|
| |
[ Home ] [ Up ] [ Honors Core Seminar Syllabi ] [ Reactions Paper Assignments ] [ Machiavelli ] [ More ] [ Reformation ] [ First Study Guide ] [ The Slave Trade ] [ Bacon, Hobbes, and Descartes ] [ Locke ] [ Second Study Guide ] [ Kant, Wollstonecraft, and Voltaire ] [ Hume ] [ Kant ] [ Hegel and Kierkegaard ] [ Hegel's Phenomenology ] [ Marx's Theory of Alienation ] [ Marx's Theory of Ideology ] [ 3rd Study Guide ] [ Nietzsche ] [ Sartre ] [ 4th Study Guide ] [ Finishing Our Seminar ] [ Final Exam Questions ]
Reading
Questions and Notes for Sir Thomas More’s Utopia.
What to read:
You can find the full text at:
http://www.newbanner.com/AboutPic/athena/raphael/nbi_ath4.html
and at many other sites as well.
Utopia is a relatively short piece and an easy read,
all things considered. So, if you can, you should try to read the whole thing.
However, barring that here is what you absolutely must read:
All of Book I and the following
chapters of Book II: “Of their Traffic,” “Of the Traveling of the
Utopians,” “Of Their Slaves and of Their Marriages,” & “Of the
Religions of the Utopians.”
A few comments:
There is a central or abiding ambiguity to Utopia that continues to make
it intriguing and a subject of controversy. On the one hand it is clear that Utopia
is a satire and is meant to be humorous. This was a common genre of the
so-called “northern humanists” (e.g. Erasmus’ In Praise of Folly).
Indeed, the letters exchanged amongst this group of intellectuals, and their
apparent (childish?) glee that some people assumed that Utopia was real place,
sometimes suggest that Utopia is meant as a joke. (Peter Giles, in one of
this letters, went so far as to construct an actual alphabet for the Utopians.)
On the other hand, it is not at all clear what is being satirized or what the
butt of the joke is. More was a devote catholic (he wore a hair shirt and would
at times flagellate himself with a corded whip), yet much of Utopia is
critical of contemporary Christianity. More’s own activities in the government
of Henry the VIII (in both foreign relations and domestic policy) suggest he was
far less tolerant of both religious and political freedom (he really did not
like the Protestants movement then taking off). Can we say that More was some
sort of proto-socialist? Or, did he wish to see a return to the monastic ideals
of the late Middle Ages? However we answer these questions, we must recognize
two things. First, Utopia does pose very serious and interesting
questions for our consideration. Not only do these questions give us some
insight into the intellectual culture of the period, but they remain important
questions for us. Second, Utopia had a very profound impact upon the
minds and thinking of the humanists during this period. It is interesting to
note that while More could have in no way read Machiavelli’s The Prince,
there is much in Utopia that can be seen as a direct response to
Machiavelli’s particular understanding of political justice.
Much of the satire in Utopia is bound up with
More’s use of Greek (which accounts for why some people did not pick up on its
satirical nature). So, for example, “utopia” itself means “no place.”
Currently, we consider “utopias” to be perfect or ideal places (and this is
suggested by the possible pun on “eutopia” which means “good place”).
However, it is not clear –and seems dubious—that More’s Utopia was
considered to be an “ideal” for him or anyone in his circle. We should be
careful of assuming that the social structures illustrated by the Utopians are
social structures that More thought were ideal –we must remember at least the
lack of Christianity as an informing element in those structures and what limits
reason had for many humanists. Almost all of More’s uses of Greek in
constructing names have something to do with nonsense or stupidity. So, for
example, “Hythloday” (Raphael’s last name) is probably a construction from
“huthlos” and “daien” and can be read as “nonsense peddler.” So,
watch for this.
Some questions to
consider: While you are reading the text you should keep in mind these
general questions.
- Identify
and try to explain the “humanist” elements in Utopia. That is,
try to find specific passages, themes, or references that indicate the
text’s placement within the humanistic intellectual tradition.
- Consider
More’s work here in relation to the work of Machiavelli. How is his vision
(to the degree that you can work this out) of justice and politics different
from Machiavelli? Which vision do you find more realistic or more appealing?
- It
is also useful to contrast More’s characterizations of people –and his
sense of what a good person is—with that put forward by Castiglione.
Book I
- Consider
carefully the question that More poses to Raphael: why don’t you work in
the service of some king? Why does Raphael refuse to do this? What are his arguments
such as they are that he should not do this?
- What
are some possible responses to Raphael’s refusal? How would you respond to
Raphael here?
- Consider:
is it possible to be a virtuous
person –as More understands this (think of his description of Peter
Giles)—and still service in politics? Think about this in relation to
Machiavelli.
- Trace
out and try to re-write the argument (as you understand it) that Raphael
gives for his position. Do the same for More.
- One
of the sub arguments here concerns the death penalty for crimes. What do you
think of this discussion? What is Raphael’s argument here? Is slavery a
more just form of punishment? Do you agree with the purpose of punishment
outlined here?
- Of
course, you should know the basics here as well: Who is Raphael, who are the
Polylerites, Achorians, etc.?
Book II
- For
each of the specific chapters in this section you should know the basic
content. For example, what are the key structures of society and business in
Utopia? What is most interesting or “striking” about these structures?
In a sense, you should know the basic content. However, here are a few more
general questions.
- What
is the role of reason in Utopian society? What can reason do you human
society? Does it have any limits?
- What
is the basis of their moral philosophy? What is the role of reason and
nature in morality for the Utopians? What do you think of this construction?
Is it reasonable? Does it leave anything out, or leave any important
questions unasked and unanswered? What are the rules of nature/reason?
- How
do the Utopians define and understand pleasure as a part of human life? What
place does pleasure have in their social structures and in their moral
philosophy? Does the elimination of private property relate to the emphasis
on pleasure?
- What
do you think of the role of religion in Utopian society? Can you have
religious freedom if you maintain the two “fundamental laws” of Utopian
society? What is the purpose or function of these laws?
- What
is the precise nature of the toleration of diversity in religion in Utopia?
What is allowed and what is forbidden? Is this a true tolerance or a true
freedom of speech?
- What
do you think of this sentence: “If anyone claimed to prefer celibacy to
marriage, and a hard life to a comfortable one, on the grounds of reason
alone, the Utopians would think him absurd”? What does this mean for the
function and limits of reason?
- Consider
the sentence that follows: “But, since these men [religious people who are
celibate and reject pleasure] claim to be motivated by religion, the
Utopians respect and revere them.” What do we do with this?
- Over-all
what do you think of the role of religion in Utopian society?
- Finally,
what is your over-all judgment of Utopia –both as a text and as a vision
of a just state?
Author: Thomas Bowen
Oakton Community College
Updated: January 23, 2007
|