ipl-logo

Jean Domat's Social Order And Absolute Monarchy

1340 Words6 Pages

HIST 3005 Contreras 1 Luis Contreras Sophie Tunney 12/3/2018 The Needs of the people When a form of governing a state becomes obsolete it is sometimes best to do away with that form of governance and install a new form of government. In our “Shaping Of The Modern World” textbook we can find the source “Common sense” by Thomas Paine explaining how ineffective England’s rule over the colonies is, and we can also find “Social Order And Absolute Monarchy” by Jean Domat which argues in favor of absolute rule by the monarchy. Domat’s idea of absolute monarchy is flawed however because when a monarchy is in power it limits the growth of the state, stomp on the natural rights of its citizen’s, their decisions will affect their people …show more content…

In Domat’s “Social Order And Absolute Monarchy” the argument is that monarchs should stay in power and that is their divine right to rule that would keep society together, monarchs are natural and necessary form of government that society should follow. Jean is of the mindset that monarchies are one of the most effective and natural forms of government, however he mistaken to believe this. “The first distinction that subjects people to others is the one created by birth between parents and children. And this distinction leads to a first kind of government in families, where children owe obedience to their parents who head the family. The second distinction among persons arises from the diversity of employment required by society” (Domat 28). What Jean means with this is that one natural form of government that is like a monarchy is one that we are born into whether we like it or not is families where comparisons are drawn between the children being the subjects and the parents being the monarch and that children owe their parents obedience. The other distinction is between employer and employee which is self explanatory the employer is the monarch and the employee is obedient to the employer. Domat is drawing comparisons between regular everyday relationships to that of subject to king but what he fails to take …show more content…

In Conclusion Thomas Paine was able to prove that monarchies weren’t the correct form of government for the Europe and much less the American colonies. He demonstrates how monarchs can have a severe impact on many people both directly and indirectly. Paine also manages to establish a precedent in which society was able to prosper and be at peace before monarchs took over. Domat’s belief in absolute monarchies is flawed because even though it similar to other natural relationships the one between monarch and subject is just one in which the monarch holds all the power and and can abuse of that

Show More
Related
360 Words | 2 Pages

He explains that even if civilians chose to have a ruler, that does not validate the King’s child as a ruler too. Thomas Paine’s argument can be used to convince colonists to declare independence from Great Britain because the British follow this monarchy which spreads inequality. It also gives the Colonists

Read More
123 Words | 1 Pages

Paine sees the government sort of bad, and doesn't see our government as divinely ordained or otherwise extremely valuable. Paine thinks that, governments can only be measured by effectiveness, and their ability to improve society without being cruel. Thomas Paine doesn't believe that anyone has a right to govern other people, which means he thinks that the king should no longer rule the colonies. According to Paine's view on government makes the revolutionary movement much more appetizing by rejecting the presumption that the king has some lawful authority over the colonies. He also says that the only question that really matters, is whether the colonists' living conditions would be more better, if they governed upon themselves, rather

Read More
727 Words | 3 Pages

They are saying that through this differentiation comes a great ruler that unites everyone for the greater good. The most likely purpose of this document is to stress the importance of having an absolute monarchy, and how it is good. The author most likely wants to convince everyone that what they are doing is correct, and attempt to spread it around, showing the strengthening of a

Read More
1069 Words | 5 Pages

According to Paine, “Even though people of the colonies were paying taxes and were pushed into wars caused by British, they were unfairly not represented in the British Parliament”. (109) Since Paine’s main goal is to target the common man of the society; he directs his argument by using the Bible and emotions to back up his own discussion. Paine indicates that all people are born equally and there is no one given the power to rule over other human beings. Then he uses Bible quotes to explicitly disagree with the presence of Monarchy rule used by the Great Britain.

Read More
545 Words | 3 Pages

While the choice of whether to remain loyal to the crown or join the revolution became popular in the late eighteenth century, two men, Jonathan Boucher and Thomas Paine, decided to voice their beliefs and later became well known for their arguments. Though Boucher stated strong points about why remaining loyal to Great Britain was the correct choice, Paine’s argument was more appealing because he clarified that America would offer various inviting benefits that Britain was not able to provide. Paine compelled people because of the clarity in his argument. He avoided utilizing language that people were incapable of understanding, and he made his points sound appealing by using “a new style of political writing” (#31, p.95). Paine informed

Read More
766 Words | 4 Pages

“It is wholly owing to the Constitution of the people, and not to the constitution of the government that the crown is not as oppressive in England as in Turkey.” We should give power to someone who is fair and not self-centered. Paine stated “from the errors of other nations, let us learn wisdom” to advise us to avoid repeating the past in the future from learning about bad past experiences. Paine argued for American’s separation from England by comparing the Kings that Great Britain has had to what a government should be

Read More
894 Words | 4 Pages

The Magna Carta is a very important document that greatly impacted the United States. Throughout, the years the Magna Carta greatly established the principle rules that made everyone subjected to the law, even the government. The Magna Carta provided a visual outline while setting down the foundations for modern society, by establishing a justice system, individuals granted rights, and the rule of law. As, the Magna Carta was first introduced, that soon foreshadowed the role of what is now the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, in which created a democracy.

Read More
1612 Words | 7 Pages

Each king’s different approach to obtaining the obedience of their subjects (one of the qualities of kingship in Trew Law)

Read More
660 Words | 3 Pages

Absolute monarchy is rule by one person, usually a King or Queen, who obtains absolute power of authority with no repercussions for what he or she does. Bishop Bossuet held strongly to the argument of absolute monarchy, whereas John Locke opposed on the basis of man's natural rights. Bossuet and Locke have different views on the government’s source of power and their ideas about the rights of the people, but agreed that their chosen theories are in the best interest of the people and held their country's unity in high regard. The first thing we can look at when comparing the two philosophers ideas, is their differences of opinions on the government's source of power.

Read More
593 Words | 3 Pages

Emmanuel Joseph Sieyès talks about in his famous pamphlet, What Is the Third Estate, relates to common people. During history, we talked about how the people serve the king based on God’s authority. However, it limits people from speaking out on their individual issues or needs. What Sieyès suggests is that without the nobility or the citizens, they cannot function. It takes both the nobility and citizens to create the foundation for their “new” government.

Read More
1427 Words | 6 Pages

Eastern and Western European countries had many differences on economics and political structures. Both the East and the West tried to achieve an absolute monarchy, which can be described as a type of government where the monarch has complete rule over everything. Although both had an absolute monarchy at some point, they were structured differently and one much more successful than the other. In Eastern Europe the members of nobility had almost all of the control over the poor peasants who lived in their community.

Read More
763 Words | 4 Pages

Domat wrote “On Social Order and Absolute Monarchy” to defend the king’s powers, and to give a better understanding of the hierarchy type system so ordinary people would accept it. Jean Domat’s life goal was explaining absolutism. Since he was not a king and seen as a regular person, people at his time can get a better understanding of the system when someone like him explains it. He explained that the king was given his power through God and is responsible to no one but God. At first this may not have caught the attention of the people, but when Domat tells that disobeying their king is the same as disobeying God it is the

Read More
974 Words | 4 Pages

At the start of the early-modern period of European history, feudalism was dying, and countries looked to strong, centralized governments for leadership. The popular political theory to address this new development was absolutism. Absolute monarchs reduced the power of nobles in order to consolidate the nation’s leadership under one banner. During the 17th and 18th centuries, Europe’s political landscape was dominated by this form of government. Monarchy was seen by the early modern Europeans as the best form of government for a variety of reasons.

Read More
856 Words | 4 Pages

To many, monarchs were God 's form on earth. King James I of England said that "The state of monarchy is the supreme thing upon earth; for kings are not only God’s lieutenants on earth, and sit upon God’s throne, but even by God Himself they are called gods..." (Document 2). Like King James I, people believed monarchs were needed because they had power like God. Kings and Queens were essential and brought goodness to the land.

Read More
853 Words | 4 Pages

Secondly, the king’s life must be preserved in order to preserve the life of the body politics. As Barker claims, “The figure of the king guarantees, as locus and source of power and as master-signifier, a network of subsidiary relations which constitute the real practice

Read More

More about Jean Domat's Social Order And Absolute Monarchy

Related Topics

Open Document