The Compare & Contrast Pt2

Machiavelli believed that the God invincible hand was absent to guide the human being and therefore every man had to take charge of every outcome of events. Metaphysical Machiavelli denied the existence of god’s intervention in human management of affairs and therefore every individual is endowed by the potential and will to determine the outcome of every desire in order for man to be termed as becoming. Machiavelli insists that the nature of reality is that men are unreasonable to keep ethical rules and society would never be trusted “rulers disobeyed convention in order to keep power, and men were naturally vicious creatures that did not willfully conform to reason” (Furmanski 2). The foundation of the state is to create a responsible society that can check on every man’s vicious actions. Thus a prince must protect the personal interests that are usually tied with the flamboyant action on behalf of public since he is the head of the populace with the highest scrutiny power.

Locke reveals the true nature reality that he calls common sense or natural law that states that man every man can reason and make clear conclusions about the conduct of men. Ethically, all men can do well only that the state political way of concentrating men on power unnatural cause conflicts. He therefore refutes Machiavelli and Hobbes idea that men are vicious and violently turn a sovereignty or elected state into a state of anarchy (Furmanski 3).

Hobbes believes every human action could be calculated through metaphysical geometry whereby human motive can be reduced to certain precise physical principles; Politics is a physical principle to maintain law and order. Hobbes insists that order must be imposed since all men naturally violent. The state that must act on behalf to protect the society must have a sovereign ruler to protect the people from violent attacks from anarchists and rebels. Ontologically, unlike Locke but like Machiavelli men were inclined their lowest possible morals actions such as man suspects all other men but himself and therefore would harm to prevent being hurt. Radically, Hobbes like Machiavelli believed that men were naturally disposed to observe neither morals nor respect for ethics; thus a state must be put in place with elected leaders to protect the sovereignty from falling into anarchy.

Locke satisfies the philosophy of being and becoming state that man is becoming a round in acquisition of knowledge and reason such that man is likely to govern the state and the society by logic reason. Conversely, Machiavelli and Hobbes differ with the philosophy of being by insisting that man is naturally inclined to do harm for his domestic gain.