“The Tao-te Ching” by Lao-Tzu and “The Prince” by Machiavelli 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 contrary, Machiavelli advocates the necessity for a successful leader, or prince, to take control of his endeavors, and the skills or qualities necessary to maintain power, at any cost. Since these thinkers both make an inquiry to what is essentially the same dilemma of effective leadership, it becomes almost a natural progression to juxtapose the two in an effort to better understand what qualities a prosperous leader must possess. In this sense, when we utilize the rhetorical strategy of compare/contrast as a vehicle to transport us to a more enlightened interpretation of Lao-Tzu and Machiavelli’s conclusions, it becomes apparent that Machiavelli’s effort is much more successful as his practicality serves its purpose much more effectively. Although they share some similarities in ideology, these parallels are greatly overshadowed by the concepts in which Lao-Tzu and Machiavelli diverge. Their primary distinction lies within their view of human nature and it’s role in governing. Lao-Tzu maintains that if we promote a system of governing to the least possible extent, then human nature should manifest a favorable temperance and dictate the direction of society. In fact, Lao-Tzu asserts numerous attempts to illustrate his point that if leaders, “Stop Trying to control” (§ 57, 35), then there is no desire (§ 37, 24), he dwells in reality (§ 38, 29), and “the world will govern itself.” (§ 57, 35) Although this is an extremely optimistic and beneficial ideal, the main problem with Lao-Tzu’s entire philosophy is exactly that, it can only be viewed as a philosophy. Because it appears under the section entitled “Government,” I... ... middle of paper ... ...d this consequently deducts from the validity of his advice. As he begins to conclude, Machiavelli states that the prince: “should think about avoiding those things which make him hated and despised.” (Mach 48) Although these lack any withstanding moral values, they are effective in the sense that they better serve their purpose. Machiavelli was seeking to display a way to hold political power by any means possible not a utopian state. This may mean malicious acts, imprisonment, and torture, or it may mean the utilization of power to achieve a common good. Machiavelli doesn’t elaborate on this. He concentrates on a realistic approach towards government, as he remains concerned with the establishment and protection of power. Works Cited Boltz, William G. Lao tzu Tao te ching. In Early Chinese Texts: A Bibliographical Guide, edited by Michael Loewe. Berkeley: University of California, 1993. Kaltenmark, Max. Lao Tzu and Taoism. Translated by Roger Greaves. Stanford: Stanford University Press. 1969. Machiavelli, Niccolo. The Prince. Trans. Hill Thompson. Norwalk: The Easton Press, 2002. The Prince, and Other Political Writings, tr. Stephen J. Milner, London, 1995
In comparing and contrasting the governmental philosophies of the great thinkers Lao-Tzu and Machiavelli, I have found a pleasant mix of both of their ideas would be the best for America today. Lao-Tzu’s laisse-faire attitude towards the economy, as well as his small scale military is appealing to my liberal side, while Machiavelli’s attitude towards miserliness which causes low taxes appeals to the right wing. These great thinkers contradict the popular saying “all great thinkers think alike.” They have several ideas, such as taxes, that are the same, while other ideas, like the involvement of government in citizens' everyday lives are totally opposite. I shall start with the ideas of Machiavelli, then move on to Lao-Tzu’s, and finally a comparison and application into American life.
People from all around the world suffer from many different anxieties and troubles. They turn to things they enjoy so that they can forget reality and be somewhat happy or simply to communicate with one another. Most of the enjoyment is temporary and not sufficient, that is why they continue doing what they do. Creative Arts Therapy, also known as Expressive Arts Therapy, helps those who find themselves completely lost and have nowhere to go or anyone to go to. They can express themselves however they please. In order to better understand arts therapy one must have a knowledge of creativity, emotions and, of course, people.
Powell, Barry B. “Chapter 14-Perseus and Myths of the Argive Plain.” Classical Myth, translated by Herbert M. Howe, 8th ed., Pearson, 2015, pp.
Overall Machiavelli’s perspective does seem harsh and cold at times, but he proves to be an avid supporter of popular rule throughout his writings. He believes in popular rule so strongly that he states it is acceptable to use immoral means to achieve a peaceful government. If the citizens are not happy and feel their ruler disregards their wishes then the populace could become enraged and therefore, the ruler would not be executing his power of indirect popular rule. Machiavelli states that in order to achieve the necessity of popular rule, a leader will have to step outside a moral sphere and do whatever it takes to achieve popular rule. Machiavelli puts clear and strict limits on acts of immorality in leadership. The use of immorality is only acceptable in order to achieve overall good for a government. Engaging in immorality for the sake of popular rule is justified because it is done to serve the people and the state successfully.
Machiavelli’s views were drastically different from other humanists at his time. He strongly promoted a secular society and felt morality was not necessary but stood in the way of a successfully governed state. He stated that people generally tended to work for their own best interests and gave little thought to the well being of the state. He distrusted citizens saying, “In time of adversity, when a state is in need of its citizens, there are few to be found.” In his writings in The Prince, he constantly questioned the citizens’ loyalty and warned for the leaders to be wary in trusting citizens. His radical and distrusting thoughts on human nature were derived out of concern for Italy’s then unstable government. Machiavelli also had a s...
Machiavelli believes that a government should be very structured, controlled, and powerful. He makes it known that the only priorities of a prince are war, the institutions, and discipline. His writings describes how it is more important for a prince to be practical than moral. This is shown where he writes, "in order to maintain the state he is often obliged to act against his promise, against charity, against humanity, and against religion" (47). In addition, Machiavelli argues that a prince may have to be cunning and deceitful in order to maintain political power. He takes the stance that it is better for the prince to be feared than loved. His view of how a government should run and his unethical conduct are both early signs of dictatorship.
For all of Machiavelli’s ruthlessness and espousal of deceit, he knew the value of authenticity and relying on his administration. A true leader cannot achieve greatness alone. Machiavelli says that the prince is the state, and the state is the prince. This means that whatever vision and principles the leader holds in the highest regard, they must be known to the state so that they can be realized. He believed that no matter how a prince was elected, his success would depend largely on his ministers. Collaboration between a prince and ministers would create an atmosphere of harmony and camaraderie, highly reducing the chances of rebellion. Without the support and cooperation of the people, military action is not possible, expansion is not possible and most importantly, governance is not possible. If a leader does not satisfy the needs of the people, they have the power to overthrow him through strength in numbers. Thus, a leader depends just as much on the people as they do on him. A leader must be able to convince the people to buy into his visio...
Additionally, The Prince states that secular forms of government are more realistic than pious ones because a pious government would be bound by morals. In the Prince, Machiavelli tries to convey that the end justifies the means, which means any thing goes. He claims that it would be ideal for a prince to possess all the qualities that are deemed good by other men, but states that no leader can accomplish that. He also states that the security of the state should be the prince’s first priority and it must be protected by any means necessary. Although, this can be true in certain cases, Machiavelli uses it as an excuse to use evil and cruel tactics.
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 Ching, and not as chaotic as Machiavelli illustrated in Prince.
Gittings, John. The Changing Face of China: From Mao to market. Oxford University Press, 2005.
Jean Piagets developed a theory known as the cognitive development theory. In this theory he explains how children are able to develop intellectually throughout childhood. He did not believe the idea that children were simply mini adults but instead believed that the way children think is very different to the way adults think. He suggested that cognitive development is a process that occurs when children actively construct their knowledge based on their experiences and interactions in their world moving through four different stages of mental development. These four stages are sensorimotor, preoperational, concrete operational and formal operational period.
Art Therapy is defined by the American Art Therapy Association, as “the therapeutic use of art, within a professional relationship, by people who experience illness, trauma, or disabilities, and are seeking personal development.” This process uses art media, images, and performances to enhance the patient’s abilities, personality, and quality of life. Patients who use art as a therapeutic device engage in creative outlets which allow them to gain emotional healing and relief from stressful and terminal diseases or disabilities (Benefits, 1). Art Therapy is practiced in mental health, rehabilitation, medical, educational and forensic institutions. This treatment also has a variety of clientele, and formats, such as: individuals, couples, family, and group therapy. Creating, viewing, and talking about art, provides a way for people to cope with emotional conflicts and increase self-awareness (History, 1). The ability to create or interpret art provides the patient the proper format to express unspoken and often unconscious concerns about their misfortunes. Coupled with medical treatment, Art Therapy provides emotional support and stability for many people throughout the world. Although it is a growing field, with 34 master’s programs approved by the American Art Therapy Association in universities throughout the United States, Art Therapy departments and therapists are continuously shown a lack of appreciation and support. Other than the actual patients and their loved ones, successes shown within this form of treatment are relatively unheard of by the general public. The significance that Art Therapy has in the medical world should be known because is completely safe, without side effects and incredibly important to many people (Ar...
Notwithstanding the two philosophers’ different views on abstract concepts, Machiavelli’s virtù to fortuna is comparable to Plato’s Justice to Good. Each philosopher grants his ruler with a specific trait that deviates from the leader’s acquired knowledge of abstract concepts. Under their beliefs, the best ruler is the one who conforms to this virtuous trait--for Plato, Justice (Plato 519b-c), and for Machiavelli, virtù (Machiavelli, Prince 29). These traits then extend to a multitude of characteristics that define the careful instruction both philosophers laid out and that will allow the leader to directly change society into a worthy political
Through the first part of the play Othello remains the calm voice of reason, believing himself to possess a “perfect soul” (1.2.36). This is significant because when he grants himself the role of an exempt man from a rigid moral code because his wife is supposedly cheating on him, it shows his true nature, motivated not truly by jealousy, but protection of his honor. Therefore allowing a caveat for the murder of his supposed love, which he is proudly open about, proclaiming to Emilia, “She’s like a liar gone burning to Hell! ‘Twas I that killed her.” (5.2.159-160). Othello is desperate for people to know that he has swiftly dealt with his allegedly cheating wife to defend his honor and reputation. Rather than maintaining his reasonable disposition he possesses for a large duration of the play he gets blinded by jealousy, turning to lunacy. An example of this is when he begins to spew gibberish in the presence of Iago, upset with his wife's alleged infidelity, saying, “Pish! Noses, ears, and lips--is’t possible? Confess--handkerchief--O, devil!” (4.1.50-52). In the earlier moments of the play Othello’s words are meticulously chosen as to come off as intelligent and a man of high stature, however in this moment he breaks the trend of powerful, well thought out words. It is proof that jealousy can attenuate the better judgement of those who
The paper explores the nature of the ‘Truth’ through the lens of Chinese ancient philosophy of Lao Tzu. Unlike other epistemologists, Lao Tzu holds a very different and unique perspective on the nature of the truth. Tao Te Ching is the most significant treatises in Chinese cosmogony (Giles, 1947) and by exploring his teaching, we will discuss the inexpressible, immutable and permanent nature of the truth. The understanding of Lao Tzu is very complex because he speaks opposite to the rational scheme of the human beings. Verily, the teaching of Lao Tzu is contradictory because the human being is used to think rationally whereas, Lao Tzu talks of simplicity (Osho, 2001). In addition, Lao Tzu states that truth cannot be expressed because it