Sir Thomas More- UTOPIA
Sir Thomas More, son of Sir John More, a justice of King’s Bench, after his earlier education at St. Anthony’s, he was placed, as a boy, in the household of Cardinal John Morton, Archbishop of Canterbury and Lord Chancellor. It was not usual for persons of wealth or influence and sons of good families to be so established together in a relation of patron and client. The youth wore his patron’s livery, and added to his state. The patron used, afterwards, his wealth or influence in helping his young client forward in the world. Thomas More is travelling as Henry the Eighth’s ambassador in the Low Countries in the early 1500s when he encounters his friend Peter Giles. Giles introduces More to an acquaintance of his, Raphael Hythloday, who is with Giles at the time. His book ,,Utopia” describes a perfect society governed by an ideal socio-politico-legal system. Therefore, the idea of the impossibility of a perfect society is built into the very name of the genre. In common parlance, people will refer to an impossible or unrealistic proposal as “utopian.” In this sense, the term is emphasizing not the perfection but the naïveté of such projects. Focusing on what he saw as the main problem of his time, More emphasized social order, conformity, meaningful work, and religious tolerance, sometimes termed “toleration.” More tries to implement these concepts in his country. As the author of Utopia, More has also attracted the admiration of modern socialists. While Catholic scholars maintain that More's attitude in composing Utopia was largely ironic and that he was an orthodox Christian, Marxist theoretician Karl Kautsky argued in the book Thomas More and his Utopia (1888) that Utopia was a shrewd critique of economic and social exploitation in pre-modern Europe and that More was one of the key intellectual figures in the early development of socialist ideas. Others have seen in it an attempt at mythologizing Indian cultures in the New World during a time when the Catholic Church was still debating over how to view the decidedly anti-Christian cultures of the Indians. The best leaders in the world are excellent teachers. Like Morus, they know that the sincerity and truth does not guarantee that the main statements will be heard beyond the daily routine, will be understood and also remembered. This is why Morus carefully formulates, adapts its main principles, being very attentive to the nuances and subtleties. His purpose was to show the people around him that the best way to resolve problems is to communicate, to intensify and to transmit the message, in order to be understood by all people and to produce an impression on their minds and souls. Because we are tented to associate leadership with power and trust, one of the tactics used by Thomas More to communicate its beliefs it is very surprising: he often appeals to the understanding of others, he even ask them in a very personal terms. It may seem to be a sign of weakness, and managers may have the sensation that the others will perceive their appeal in that way and their authority will be undermined. But the story of More shows that this tactic must be used like this. Shortly after More became Lord-Chancellor, Henry visits him at his house from Chelsea. He is in a great mood, he speaks with More in a very exultant manner, to show him that he loves his life. But only after a few minutes, Henry starts to pour its anger towards Wolsey, accusing him of pride, ambition and that he didn’t obtain his divorce. Henry then says: ‘It is a good thing I crushed him’, then he asked More, in a gentle tone, if he will support him with the divorce. More answer that can’t do that. He sustains his point of view in front of the king in the most dramatic way possible. At the same time, he avoids to give the reasons for its decisions and he doesn’t make any speech about his own conscience. He choose to say that he is very sorry...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document