More handpicked essays just for you.
Differences between Lao Tzu and Machiavelli Philosophies
Lao-tzu leadership styles
Differences between Lao Tzu and Machiavelli Philosophies
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
When comparing Tao-te Ching to The Prince there are numerous differences. The authors of these two documents had almost completely opposite ideas of how a ruler should behave and how a government should be run. One believed that the ruler could accomplish the most by doing the least; the other believed that by controlling how the public perceived a ruler was what would make him a success or a failure. Machiavelli believed that to rule the prince must do things that would win approval with his people, and that the prince must always keep and maintain arms to remain in power. On the other hand Lao-tzu believed that the master ruled with as little involvement as possible, he believed that to “not do” would have the greatest effect, and that to use arms as only a last resort. With just these two examples it becomes clear how different the authors viewed leadership and government.
Throughout Lao-tzu’s Tao-te Ching are examples that show he feels that a master should rule by doing as little as possible to persuade people to do what is right. He believes that when a master rules, th...
Lao-Tzu desires a leader who confides in his people, to make them feel a part of the government, and to not control them. The logic and moral being: if everything is left to be do what it 's supposed to, everything will fall into place and a leader will not over occupy his or herself with duties that 's not meant for them. Not only that, but Lao-Tzu mentions what it would be like if an area is governed in a specific way, “If a country is governed with tolerance, the people are comfortable and honest. If a country is governed with repression, the people are depressed and crafty (Verse 58, pg. 29).” Lao-Tzu, in comparison to Machiavelli, thinks a compassionate, involving leader befits governing a country. However, in an earlier verse, Lao-Tzu mentions that when the “Master” governs, the best kind of leader is one who hardly exists to the people, the other is one who is loved, and one who is feared, but the worst is one who is despised. Meaning that Machiavelli and Lao-Tzu are on the same spectrum when it comes to the quality of a good
Lao-Tzu's political philosophy falls into more of an individualistic and carefree branch of politics, in which the way of governing is by not forcing issues. He believes that the ruler should not act powerful, and because of this, he will be respected. Lao-Tzu also believes that the best leader is one that is loved, not feared. Instead of holding power and forcing rules, Lao-Tzu wishes to teach simplicity, patience, and compassions. He views the latter as "the greatest treasures" and if one has the three qualities, one will be a better person.
Major changes in political structure, social and economic life define the Sui, Tang, and Song dynasties. Each period laid the foundation for the next, with changes and improvements to create a new order.
Taoism applied to everyday life "Practice not-doing and everything will fall into place" (Chapter 3). In Taoism this is the concept known as "wu wei". Wei wu wei is the practice of doing and not-doing. This concept comes from the theory of the Yin and Yang. The Yang, along with wei, is the practice of doing. The Yin, along with wu wei, is the practice of not-doing. One compliments the other, and each cannot exist alone. The Tao tells people to practice not-doing because it will bring happiness in their life. By not-doing, the Tao means not performing actions, which are unnecessary and uncalled for. People should just take things as they come in life and they will live a life full of happiness and pleasure. If you don't interfere with the Tao and let things take their natural course, everything will work out in your life (Chapter 10). "If powerful men and women could remain centered in the Tao…all people would be at peace…" (Chapter 32). If you work against your Tao, you will never find happiness. The Sage practices wu wei. He teaches without words and performs without actions (Chapter 43). He knows and therefore does not speak (Chapter 56). Many people mistake conceptual knowledge for the map to the territory. The Sage is our map to the Tao. He points his finger to show us the way, but does not really tell us what to do and how to practice Taoism. Lao Tzu's concepts of the Tao can be a guide to rational living. If one follows these beliefs he is guaranteed happiness in his life. However, it is very difficult to follow the Tao, even though the teachings are said to be easily understood and easily put into practice (Chapter 70). The reason the Tao is so difficult to grasp is because you cannot kno...
Actions dictate the experiences in humans' lives, and Confucius and Laozi disagreed in their view of whether individuals should take action to achieve the Way. Confucius believed it was necessary and prevalent in society to act, since he lived during the period of the Warring States. He wanted to fix the leaders' problems, and he felt he could only achieve this through action, because "he who behaves with honor, and being sent on a mission to the four corners of the world does not bring disgrace to his lord, deserves to be called a gentleman". He felt a person had the best chance at acquiring the Way by being a gentleman. Laozi, however, trusted in nonaction, in things taking their pre-established course in life, with Daoism. Laozi thought that "when not acting then there is nothing not done // ". He felt that it was better for a person to live their life closer to the stillness of the Way, and only by shutting off from the world could they truly know all things. Unfortunately, for this to work, people would have to isolate th...
Li claims that Confucianism is less concerned with specific rules and more concerned with living by the Golden Rule of treating others as how one would like to be treated. He relates the flexibility of rules to care ethics which bases its judgments of the right thing to do on the situation at hand (181-82). Star argues that Confucianism is heavily reliant o...
Confucianism and Daoism are two influential schools of thoughts that have existed in ancient China around the 6th century BCE. The former, led by the politician and philosopher Confucius, proposed that humans live in society according to a set of predefined rules and that they transform society through political action. Whereas the latter, led by the philosopher Lao-Tzu, promoted the idea of inaction; people should go with the flow instead of taking action to control their lives and dominate their surroundings. Although, at first glance Daoism and Confucianism seem to be two opposing philosophies, a more in depth analysis of two of their key ideas –filial piety and education—reveals that they do share some similarities.
Instead, Taoism advocated doing nothing and obey the orders of nature. In ancient Chinese society, the essence of “Dao” in Confucianism including five factors which are benevolence, righteousness, etiquette, intelligence and honest (Hoobler & Hoobler, 1993), while “Dao” in Taoist can be embodied as the natural orders and principles of universe in terms of the heaven and the ground (Wang & Chanzit, 2004). Specific comparing, Confucianism concentrates on hierarchical ethical order, through a series of manners discipline to improve people 's moral standards. Taoism treats the whole universe as a country, and proposes to follow natural orders and without doing anything as the measure of managing a state. In conclusion, The “Dao” in Taoist is not the “Dao” of moral in Confucianism. Confucianism made the “Dao” actualization and socialization, while Taoism made it
Leadership can be traced back to many ideologies over the history of time. There have been individuals that have achieved great success and accomplishments through inspiring others to believe and follow their leadership. This paper will explain some of the theories that philosophically explain how those great people inspired others to believe in their vision and goals.
In conclusion, governments as we know right now, falls way behind what Lao-tzu seems to believe. The reason is because it disobeys his tendency in peace, contradicts the fact that he is against people’s unfinished desires power, and opposes his disapproval in materialism.
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.
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.
According to Birch (2002) it was during the 6th century B.C.E that the two most influential leaders namely, Confucius and Lao-Tzu, lived and practiced their philosophies of Confucianism and Taoism respectively while simultaneously attracting countless of followers. Confucianism is a set of laws which was established by Confucius as he was primarily concerned with social responsibilities and social hierarchy. Confucianism is a leadership ethic which views hierarchy as the natural order. Therefore, if relationships and society are to be successful it is crucial for leaders to be good people. Senior leaders are powerful and power must be exercised in the best interest of themselves and those for whom they are responsible. Relationships and organisation will not be mutually advantageous and good results are much less likely occur if social ...
...rtuous ruler wishing to be established himself, seeks also to establish others; and wishing to enlighten himself, seeks also to enlighten others." To establish mean is to rectify; and to enlighten means to possess a rich, spiritual and material life. " The ideal of love in government is by far more fundamental than such modern political ideals as liberty, equality, fraternity, and democracy. When these rules are practiced, there will be no class conflict in the nation, no exploitation, no inequality, no autocracy, no social injustice." Confucius also believed in moral rule. All moral rules have implicit in the some principle or principles. A rule can thus always be judged by it success in realizing these principles. In other words, moral rules have built-in standards by which they can be judged. If they are found wanting, this point is the way of their improvement.
Before going through this near death experience, I saw the role of a leader as a boss and my assumption was far from the truth. Lao Tzu says, “A leader