Bodies, Morals, and Religion: Utopia and the Erasmian Idea of Human Progress
Algemeen Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Wijsbegeerte , Volume 108 - Issue 3 p. 321- 355
Although Thomas More’s description of the Utopians’ ‘Epicurean’ position in philosophy nominally coincides with Erasmus’s defence of the Philosophia Christi, More shows no concern for the arguments Erasmus gave in support of this view. Taking its starting point from Erasmus’s depreciations of the body and More’s intellectual as well as physical preoccupations with the bodily sphere, this article presents the theme of the human body and its moral and religious significance as a test case for comparing Erasmus and More. The treatises both men wrote on Christ’s suffering in the Garden of Gethsemane confirm that both authors dealt with the notion of the body in contrasting ways: Erasmus shows a tendency to address the moral-psychological question of mentally conquering the worldly self, whilst More highlights the way in which ordinary facts and physical things may carry spiritual and religious meaning. Paradoxically, Erasmus consistently applied his spiritualized ideal of man to this-worldly moral and social concerns, whereas More focused on the physical domain out of a religious interest in transcendent truths. In line with Giulia Sissa’s thesis, our hypothesis is that More ostensibly appropriated an Erasmian type of idealism in Utopia, but, contrary to Erasmus himself, focused on the exterior form of a virtuous society, rather than on its moral and spiritual preconditions. While Erasmus advocated a mental transformation towards reason, More’s Utopia envisioned what might come of this.
|Utopia, epicureanism, Philosophia Christi, the human body, Christ in Gethsemane, humanism, spirituality, political idealism, moral history|
|Algemeen Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Wijsbegeerte|
|Organisation||Geschiedenis van de Wijsbegeerte|
van Ruler, J.A. (2016). Bodies, Morals, and Religion: Utopia and the Erasmian Idea of Human Progress. Algemeen Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Wijsbegeerte, 108(3), 321–355. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/1765/110760