Introduction
The focus for this report is to engage in a comparison and contrast of Quentin Skinner’s Visions of Politics and Thomas More’s Utopia both of which give their readers a sense of connection towards the general context of the books. Both Quentin Skinner and Thomas More are known for some of their works, which have played a key role in shaping the understanding that people tend to have of the society today. Thus, this creates the need for having to evaluate the works by these two authors as part of determining the extent to which the authors can influence their audiences towards embracing their understanding. The analysis will reflect on general projections on the subject from both authors, as part of understanding the similarities and differences occurring with these two books.
Comparison of the Books
Utopianism
The crucial first aspect to consider when engaging in a comparison and contrast of these two books reflects on the presentation of the concept of ‘Utopianism.' The concept is first projected by Thomas More from where he seeks to describe a society or world that he believes would meet or match some of his general expectations. More (1965) reflects on this concept with the sole focus being on the fact that it seeks to create some form of understanding of what it means to live in ‘a perfect world.' Based on his description of this concept, one of the key aspects to note is that this is the world that is easily recognizable taking into consideration that one may find it much easier when trying to understand and recognize the fundamental merit associated with any course of action. More brings together a discussion on the virtues and values of a perfect society as part of his position on understanding Utopianism with a reflection on some of the critical aspects that seek to define the organization.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
More (1965), in his presentation of the concept of Utopianism indicates that:
“Living far from the sea, they are nearly surrounded by mountains; and since they are content with the products of their land (it is by no means unfruitful), they do not visit other nations and are not much visited” (p.23).
From this particular statement, Thomas More seeks to describe a society that has been able to fulfill some of the general expectations of its people from where it becomes much easier for the society to embrace its overall contentment. In comparison, Quentin Skinner presents some form of understanding on what would be of value towards projecting his knowledge of a culture that embraces what he considers as true nobility. In his discussion, Skinner seeks to evaluate the concept of Utopianism from the general perspective that this would attempt to build on the overall positioning and understanding of how this concept may affect the other people in the society.
Skinner mirrors the position taken by Thomas More in his understanding of Utopianism indicating that embracing this element helps towards creating the general perception on what would be of value towards creating the general expectation of an ideal world. As part of his discussion, Skinner (2000) indicates that”
“But in fact, the question of what constitutes the best state of a commonwealth had been a standard subject of debate throughout the era of the Renaissance” (p.214).
In this statement, Skinner reflects on the position that the debate on the issue of nobility arising through politics can be of value towards creating that effective avenue from which people ought to understand the importance of everything. Thus, this means that Skinner seeks to build some form of connection towards projecting his understanding of Utopia based on the fact that he believes in the idea of real nobility from his knowledge of politics.
The vision of Social and Political Life
Another critical aspect to note, which has been of value towards creating some form of connection between these two books is on the fact that they both seek to evaluate the society's vision of social and political life. More (1965), in his discussion of this vision, highlights the position that both the community and politics must have the view and power to provoke, as well as, delight taking into account the fact that one seeks to build his or her understanding of how to create a perfect society. More argues that embracing a life that not only provokes but also aims to delight may work as an avenue from where one can bring together a channel from which to reflect on the vision of a perfect society.
Thomas More's book is a very controversial political book that has helped provoke political discussions on some of the critical elements that define social institutions in different parts of the world touching on the fact that this is one of the essential factors that determines and shapes society. Thus, this seeks to support the position that the book not only works towards building some form of understanding on what would be considered as a perfect society but also reflects on the fact that the society must be in a position to embrace a structure of political vision and mission. More (1965) argues that the adopting the values of politics and social lives may help towards building what others may describe as ‘magnificent,’ which is an element that he believes would be able to act as a determinant of the kind of society that people are expected to embrace and adore.
In that same way, Skinner (2000) reflects on the visions of politics from the perspective that these visions would act as key determinants of how the society ought to be shaped taking into account the fact that every society has its own set of values. Skinner indicates that,
“Describing Utopia as a community in which the Optimus status reipublicae has in fact been realized, Hythloday at once adds that it is a society of which it can also be said that nihil privali esl, that there is nothing of the private about it at all” (p.235).
In his discussion of these visions, Skinner reflects on the position that the kind of politics that society embraces determines the type of life that the people are expected to live. That can be seen in the world today whereby corporations that seek to build on the understanding of democracy tend to provide people with better avenues from which to promoting social and economic development. By embracing freedom, people tend to reflect must of their focus on the fact that societies must be willing to bring together the understanding that the political framework acts as a critical determinant of the social lives for the people involved.
Skinner considers politics as one of the cardinal elements that seek to determine of define how the society is structured taking into account the fact that every society must be ready and willing to embrace real politics. Skinner goes ahead to indicate that,
"Although they think that the religious principles they introduce into their discussions about humans happiness are such that ‘no truer viewpoint can be attained by the process of human reasoning alone’ they concede that their conclusions have been arrived at ‘in the absence of a heaven-sent religion’” (p.237).
The expected outcome of this is that the society must work towards creating some of the platforms from where people would be able to create or define the quality of life that they expect. Primarily, the discussion by Skinner is similar to the talks by Thomas More touching on the fact that people tend to have the power and authority allowing them to create societies depending on what they expect. From his understanding, Skinner is able to project some form of debatable knowledge on what would be expected when dealing with the issue of politics, as well as, how it is structured within the society to help project some form of understanding on the values associated with promoting affirmative policies that determine the overall structure of the society.
Contrasting the Books
On the other hand, it is essential to take note of the fact that some of the critical discussions within the book also seek to create or highlight some form of differentiation regarding expectations. Some of the essential differences in the books include:
Moral Principles
In his book, Thomas More discusses the issue of principles based on the fact that people must be willing to shape out what they expect within themselves depending on the values that they embrace as part of their social connections. In his view, More (1965) believes that every society has the power and authority allowing the people to reflect on an overall structure of social connection as a way of ensuring that people project or reflect in their abilities to enhance some form of understanding of the ‘perfect society.’ More indicates that,
"As soon as their masters die, or they fall ill, they are promptly turned out of doors, for lords would rather support idlers than invalids, and the heir is often unable to maintain as big a household as his father had, at least at first” (p.17).
That is elevated for his discussion on the concept of Utopianism, which seeks to build on the fact that every individual must be ready and willing to embrace social values that would help determine how one can connect to his or her position or role in the society.
However, Skinner (2000) builds the understanding of moral principles governing the society from the fact that every individual in the society must be willing to reflect on the expected position from which to project true nobility. Skinner describes true nobility from the view that people must understand some of the critical elements that seek to determine whether or not they have been able to achieve some form of nobility. In contrast to the view by Thomas More, Skinner believes that true nobility is the only aspect or element with the capacity or ability towards ensuring that people can build or promote their understanding of what it truly means to embrace the ‘perfect life.' From that perspective, it is clear that the expectations that Skinner builds on his or her positioning reflect on the fact that the ability for people to develop or promote their understanding of nobility will help ensure that the society achieves the intended vision of political and social life.
Conclusion
In summary, Thomas More in his book, Utopia, and Quentin Skinner in his book, Visions of Politics, provide their readers with some sense of understanding on what they ought to expect in their bid to building what would be described as the ‘perfect society.’ The similarity in the views by the authors can be seen from the fact that both authors tend to build their discussion focusing on the fact that the society has the ability and capability of projecting the ‘perfect outlook.' However, when discussing the moral principles that determine the role of the people in building such societies, the two authors tend to differ on some of the fundamental values that would help determine how each society is structured.
References
More, T. (1965). Utopia, trans. Paul Turner. Baltimore: Penguin Books , 1 , 63.
Skinner, Q. Thomas More’s Utopia and the virtue of true nobility’, in his Visions of Politics, Vol II: Renaissance Virtues. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press , 200 , 213-44.
