<\/p>\n
Explain what Bradshaw argues in his article \u2013 quote the argument directly, and show the steps that he takes to explain his argument it in your own words.<\/strong><\/p>\n \n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 In his work, \u201cMore on Utopia,\u201d Brendan Bradshaw argues that J. H. Hexter\u2019s interpretation of More\u2019s \u201cUtopia,\u201d is flawed. He claims that \u201c\u2026despite all the light which Hexter’s analysis throws on the text, it is founded on an unsustainable hypothesis\u201d (Bradshaw 2). However, it is important to understand that the primary objective of Bradshaw\u2019s argument is not to \u201crefute Hexter\u201d (2), but to set forth a more accurate interpretation of More\u2019s work, or in his words, to \u201cattempt the hazardous voyage to Utopia again\u201d (2).<\/p>\n To present his argument, Bradshaw first highlights Hexter\u2019s two main conclusions. One, that More\u2019s work is a critique of medieval Christianity in Europe, and two, that More emphasizes how the social and political system must change (thus sets forth \u201cpolitical theory\u201d (3)). Bradshaw begins challenging such conclusions by making reference to Dr. Fenlon, another critic of Hexter, and shows agreement with his statement that \u201cUtopia\u201d is not an attempt to improve the \u201chumanist scheme\u201d (4) by reformulating it, but that it is only a \u201ccritique of humanism itself\u201d (4). Before he has even introduced his in-depth explanation then, Bradshaw confirms that his views against Hexter\u2019s interpretation are supported by other intellectuals.<\/p>\n Moreover, Bradshaw sets forth the two main issues of Hexter\u2019s interpretation: he misinterpreted the \u201cnature of human ideology in its religious aspect\u201d (6) and he failed to take \u201csufficient account\u201d (6), or evidence, from the text. In order to show the \u201cmisinterpretation\u201d of the purpose of \u201cUtopia\u201d in regards to its religious \u201clessons,\u201d Bradshaw sets forth the claims that Hexter uses, and then he counter-argues them with his own. He explains how Hexter claims that \u201cChristianity for the individual consists in virtuous living, not in ritual observances,\u201d and that Utopians then, even lacking the \u201critual observances,\u201d are true Christians as they live virtuously. Bradshaw explains how according to Hexter, More criticizes Europeans who do only perform religious rituals but do not live by religious morality. However, Bradshaw claims that this is a flawed interpretation, as by the teachings of \u201cEnchiridion,\u201d \u201c\u2026true christianity” depends on \u201ctrue knowledge of Christianity \u2014the life and teaching of Jesus revealed in scripture\u201d (11). Hence, Bradshaw shows how Utopians could never be true Christians, as they did not have the \u201cknowledge of Christianity.\u201d According to Bradshaw then, a \u201cUtopia\u201d cannot be a model of true Christianity (which Hexter claims is). Bradshaw continues using the teachings of \u201cEnchiridion,\u201d to state that true christians must use \u201cprayer and knowledge,\u201d (16), which Utopians do not use. It is evident then, that the incorporation of the teachings of Erasmus, commonly known as a credible source, are Bradshaw\u2019s tool to substantiate his arguments with evidence and weaken Hexter\u2019s.<\/p>\n Bradshaw continues to explain that Hexter also misrepresents More with \u201cregard to social justice\u201d (19). Hexter is said to explain the idea of communism in \u201cUtopia\u201d as a \u201cradical\u201d criticism towards Christianity, as More supposedly approaches it more pragmatically more than theoretically. However, according to Bradhsaw, Hexter ignores the fact that the \u201cNew Testament\u201d holds ideas that resemble those of communism. Hence, because ideas of communism can be found in Christian scripture as well, Bradshaw weakens Hexter\u2019s interpretation that More is critical towards religion.<\/p>\n Furthermore, Bradshaw devaluates Hexter\u2019s claim that \u201cUtopia\u201d in itself calls for reform by analyzing the very allusions to Plato within More\u2019s work. He claims that by alluding to philosophy, More paints an \u201cimpossible\u201d world. More is only further expanding an idea of a paradigm which \u201cno particular commonwealth existing in historical reality can successfully reproduce\u201d (24). Bradhsaw then, uses the same sources used in More\u2019s work (Plato) to add credibility to his claims that \u201cUtopia\u201d is not a call for reform in society, but only a model. To this he adds that the book ends with unfinished dialogue, thus More could have not possibly present a criticism towards the status-quo that incites reform, but only philosophical arguments to think about. It is a combination of references to external sources, a structured presentation of arguments and counterarguments that lead Bradshaw to successfully challenge Hexter\u2019s interpretation of \u201cUtopia\u201d.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n “I have neither received nor given unauthorized assistance during the completion of this work.”<\/em><\/p>\n x.Daniel Majluf<\/em><\/p>\n \n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Works Cited<\/strong><\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Reeve, C. D. C. Plato Republic. Indianapolis, Indiana: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc, 2004. Print.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Explain what Bradshaw argues in his article \u2013 quote the argument directly, and show the steps that he takes to explain his argument it in your own words. \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 In his work, \u201cMore on Utopia,\u201d Brendan Bradshaw argues that…<\/p>\n