Utopia by Thomas Moore in Review

In Utopia Land is bountiful, foes are afar, and the economy is always seemly predictable. This fairy tale of a political philosophy and economic theory is sought after by the idealist and seen as a naive attempt the better society by the realist. This work requires an imagination, an ability to suspend disbelief for interpretation and application. More wrote this work as satire, upset with the current political conditions of Europe and and reviewing these ideals just as so; however, with more realistic applications with the time of conception and tomorrow on distant planets.

The beginnings of Utopia are not vivid in detail; however, they are adequate for a playground for conducive thinking. The indigenous are seen as ignorant and beast like (More, 1516). This could be defined as how he thinks the state of nature was in everyone's case. It is apparent that the natives have not killed off themselves nor the intruding militia. The reflection of this could infer that More is sharing that the state of nature is based on some form of reason and social values. Unlike the view of human nature from the Philosopher Machiavelli, where he feels that human nature is evil, More seems for think the contrary. Machiavelli thinks that humans by nature are greedy and selfish (Machiavelli, 1532). This view which is being intercepted and circulated around Europe around the same time as More could be a source of conflict. More, feeling that humans naturally have a reasonable desire for pleasure, as stated later in Book Two of Utopia, are not inherently greedy or selfish. Throughout the entirety of his work, though not explicitly, he is defending humanism. While not directly acknowledging the negatives of this human happiness More does explain that i...

... middle of paper ...

...itten history of eras.

The intention of this work was to open the minds of its readers, in this case the people of Europe. This is the case of every writing in relation to philosophy and politics. Utopia can easily be restricted to satire and art; nevertheless, this work is so much more. The channel of communication was unorthodox; nonetheless, it took creativity and ingenuity to make ideas as radical has his were during the 16th century to be transmissible to those who had the eye and mind to interpret it. This work, like various others has its flaws and key pros. This system cannot be seriously enacted into society today due to its limitations for the advancement of society. That said this is a great starting point for colonization on distant planets and the bases for a new version of democracy that could evolve into something more desirable and unimagined today.