principalities may govern different populations and acquire new lands. The Art of War provides us with a schematic of the optimal path to victory. This book is instead directed towards generals of powerful militaries with only the goal of winning. Concepts such as Machiavelli’s view of destruction will be contrasted with Sun Tzu’s victory-oriented argument for taking whole and several of their other ideas will be compared. Although Machiavelli and Sun Tzu have different intended audiences, many of their ancient tactics can

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.

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

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,

A just and fair world filled with just and fair people does not exist- it is a utopia. This

I would like to say that I chose the Tao Te Ching, however, it chose me. I was first introduced to this text one Christmas morning, many years ago, and it has been with me (in one way or another) ever since. Due to my lifestyle I was constantly losing my copy, and in my attempts to replace it I had the pleasure of owning a multitude of versions, and differing translations. Today I will be using the 1988 publication of the Tao Te Ching as translated by author Stephen Mitchell (as my primary source). One of the main reasons I chose Mitchell’s translation is because he uses “she” instead of the conventional “he” throughout his text. I found this to be refreshing and Mitchell explains this by in the forward to

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

Lao-tzu and Machiavelli’s Opposing Viewpoints The qualities a leader possesses plays a very important role in the success or failure of a society. If he favors war and discipline, then it will be a harsh living environment for his people.

Lao-tzu or "Old Master," the author of the Tao-te-Ching wrote not only about the moral behavior one should live their life by, but also about the ways to create a functional government. Lao-tzu wrote mainly for politicians as a guide to follow in order for them to become good leaders. Lao-tzu informs his readers that one can only help people by allowing them to help themselves. One powerful statement from the Tao-te-Ching is, "When they think that they know the answers, / people are difficult to guide." This statement is not only applicable for followers of the Tao-te-Ching, but it can also apply for people of today as well. There are many examples of the previous Lao-tzu quote that apply to today. A perfect example of people being

Confucius found the vinegar sour very alike like he saw the world, full of degenerate people in the world, and Buddha found it bitter very alike like the world he saw full of suffering people but Lao Tzu found it sweet as he looked at the world with its seeming discord and look for the underlying harmony that guides it by the

In the world today, knowledge is a very valuable thing. The world can be a scary place, and without knowing how to be happy and live in harmony with others, it can be hard to survive. Luckily, there are those who have given us advice and instruction on how to live, and who have told us the secrets to earthly happiness. One would probably suspect they are politicians or millionaires or movie stars, but they aren’t. In fact, they lived around fifteen hundred years ago, in China. Their names were Lao Tzu and Confucius, and they were Chinese philosophers.

In all lines of work, society needs a leader that takes pride and trusts his own people. A leader that lets go. Lau-tzu agrees, as he suggests, that while “the master governs, the people are hardly aware he exists” (206). Lau-tzu’s ideas consist of people having a leader, but not necessarily being controlled by one. People should be able to make his or her own decisions. When a leader governs people too strictly it can cause mistrust, which can cause a collision between the people and the leader. A leader should want his people to feel powerful instead of powerless by restraining them. Lau-tzu says, when the leaders “work is done the people should say “amazing: we did it all by ourselves!” (207). This accomplishment made by the people will encourage them to serve towards greater things on their own. Lau-tzu says, “Throw away morality and justice, and people will do the right thing. Throw away industry and profit, and there won’t be any thieves” (207). Lau-tzu’s thoughts show that people will automatically do the right thing if you don’t tell them what they can and cannot do. If the leader takes out these certain aspects of life, the people will do what is right. The best leader barely leads at all.

It is worth noting that there are two types of leaders depending on their individual styles. The first kind of leaders personally takes part in actively implementing his orders. The second type of leader on the other hand delegates duties to other people without setting an example. When ruling a country, a state and even a family, a leader should be the North Star, which directs others. In Confucianism, a virtuous leader does not need to do anything since other people who respect the leader will carry out the necessary duties for him. Confucius asserts that when a leader adheres by the rituals, everything will unfold well.