Socrates Vs Machiavelli Essay

875 Words4 Pages
Socrates, in his early works, maintained a steadfast distance from involvement in politics, making a comparison or evaluation of a political system in his persona technically impossible. To claim that Socrates would or would not be supportive of any political system might then seem irresponsible, a presumptuous analysis not fitting for an academic recognizing the false equivalence between Socratesphilosophy and Machiavelli’s political ethics. The strategy to conduct any sort of liable and valid analysis is not to wholly ignore the “political” part of the system but to evaluate…show more content…
In spite of this ideological divide, the two had commonalities specifically pertaining to politics, at the very least in practice and method, wherein they could agree on autocracy and suppression of one’s enemies.
Machiavelli’s political theory is contingent upon the explicit and unchanging verity that humans are self serving by default, providing an advantageous foresight of predictability. If humans are always and will always act selfishly, it is possible to deduce a large scale societal response to any given action or context within a certain margin of error. However, the entire theory dissolves if indeed people do not act in this predicted manner, concerned only for themselves. Machiavelli’s “prince”, a tangible representation of the leader and power behind a given political system, is duplicitous, troubled with appearances and survival above all else. Machiavelli argued, through his most notable work The Prince, that is most advantageous for a ruler to

More about Socrates Vs Machiavelli Essay

Get Access