Similarities Between Machiavelli And Hobbes

1724 Words7 Pages
Political science and political philosophy are two unique philosophies of different eras that review and study the political behaviors and values. Political philosophy is regarded as an ancient concept which followed back to Socrates who encouraged partisanship in politics. Moving to the political science, it is a modern study of political behavior that supports the non-partisanship. Political scientists are not interested in political argues like political philosophers, because they want to deal with facts as they believe. But such debates will not have solutions. The political philosophy mostly concentrates on building up the best regime while the political scientists have developed several theories that are intended to political civil arguments and not…show more content…
He put him in a formula that made it more universal, precise and scientific, and subtracted his greatness individuals and groundbreaking concerns. With the emergence of Hobbes, modern ideas on the theory of passion becomes visible and primary. The theories created by the modern thinkers are not in a view of general topic, but rather single factors, for example, Hobbes concentrates on self-preservation while Machiavelli focuses on glory. Hobbes thought of the idea of the 'condition of nature" where people are dreamy from the real and put in the state of nature where all are stripped of the distinctions and are observed to be equivalent. Hobbes perceives a system where there is a sovereign authorized by the individuals to represent them thus observing to their needs compared to the medieval kingdoms that only represented the interests of the rulers. Nevertheless, this system becomes inconsistent, particularly when the sovereign needs to be absolute, and the people submit to them. John Locke concurs with the modern nonpartisanship yet inserts a strong executive and legislative system to the new
Open Document