Essay example --

Aristotle and Niccol Machiavelli were two great minds from completely different times, both having rather different views on the world, that touched on galore(postnominal) similar points throughout their respective works Politics and Machiavellis various writings. This occurred because Machiavelli was illustrating his positions directly a weest Aristotles theories, which allows for an interesting comparison between the twos opinions on a variety of issues. While Politics is more of a discussion for the populous and The Prince was specifically made as a sort of guidebook for the time to come ruling class, they can still be compared based upon their similar topics of discussion regarding political goals and the argue points that need to be avoided. This combined with The Discourses, which was an analysis of the Roman res publica and why it was so successful, provide a rather comprehensive view of Machiavellis core beliefs. The concept of differing worldviews is key to understanding the similarities and differences between the two as they come from very different basic places of opinion when regarding the overall goal of politics. Aristotle came from a position of lofty, boarding on impractical, goals with the effort of creating the concept of the good animation for its citizens, in which they could expand and flourish. Machiavelli on the other hand worked on a much more practical scale of thought, focusing on concepts of gaining power, and control, while maintaining stability as the main goals of participating in politics. Both however stated a vast array of necessary requirements for achieving the best political scenario along with opposing points to avoid, and in turn theories on how to distinguish between the two. In this paper, these two great poli... ...nd goals a governing body can hope to achieve, asking the unmarried to question how they are being governed and how the system around them can be improved. They also however provide guidelines for how to govern ones self, and legitimate goals that an unmarried should strive to achieve, not just goals for the governing body over top of them. From these two theories, an individual should be able to learn how to better govern their sense and identify how best to serve themselves throughout life. No one theorist is ultimately better then the other therefore because of this, as they both gain significant merit in the debate that they open up to their audiences. Their timeless core theories provide remain with society forever as there will always be some form of governance, and their theories can fit so many scenarios throughout life.Sources