In early modern England there were many laws created to cripple the common man keep order and discipline. It was the elite who governed and enforced these laws, and it is this that More seems to have a problem with. However, More felt that not only were laws good for the people, but also necessary. Sir Thomas More thought that in England there were way too many laws that were written in a way that the common man could not understand. I can see how not understanding a law or even knew of its existence, but being tried and punished for breaking said law could be problematic. So, who could advise the King that these laws need to be changed for the good of the common man when his ear was given to those who profited from the common man not understanding the laws. …show more content…
Yet this society is the dream of one man and therefore in itself a flawed concept. Maybe man (women included) are unable to achieve this feat of a perfect “ideal” society. I think that Thomas More made some very valid points in Utopia, with how people are elected in to office, but I disagreed with how long the Prince was able to main his position. I really like how in Utopia the punishments were less severe than in England, but still had issues with the length of the punishment, which was unknown, and the fact that the convict was mutualized by having their ear cropped. I like that Thomas More also addressed the enclosure and private property, these are truly unrealistic ideas but never the less they still intrigued me. I think that More was demonstrating that people would find these ideas harsh and faulty because we tend to pride ourselves on the things we have as if they were some type of a trophy for accomplishing life. Life is not a game that you can win in, it is however, your chance to give back to the world and help your fellow