Machiavelli and Hobbes: Founders of Modern Political Science

Introduction: Politics as Science

Machiavelli and Thomas Hobbes influenced the entire direction of political thought within their respective generations. Their influence resulted from political documents that changed the way we view the nature of humanity and political science. They brought a scientific understanding to the perception of politics, rather than a humanistic and rhetorical one. The profound difference in the ways in which they approached politics as a science rather than a philosophy challenged traditional thinking and transformed our understanding of politics forever.

Machiavelli's Revolutionary Approach to Governance

The Prince by Niccolò Machiavelli was a revolutionary political document that influenced how Europeans perceived politics. Originally written as a political codex for the Medici family of Italy, it turned European thinking upside down by explicitly stating rules for pragmatic governance. Many critics argue that Machiavelli's long-term legacy is to explain political phenomena in scientific terms. He lived in an era of flourishing scientific thought and an evolving definitional system. Ethics, science, mathematics, and many other fields were no longer regarded as purely conceptual frameworks but as executable concepts. For Machiavelli, politics was not an arena of rhetoric or ethical understanding, but rather a process that could be documented and understood through governing principles and rules, much like any other scientific process. His book therefore revolutionarily reduced political governance to its core components.

Prior to The Prince, politics was cast in the light of conceptual rhetoric. Thinkers such as Plato, Aristotle, and the Roman philosophers approached politics as an understanding of how idealized governments and governors ought to operate. Machiavelli's approach, however, was to examine governance in a pragmatic setting. He sought to understand how an individual can govern effectively given the political circumstances of the status quo. This is a unique approach because it focuses on execution rather than conceptualization. As a codex for government, his specific ideas were not entirely novel — nor was he the first to advocate them — but he was the first to state them openly and in a direct, challenging light.

Machiavelli's main contribution and his revolution of political science lie in understanding politics as a reality, with governance as a template for how individuals must govern, rather than how they should govern. Although many critics throughout history have argued the immorality of the rules advocated in The Prince, Machiavelli argues that all moral principles must yield to circumstance. The essential revolution within his political thought is that he does not believe there is a tangible connection between ethics and politics — a connection that had been implicitly assumed by all previous philosophers. Machiavelli departs from classical conceptions of virtue, unlike Plato and Aristotle, who assert that virtue is the principal quality of all great leaders. His politics focuses on real and tangible guidance for leadership; his chief contribution is that he no longer makes politics synonymous with justice.

Pragmatic Ends and the Prince's Core Principles

Machiavelli's founding principle is the focus on achieving the pragmatic ends of governance and stability. When viewed from an ends-oriented perspective, the majority of his thinking coincides with other philosophers. For instance, he argues that a prince must not be hated by his people — that "a wise prince should establish himself on that which is his own control and not in that of others; he must endeavor to avoid hatred, as is noted." Hatred causes a people to unite despite all obstacles and rise up against their prince, and no matter the military might of the prince, he will be overthrown. This tenet is central to Machiavelli's philosophy because he believes the primary end of any prince is to maintain stability within his kingdom and ensure that his power is permanent. When a prince does not engender hatred, the populace will have no cause, reason, or means to rise up against him.

Not being hated, however, does not preclude being feared. Upon reading the above principle, one might be tempted to think that Machiavelli's intent is benign; however, he goes on to say that "it is best to be both feared and loved, however, if one cannot be both, it is better to be feared than loved." The purpose of this statement is to show that Machiavelli is concerned only with ends, and that he believes immoral and even vicious means must sometimes be pursued to achieve them. Furthermore, his intent is that all princes should use all means necessary to maintain their power base.