Lao-Tzu: Criticism Of Machiavelli's Philosophy

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 stand on war is not what one might expect; he believes that peace has more power than war and that all men with a good set of morals look down upon the men who seek to fight. Along with war being an unnecessary product of compromise, Lao-Tzu view’s weapons as a disgrace as well; this idea is shown on page 209 when he adds, “Weapons are the tools of violence; all decent men detest them.” He later then states, “There is no greater illusion than fear, no greater wrong than preparing to defend yourself, no greater misfortune than having an enemy,” (page 210). Lao-Tzu detests war and sees it as a shame to even take part of the hate that is involved with fighting. On the other hand, Machiavelli suggests that it is fit for a leader to show close to perfect fighting techniques on and off the battlefield. War is shown as a lesson of fortitude for leaders during his time, Machiavelli explains, “Its institution, and its discipline; because that is the only profession which befits one who commands; and it is of such importance,” (page 221). He later discusses, on page 222, how a leader must train in his free time to prepare and become the most powerful fighter of all the men by mentioning, “and in peacetime he must train himself more than in time of war; this can be done in two ways: one by action, the other by the mind.” One can conclude that Machiavelli defines a strong leader through both psychological warfare and hand to hand combat. He also sees war as a learning curve for the men who wish to become a leader; Machiavelli’s understanding off a strong leader

To celebrate death could sound bizarre, but in Mexico and in India celebrating death is part of the culture, religion, customs and our own beliefs. However, there are some differences between Indian Hindus and Mexican Christians as well as similarities between both countries and religions. Cooking their favorite meals on their deceased loved ones birthday, and anniversaries, is just one example of similarities they both have. Jumpa Lahiri describes that Gogol and his family prepared Ashoke’s favorite meal (Gogol’s father) on his first death anniversary (Namesake, Chapter 7).

The most obvious difference between Lao-Tzu and Machiavelli are their moral perspectives and beliefs. Lao-Tzu is very mellow and easygoing person. He believes that the best government is one that runs itself, in the sense that the government should have very little control. Lao-Tzu is very passive. In his section titled Thoughts of the Tao-te Ching, Lao-Tzu says, “The world is sacred. It can’t be improved. If you tamper with it, you’ll ruin it. If you treat it like an object, you’ll lose it” (208). This quote strengthens the claim that Lao-Tzu believes in a government with little control. This is most accredited to his religion. He is a person of the Tao, and he is very reliant on the ‘Master’, or the god of Taoism. He believes that the Master controls everything, yet does nothing in the sense that people hardly are aware that the Master exists. Because of his knowledge of the Tao and the expectations of the Master, Lao-Tzu

Lao-Tzu is not exactly polar opposite of Machiavelli, although he is close. He believes that man in a state of nature is generally good and not greedy. What makes man greedy is overemphasis on material

On June 25, 1950, communist North Korea invaded the United States ally South Korea. The United States and the United Nation forces headed to South Korea to help defend but are pushed back and practically pushed off the peninsula. General Douglas MacArthur stages a risky but successful counterattack at the port of Inchon. This counterattack helps South Korea push back North Korean forces back to the Yalu River. This causes communist China to enter the war. The war dragged on for many years and finally ended in 1953 with the help of the United States and the United

To begin, Lao-tzu’s and Machiavelli’s views on the ultimate purpose of government are very different. First of all, Lao-tzu’s idea of the purpose of government is more as a suggestion or a guide. Lao-tzu believes that government should not be a part of people’s personal lives in any way shape or form. He believes in a very simple type of government. He

Anywhere you go, there will be a community ruled by a leader. The qualities of leaders play a vital role in the success or failure of a society; if these qualities are effective, it allows the country to be successful and the ruler’s to fulfill the country’s needs. However, the absence of effective leadership qualities result in severe effects towards the country. When comparing the thoughts of Lao-Tzu and Machiavelli, it becomes obvious these two authors have different beliefs on how to be an effective leader. Machiavelli was a historian in Italy, a diplomat, a philosopher, a politician, and a writer during the era of the Renaissance. Lao-Tzu, during the 6th century, was an ancient Chinese philosopher. These two authors approach at almost entirely different positions. For this reason, it is a natural progression to collocate the two in an effort to better understand the qualities a leader should possess. To prove their philosophies, Lao-Tzu and Machiavelli have sought to reach a more complete understanding of each other’s thoughts on the subjects of war and weapons, qualities of leaders and the people, and how to govern.

On page 214 Lao-Tzu says, “The master is above the people, and no one feels oppressed. She goes ahead of the people, and no one feels manipulated.” Lao-Tzu’s standpoint on how a leader should be perceived is thought to be peaceful along with a sense of power through the people. He wants the leader to be powerful, but only as if the people were leading themselves; this gives the nation as a whole confidence as if they didn’t need the help of a leader at all. Adversely, Machiavelli deems it suitable for a ruler to be feared; he thinks that in order for one to have the capability of a great leader, one must have little mercy, but yet also not be seen as cruel.

Throughout The Prince, Machiavelli encourages the idea that a fear leader is a good leader. Machiavelli makes the point that a good leader knows that it is, “far safer to be feared than loved” (Machiavelli 43) because love allows for weakness. It is easy to keep people under control and in line when they fear their leader because they do not want to have to face consequences that come with “doing wrong”. When a leader is loved, some many look at this as a weakness. Those who fear their leader are is less likely to curate rebellions and revolts because they know that their leader is not afraid of applying punishment. When a ruler is too kind to their subjects it leaves them vulnerable and they are easily taken advantage of, which threatens their position. For a good leader should, “desire to be accounted merciful and not cruel”, and needs to,

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.

When reading both of these stories, I was always hung up on what exactly I thought a good leader is. Lao-Tzu states in his work, “When the Master governs the people are hardly aware that he exists.” His proposal says that the ruler shouldn’t inform the people about all of his ideas, and that the less they know the happier they will be in the end. This idea of a leader, who is somewhat under the radar, completely contradicts Machiavelli’s idea, that a ruler must be feared to be effective. As I thought more about this I felt as if I was slightly more in sync with Machiavelli’s viewpoints. People today need to have an authority figure in which they fear so that they will obey laws. In a world filled with crime, more fear might lead to less law breaking. But is fear the only trait one should have to be an effective leader? In

Lao Tzu is better known as the founder of the religion and philosophy Taoism, which has a large following in China and some other parts of the world. Confucius was another philosopher who lived around the same time as Lao Tzu. He is also the founder of Confucianism, one of the better-known philosophies around the world.

He says that it is safer to be feared because the sole purpose of a ruler is to keep order. Machiavelli is not saying that it is necessarily better to be feared, he is saying that it is safer because the people

Different cultures and societies have their story of how the world began. These stories vary in the process, but they all share one common theme. All of the stories begin with nothing or chaos, that is until one being creates light, time, earth and its occupants. One common thing all myths share is the role and status of women and men. In the Greek myth women were less dominant, Hindu myth women are not even mentioned, and in Cherokee myth women are shown to be inferior.