David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
The thesis examines the thought of Thomas More and Gerrard Winstanley, emphasizing the concern of both theorists with the prevailing moral depravity of human nature attributable to the Fall of Man, and their proposals for the amendment of men's conduct by institutional means, especially by the establishment of a communist society. The thesis opens with a conceptual exploration of 'utopianism' and 'millenarianism' before discussing the particular forms of these concepts employed by More and Winstanley. The introductory section also includes an investigation of the context which constituted the background to the ideas of More and Winstanley. More's theology, his conception of human nature, and his view of contemporary civil society are examined in detail. It is argued that the conclusions More derived from this aspect of his thought formed his basic conception of the situation to which the institutional amendments outlined in Utopia were directed. These proposals, regarding communism, the state, family and community life, education, religion, and ethics, are discussed. It is argued that Utopia constitutes More's model of a society designed to facilitate the salvation of man. Winstanley's appreciation of man's nature, prevailing condition, and potential for spiritual regeneration, are outlined. The development of Winstanley's thought, and the impression his active involvement with the Diggers made upon him, is described. It is argued that Winstanley renounced millenarianism and ultimately assumed utopian social theory as a medium for the articulation of his proposals for the restoration of man to spiritual regeneracy on earth. The institutional aspects of this scheme, regarding communism, the state, patriarchalism, labour, and education, which he outlined in The Law of Freedom, are evaluated. The thesis concludes, with a brief comparative analysis before setting the ideas of More and Winstanley'in the context of the changing worldview, appreciation of man's potential and progress, and the emphasis upon aspiration, which evolved in the early modern period
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
George L. Abernethy (1942). Book Review:Left-Wing Democracy in the English Civil War: A Study of the Social Philosophy of Gerrard Winstanley. David W. Petergorsky. [REVIEW] Ethics 52 (3):378-.
W. K. Jordan (1942). Book Review:The Works of Gerrard Winstanley. George H. Sabine. [REVIEW] Ethics 52 (3):377-.
Richard L. Greaves (1969). Gerrard Winstanley and Educational Reform in Puritan England. British Journal of Educational Studies 17 (2):166 - 176.
Brian Manning (2005). Winstanley and the Diggers, 1649–1999, Edited by Andrew Bradstock. Historical Materialism 13 (3):229-238.
Diana Winstanley, Joanna Clark & Helena Leeson (2002). Approaches to Child Labour in the Supply Chain. Business Ethics 11 (3):210–223.
Diana Winstanley & Mary Hartog (2002). Ethics and Human Resource Management: Introduction. Business Ethics 11 (3):200–201.
Diana Winstanley (2000). Issues of Diversity in the Globalisation of Competencies. Business and Professional Ethics Journal 19 (3/4):139-159.
Mary Hartog & Diana Winstanley (2002). Ethics and Human Resource Management. Business and Professional Ethics Journal 21 (2):3-9.
Diana Winstanley Jean Woodall & Edmund Heery (1996). The Agenda for Ethics in Human Resource Management. Business Ethics 5 (4):187–194.
Diana Winstanley, Jean Woodall & Edmund Heery (1996). The Agenda for Ethics in Human Resource Management. Business Ethics 5 (4):187-194.
Mary Healy (2011). Philosophy in Schools. By M. Hand and C. Winstanley, C. (Eds). [REVIEW] Journal of Philosophy of Education 45 (1):167-169.
Giuseppe Padovani (2000). The Artificial Between Culture and Nature. AI and Society 14 (3-4):300-313.
George Sessions (1977). Spinoza and Jeffers on Man in Nature. Inquiry 20 (1-4):481 – 528.
Added to index2012-01-10
Total downloads10 ( #347,727 of 1,911,741 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #458,113 of 1,911,741 )
How can I increase my downloads?