{"id":3974,"date":"2025-09-28T21:41:22","date_gmt":"2025-09-28T21:41:22","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/apeterman.digitalscholar.rochester.edu\/phl202f25\/?page_id=3974"},"modified":"2025-12-03T15:56:25","modified_gmt":"2025-12-03T15:56:25","slug":"thomas-more","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/apeterman.digitalscholar.rochester.edu\/phl202f25\/thomas-more\/","title":{"rendered":"Thomas More"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<figure class=\"wp-block-video\"><video height=\"1080\" style=\"aspect-ratio: 1920 \/ 1080;\" width=\"1920\" controls src=\"https:\/\/apeterman.digitalscholar.rochester.edu\/phl202f25\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/Gurami-Mgebrishvili_More.mp4\"><\/video><\/figure>\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\">\n<figure class=\"aligncenter size-full is-resized\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"201\" height=\"250\" src=\"https:\/\/apeterman.digitalscholar.rochester.edu\/phl202f25\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/download.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-3975\" style=\"width:275px;height:auto\"\/><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-group\"><div class=\"wp-block-group__inner-container is-layout-constrained wp-block-group-is-layout-constrained\">\n<!--nextpage-->\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Bibliography<\/h2>\n<\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n<details class=\"wp-block-details is-layout-flow wp-block-details-is-layout-flow\"><summary><strong>Primary sources:<\/strong><\/summary>\n<p><em>More, Thomas. A Dialogue Concerning Heresies. 1529. Edited by Thomas M. C. Lawler, Germain Marc\u2019hadour, and Richard C. Marius, Yale University Press, 1981. The Complete Works of St. Thomas More, vol. 6.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><em>&nbsp;More, Thomas. The Supplication of Souls. 1529. Edited by Frank Manley, Yale University Press, 1979. The Complete Works of St. Thomas More, vol. 7.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><em>More, Thomas. A Dialogue of Comfort Against Tribulation. 1534. Edited by Louis L. Martz and Frank Manley, Yale University Press, 1976. The Complete Works of St. Thomas More, vol. 12.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><em>More, Thomas. The History of King Richard III. c. 1513\u20131518. Edited by Richard S. Sylvester, Yale University Press, 1963. The Complete Works of St. Thomas More, vol. 2.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><em>&nbsp;More, Thomas. Utopia. 1516. Translated by Clarence H. Miller, Yale University Press, 2001.<\/em><em><br><\/em><em> (The Complete Works of St. Thomas More, vol. 4.)<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><em>More, Thomas. The Confutation of Tyndale\u2019s Answer. 1532\u201333. Edited by Louis A. Schuster, Richard C. Marius, and James P. Lusardi, Yale University Press, 1973. The Complete Works of St. Thomas More, vols. 8\u20139.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><em>More, Thomas. The Correspondence of Sir Thomas More. Edited by Elizabeth Frances Rogers, Princeton University Press, 1947.<\/em><em><br><\/em><em> More, Thomas. The Sadness of Christ. Translated by Clarence H. Miller, Scepter Publishers, 1993.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><em>More, Thomas. A Treatise on the Passion and Treatise on the Blessed Body. c. 1534\u201335. Edited by Garry E. Haupt, Yale University Press, 1976. The Complete Works of St. Thomas More, vol. 13.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/details>\n\n\n\n<details class=\"wp-block-details is-layout-flow wp-block-details-is-layout-flow\"><summary><strong>Secondary sources:<\/strong><\/summary>\n<p>I found an article on the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy that gives a brief introduction to Thomas More\u2019s life and works. I think it would be a good starting point for my project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><em>Wegemer, Gerard. \u201cLogin Required.\u201d Rochester.edu, 2025, plato-stanford-edu.ezp.lib.rochester.edu\/entries\/thomas-more\/. Accessed 5 Oct. 2025.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>I found this article on the university library website. The work that I am most interested in out of Thomas More\u2019s works is Utopia, and this article explores and compares his Utopia, Francis Bacon\u2019s New Atlantis, and Jonathan Swift&#8217;s Gulliver&#8217;s Travels. I am not internally sure how useful this will be for the project, but the article description seemed interesting.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Schultz, K. (2025). Utopia and Intellectual Humility: More, Bacon and Swift Appraising Law and Technology. <em>Law, Technology and Humans<\/em>, <em>7<\/em>(1), 7\u201321. <a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.5204\/lthj.3860\">https:\/\/doi.org\/10.5204\/lthj.3860<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>I found this article everywhere I tried to get new information about Thomas More and his works. It is not very recent, and we only have a hard copy in the library, which I hope to check and see if it is not too long and relevant for my project.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Sylvester, R. S., &amp; Marc\u2019hadour, G. (1977). <em>Essential articles for the study of Thomas More<\/em>. Archon Books.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Wegemer, Gerard. \u201cThomas More.\u201d <em>Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy<\/em>, Stanford University, 15 10 2023, https:\/\/plato.stanford.edu\/entries\/thomas-more\/#Aca. Accessed 16 10 2025.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Papke, David. <em>the Communisitic Inclinations of Sir Thomas More<\/em>. 10 Mar. 2016.<strong><em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<\/em><\/strong><a href=\"https:\/\/scholarlycommons.pacific.edu\/cgi\/viewcontent.cgi?article=1006&amp;context=utopia500\">https:\/\/scholarlycommons.pacific.edu\/cgi\/viewcontent.cgiarticle=1006&amp;context=utopia500<\/a><\/p>\n<\/details>\n\n\n\n<!--nextpage-->\n\n\n\n\n\n<p>Thomas More (1478\u20131535) was a lawyer, judge, member of the English Parliament, ambassador, advocate for women\u2019s education, Christian saint, and one of the earliest humanists in England. From a young age, he was very interested in reading and writing, and in his early poetry from times when he was still young it was visible that he had,&nbsp; \u201can awareness \u201cof himself in relation to others\u201d, showing \u201cconscience in the old sense of the word, \u2018a knowing with\u2019\u201d that always enabled him to determine a \u201cpart of his own\u201d(Sylvester, 1967:30). Perhaps this is the reason why he was so fascinafde by ancient Greek philosophers especially Plato and his socratic dialoges. As&nbsp; he graduated law school and then deeply studied Greek philosophy, he wanted to blend Greek philosophical ideas with biblical traditions of his own time. However, as a man of strong faith and unwavering moral principles, More refused to acknowledge the legislation of 1532\u20131534 that declared Henry VIII the head of the Church of England and opposed the king\u2019s divorce\u2014actions that ultimately led to his execution, in the age of 57.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>As mentioned, More was deeply influenced by ancient Greek philosophy. Among all the philosophers, he held the greatest admiration for Plato, whom he often referred to as \u201cthe great philosopher,\u201d believing that Plato\u2019s Socrates was the finest philosopher of all. His understanding and interest in Greek philosophy and especially plato is visible in his works, as there are many instances in for example his Utopia where we see allusions of Plato\u2019s or Cicero\u2019s works. Beyond the many allusions found in his writing, it is evident that More was deeply concerned with the idea of a perfect society\u2014or, more precisely, a perfect city\u2014much like Plato in <em>The Republic<\/em>. He was particularly interested in the moral values such a society should embody, revealing a clear intellectual connection between his thought and that of Greek moral philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle. It is also worth noting that, as a devout Catholic of the sixteenth century, More sought to unite the traditions of Jerusalem and Athens, blending Christian faith with classical philosophy to envision <em>Utopia<\/em>\u2014a static society grounded in perfect moral principles, immune to the corruption of history and change, where everything is operating in its best capacity.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>He was also among the first to advocate for women\u2019s rights, portraying in <em>Utopia<\/em> a society where women receive the same education as men, since they share the responsibility of defending and advancing the state. In 1523, as a member of the English Parliament and Speaker of the House of Commons, More championed the principle of freedom of speech within Parliament. These progressive ideas reflected the values he sought to promote in sixteenth-century England. Moreover, in his writings, he went even further\u2014abolishing private property in his imagined <em>Utopia<\/em> and opposing all forms of extremism, envisioning a balanced and just society guided by reason and virtue.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>It is worth noting that More was an exceptionally honest and devout man who truly lived according to the principles he wrote about. He provided equal education to both his son and daughters, advocated for human rights and freedom of speech, and sought to reform the Catholic Church from within in order to prevent the schism that eventually occurred during his time. His courage and moral strength is especially evident in in his History of King Rochard III, where he critiques monarchy and highlight how power is frequently abused by individuals and used to rule not by virtue but solely by fear and greed. After all this, it is not surprising that More was eventually executed by Henry VIII for refusing to support the king\u2019s divorce from Catherine of Aragon and his subsequent marriage to Anne Boleyn. More also opposed Henry\u2019s ambition to become the head of the Church of England\u2014an act of defiance that ultimately led to his execution.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><\/p>\n\n\n\n<!--nextpage-->\n\n\n\n<p>Thomas More &#8211; The best political structure, humanism and socialism <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Thomas More was a prominent figure in Western philosophy in the late 15th and 16th centuries. He is known not only as an important and influential figure in British society but also as a thinker whose works deeply shaped Renaissance humanism. His ideas started discussions about human rights, the role of reason, justice, and equality in government, and the relationship between human reason and Christian faith.&nbsp; He was a deeply religious man, known for his high moral standards in both his personal life and his career as a politician; however, he was also deeply interested in and influenced by ancient Greek philosophy. Those aspects of his life are being reflected in his works, where he is <em>\u201c<\/em><em>convinced of the need to return to the sources of classical and biblical thought. \u201c(Wegemer, par. 1). <\/em>&nbsp;Moving by those motives, he takes tasks to continue where his \u201cfavourite\u201d philosopher- Plato left and creates an image of perfect country with the most efficient ruling system which guarantees the safety and wellbeing of its citizens. Ironically, he names this palace Utopia and describes it in his probably most famous and influential work, Utopia (1516). A major part of More\u2019s philosophical exploration was his critique of the social and political systems he experienced in Europe during his time. This is evident in <em>The History of King Richard III<\/em> (1513\u20131518), where he highlights the flaws of monarchy and shows how the pursuit of power can corrupt individuals, leading to tyranny and harm for the nation. In those works, along with many of his other works and letters, More explores the ideas of Morality, equality, and justice in a socio-political perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>As mentioned above, More was deeply influenced by ancient Greek philosophy, especially by Plato and his \u201cSocrates\u201d, as he describes him as <em>\u201cthe great philosopher\u201d <\/em>and <em>\u201cwise\u201d <\/em>(1529 <em>Dialogue of Sir Thomas More, Knight<\/em> [<em>EW<\/em> 681.12, 29, <em>CW<\/em> 6: 334.23, 335.2]). His respect for Plato\u2019s Republic is well visible in his Utopia, which is also written in Platonic dialogue form. Besides the similarities in style, More also explores the idea of a perfect country, a perfect society with the most efficient governing system, which doesn\u2019t have the unjust flaws of the system he lived in. His Utopia is mostly a dialogue between More himself and Raphael Hythloday, a Portuguese traveller. Raphael is a very experienced and intellectual person, who has seen a lot, and as More says, <em>\u201cHe has sailed, not like Palinurus, but rather like Ulysses, or even better like Plato.\u201d(Utopia, PG11). <\/em>Raphael is also a source of the critique for monarchy as a system and the only person who has seen and lived in Utopia.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<!--nextpage-->\n\n\n\n<p>Before engaging with Utopia and discussing More\u2019s vision of a perfect system, it is important to highlight some of the flaws he identified and argued against that were in the monarchy. In very beginning of text he says that <em>\u201c First of all, the princes themselves, almost all of them, are more devoted to military pursuits (in which I neither have nor desire any skill) than they are to the beneficent pursuits of peacetime; and they are far more interested in how to acquire new kingdoms by hook or crook than in how to govern well those they have already acquired\u201d(Utopia, PG:16-17)<\/em>. Here, he illustrates that the leaders at the top of the system are already corrupt, as kings and rulers neglect their primary responsibility: ensuring the well-being of their people. More criticizes their focus on conquest and power over the ethical and practical duties of governance. This is just the beginning, as Raphael examines the problem of individual corruption and extends his analysis to the retainers, showing that the entire system\u2014from top to bottom\u2014is corrupt, inefficient, and frequently violent. It is worth mentioning that this discussion is caused by Raphael\u2019s story about unfair punishments for theft, which is also a very important example, showing the flaws of the system that punishes the crime, which is essentially caused by it. His interest and deep understanding of morality and its applications in governing structure are well visible in his critique when he writes,\u201c Thus, in this matter, not only you but most of the world seem to imitate bad teachers who are more eager to beat their pupils than to instruct them. For heavy and horrible punishments are imposed on thieves when it would be much better to make some provision for their livelihood, so that no one should labor under the cruel necessity first of stealing and then of dying for it.\u201d(Utopia PG18). These and many other examples from <em>Utopia<\/em> and <em>The History of King Richard III<\/em> illustrate and critique the ways in which authoritarian systems act against both individuals and society as a whole.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In <em>Utopia<\/em>, the critique of European society occupies the first half of the book, while the second half presents Raphael\u2019s 5-year experience on an island called Utopia. Raphael tells all about Utopia and how Utopians achieve a \u201cperfect\u201d society through rational governance, equality, and justice. In this perfect island, social equality is maintained by abolishing private property and establishing communal ownership, which minimizes greed and social conflict. In addition, Utopians emphasize education, productive labor, religious tolerance, and the welfare of all citizens, reflecting humanist principles at the foundation of their society. These reforms collectively create an ideal society built on reason, morality, and the common good.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>This form of government, which is achieved with specific reforms like the abolition of private property, has had a huge influence on the development of political views in Europe for the next 300 years after More\u2019s death. Namely, one of the most influential socio-economic socialism, and later Marxism, envision worlds which have many things in common with More\u2019s Utopia.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>This model of government, established through reforms such as the abolition of private property, had a profound influence on the development of European political thought for centuries after More\u2019s death. In particular, <strong>l<\/strong>ater socio-economic ideologies such as socialism and one of its branches, Marxism, drew inspiration from ideas that closely resemble those in More\u2019s <em>Utopia<\/em>, including communal ownership, social equality, and the pursuit of collective well-being over individual gain(The Communist Inclinations of Sir Thomas More, PG 30). Even though Plato, before More, had the idea of collective property, More\u2019s version had more concrete and applicable socio-economic aspects that later influenced 19th and 20th-century socialists to develop their views.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>As a final note, it should be noted that More envisioned his Utopia as a goal for all societies, a place where he perfectly combined the teachings of Jerusalem and the teachings of Athens to create an ideal socio-political system, without greed, violence, and discrimination that he saw so much in firstly British and then his time European society.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\"\/>\n\n\n\n<details class=\"wp-block-details is-layout-flow wp-block-details-is-layout-flow\"><summary>Citation:<\/summary>\n<p><em>More, Thomas. The History of King Richard III. c. 1513\u20131518. Edited by Richard S. Sylvester, Yale University Press, 1963. The Complete Works of St. Thomas More, vol. 2.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><em>&nbsp;More, Thomas. Utopia. 1516. Translated by Clarence H. Miller, Yale University Press, 2001.<br> (The Complete Works of St. Thomas More, vol. 4.)<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Wegemer, Gerard. \u201cThomas More.\u201d <em>Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy<\/em>, Stanford University, 15 10 2023, https:\/\/plato.stanford.edu\/entries\/thomas-more\/#Aca. Accessed 16 10 2025.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Papke, David. <em>the Communisitic Inclinations of Sir Thomas More<\/em>. 10 Mar. 2016.<strong><em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<\/em><\/strong><a href=\"https:\/\/scholarlycommons.pacific.edu\/cgi\/viewcontent.cgi?article=1006&amp;context=utopia500\">https:\/\/scholarlycommons.pacific.edu\/cgi\/viewcontent.cgiarticle=1006&amp;context=utopia500<\/a><\/p>\n<\/details>\n\n\n\n<!--nextpage-->\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-post-title\">Thomas More<\/h2>\n\n\n<p><strong>Different Understandings of Human Nature in More and Hume<\/strong><br><\/p>\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\">\n<figure class=\"aligncenter size-full is-resized\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"487\" height=\"600\" src=\"https:\/\/apeterman.digitalscholar.rochester.edu\/phl202f25\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/humeee.webp\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-4730\" style=\"width:386px;height:auto\" srcset=\"https:\/\/apeterman.digitalscholar.rochester.edu\/phl202f25\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/humeee.webp 487w, https:\/\/apeterman.digitalscholar.rochester.edu\/phl202f25\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/humeee-244x300.webp 244w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 487px) 100vw, 487px\" \/><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n<p class=\"has-text-align-center\">David Hume by Ramsay<\/p>\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\">\n<figure class=\"aligncenter size-full\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"575\" height=\"330\" src=\"https:\/\/apeterman.digitalscholar.rochester.edu\/phl202f25\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/mores-exacution.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-4731\" srcset=\"https:\/\/apeterman.digitalscholar.rochester.edu\/phl202f25\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/mores-exacution.jpg 575w, https:\/\/apeterman.digitalscholar.rochester.edu\/phl202f25\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/mores-exacution-300x172.jpg 300w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 575px) 100vw, 575px\" \/><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n<p class=\"has-text-align-center\"><strong>Detail from &#8220;The meeting of Sir Thomas More with his daughter after his sentence of death&#8221; (1872) by William Frederick Yeames<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><\/p>\n\n\n\n<!--nextpage-->\n\n\n\n<p>Although the physical distance between Thomas More(1478-1535) and David Hume(1711-1776) was not very far, as they lived in neighbouring countries(England and Scotland), one could say that the difference between their views and understandings of the world, religion, and human nature could not have been farther. This should not be surprising, as More, a Christian saint and prominent figure of the late 15th\u201316th century, doesn\u2019t have much in common with Hume, 18th-century philosopher, known for his skepticism in religion and divine moral dogmas.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>To better understand the similarities and differences between their philosophies, it is important to consider the historical context in which they were writing\u2014their time periods and the societies around them. More was writing in the 16th century, and his main concerns were religious and moral issues. However, he was also one of the most progressive thinkers of his time, as many of his political and economic ideas were later taken up in the 19th century. His emphasis on reason connects him to Enlightenment thinkers, who placed great importance on reason and science. Still, More shared far less with the skeptical attitudes toward religious dogma that many 18th-century Enlightenment philosophers developed. Both More and Hume were highly influential figures of their time, and the sharp differences in their ideas stem largely from their contrasting views of human nature and the origin of the knowledge our minds process\u2014differences that ultimately led them in opposite philosophical directions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>It is interesting to note that highly intellectual thinkers like More and Hume would answer questions about the ideal society, the proper system for judging and punishing crime, or the socio-economic structure of a community in completely different ways. However, these differences are not surprising once we consider their deep disagreements about human nature and human understanding. More presents his view of human nature in <em>Utopia<\/em> (1516), emphasizing reason-driven individuals who create a perfect society on the island of Utopia. The Utopians reflect many of More\u2019s ideas, particularly regarding religion and reason. As he writes, \u201cFurthermore, reason above all inspires mortals to love and revere the majesty of God, to whom we owe our existence and our capacity to be happy\u201d (<em>Utopia<\/em> 82). Hume would most likely dislike his approach of prioritizing reason over everything and using it to justify religious dogmas, as he does not believe in religious dogmas and also does not believe in reason in the same way More does and employs it in his works. For Hume, \u201cNature will always maintain her rights, and prevail in the end over any abstract reasoning whatsoever.\u201d(An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, PG41). Here, he clearly shows that he doesn\u2019t believe in high moral standards, which, by reason, will lead humans to \u201cperfection\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<!--nextpage-->\n\n\n\n<p>To stay on topic, it is important to note that the main difference between More and Hume does not arise simply from their religious views, even though religion plays a major role in More\u2019s writings. Their main disagreement begins from their different understandings of human nature. For Hume, the mind begins as a collection of impressions, which come from sensory experience, and ideas, which are merely faint copies of those impressions. From this framework, it becomes clear why Hume is skeptical about both reason and morals: there is no sensory impression that directly corresponds to abstract concepts like moral truths or universal reason, so their foundations become uncertain. Now, if we apply this understanding of human nature to Utopia, it will make More\u2019s idea, not ideal, but simply impossible, as there&#8217;s no need for most moral and reason-driven society in a world where none of them exist.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>This deviation between their ideas of human nature is enough to lead them in opposite directions in social order, economic structure, and model of justice. To illustrate these differences more clearly, we can look at two of the most influential socio-economic systems in the world\u2014socialism and capitalism\u2014both of which were inspired and shaped, in different ways, by the ideas of More and Hume. Hume\u2019s idea that much of human nature is derived from self-interest and passions ends with the conclusion that our system of justice and morals arises to work in our benefit, which influenced his friend Adam Smith(1723-1790), who then laid a foundation for capitalism and most of modern economics. While More\u2019s ideas of demolishing private property and the structure of \u201cperfect\u201d society have had a huge influence on future founders of socialism, like Karl Marx(1818-1883).&nbsp;&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>These systems reflect how the ideas of More and Hume take shape in socio-economic forms. Even their views on private property reveal the depth of their disagreement. For More, private property is the root of greed: seeing others possess more than we do fuels envy and drives many of society\u2019s evils. For Hume, however, private property is an essential institution; as self-interested individuals, owning property is the most natural and appropriate arrangement for social stability and human flourishing.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<!--nextpage-->\n\n\n\n<p>Their disagreement over private property is important, but even more fundamental is their divergence in moral values and in what principles should underlie our system of justice. As mentioned above, Hume would deny the existence of moral values that most believe in. Although both thinkers aim to create systems they believe are best for society and for human flourishing, More\u2019s humanist perspective, grounded in moral principles, would fundamentally reject Hume\u2019s \u201cperfect\u201d system, mainly because it includes inequality. On the other hand, Hume would argue that \u201cmorality\u201d arises from human psychology and is just a social convention; hence, as the political order arises naturally, then we can not \u201cperfect\u201d the system without inequality, as it would be natural for humans to have such.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>It is obvious that both Thomas More and David Hume, have played a majour role in the development of one of the most influential ideas in the history of world. They were both very intellectual philosophers, with high education and experiancne of world. However ther disagreement in human nature and human understanding, leading their disagreement about moral values, and hence ending with fully different world views, is an interesting example of how important the fundamental topics like humans nature and understanding are to get the clear socio-economical structure that will lead the best outcome for society.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>It is clear that both Thomas More and David Hume played a major role in shaping some of the most influential ideas in world intellectual history. Both were highly educated, deeply thoughtful philosophers with significant experience of the world. Yet, their fundamental disagreements about human nature and human understanding led to contrasting views on moral values, which in turn produced strikingly different worldviews. Their divergence serves as a compelling example of how essential questions about human nature and knowledge are in determining the social and economic structures that can best promote the flourishing of society.<\/p>\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-post-title\">Thomas More<\/h2>\n\n\n<!--nextpage-->\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-post-title\">Thomas More<\/h2>\n\n\n<p><strong>Why Thomas More Deserves a Place in the syllabus next year?<br><\/strong>Thomas More was one of the most prominent figures of the 16th century and one of the foremost early modern humanists in England. He is known for his social and political activities, followed by his philosophical works. The best demonstration of his views and ideas concentrated in one work is in Utopia, his book written in 1516, where he uses all the tools he has to critique the Western European monarchy, with its inequalities in wealth distribution and justice system. As for solution he gave place based on the teachings of christianity and ancient greeks, where reason and only reason dictates everything.&nbsp;&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>As a pre-enlightenment thinker, he is very far from religious skepticism, which has become a big and popular idea 100 years after More, when many of the famous enlightenment thinkers started working on topics of human nature and god. However, he presents a very interesting perspective on the transition between the religion-based philosophy and reason-based philosophy, as he himself puts reason as the highest priority. For him, we should believe in god, because reason leads us to it. He also thought that god created humans and the human soul as the image of him by reason. More discusses the importance of using reason, especially in governmental and justice structures in his works. He demonstrates that following reason will lead us to a moral and good life. He also ironically dramatizes how human beings use their reason to decide not to follow reason in his \u201cThe history of King Richard III\u201d, which is a slightly expected comment from someone whose ideas and writing style are deeply influenced by Plato.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Finally, I think he would be a good start for this course, as his work would present the ideas about human nature and understanding, before the Enlightenment period. Studying him provides valuable historical context for the later philosophers on the syllabus, and helps us see the ideas they were responding to and ultimately challenging. He would also be a valuable philosopher to compare with figures like Spinoza and Hume\u2014showing, in one case, how different conceptions of God can separate two thinkers, and in another, how differing views of human nature and the mind can shape contrasting perspectives on society and governance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<!-- Page-list plugin v.6.3 wordpress.org\/plugins\/page-list\/ -->\n<ul class=\"page-list subpages-page-list \">\n<li class=\"page_item page-item-5490\"><a href=\"https:\/\/apeterman.digitalscholar.rochester.edu\/phl202f25\/thomas-more\/thomas-more-biography\/\">Thomas More Biography<\/a><\/li>\n<li class=\"page_item page-item-5486\"><a href=\"https:\/\/apeterman.digitalscholar.rochester.edu\/phl202f25\/thomas-more\/thomas-more-bibliography\/\">Thomas More-Bibliography<\/a><\/li>\n<li class=\"page_item page-item-5481\"><a href=\"https:\/\/apeterman.digitalscholar.rochester.edu\/phl202f25\/thomas-more\/thomas-more-cover-page\/\">Thomas More-Cover page<\/a><\/li>\n<li class=\"page_item page-item-5502\"><a href=\"https:\/\/apeterman.digitalscholar.rochester.edu\/phl202f25\/thomas-more\/thomas-more-video\/\">Thomas More-Video<\/a><\/li>\n<li class=\"page_item page-item-5499\"><a href=\"https:\/\/apeterman.digitalscholar.rochester.edu\/phl202f25\/thomas-more\/why-thomas-more-deserves-a-place-in-the-syllabus-next-year\/\">Why Thomas More Deserves a Place in the syllabus next year?<\/a><\/li>\n\n<\/ul>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"author":179,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-3974","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry","entry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/apeterman.digitalscholar.rochester.edu\/phl202f25\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/3974","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/apeterman.digitalscholar.rochester.edu\/phl202f25\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/apeterman.digitalscholar.rochester.edu\/phl202f25\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/apeterman.digitalscholar.rochester.edu\/phl202f25\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/179"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/apeterman.digitalscholar.rochester.edu\/phl202f25\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3974"}],"version-history":[{"count":16,"href":"https:\/\/apeterman.digitalscholar.rochester.edu\/phl202f25\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/3974\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5757,"href":"https:\/\/apeterman.digitalscholar.rochester.edu\/phl202f25\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/3974\/revisions\/5757"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/apeterman.digitalscholar.rochester.edu\/phl202f25\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3974"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}