• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

On the Authority of Montaigne and Rabelais: Questioning Authority in an Unquestionable World.

Extracts from this document...


On the Authority of Montaigne and Rabelais: Questioning Authority in an Unquestionable World Don Tran In the age of medieval Christian thought, classical authorities reigned supreme as the ultimate source of knowledge about what was right and what was wrong. This, however, in the age of Christian humanist thought, was challenged by two writers in particular, Francois Rabelais and Michel de Montaigne. In their writings, they criticize European acceptance of dogma and what modern thinkers would today term "book knowledge," or learning without thinking carefully about what they learned. Throughout both of their works, Montaigne and Rabelais cite many past writers in a show of respect for their authority. Many will misinterpret Rabelais' and Montaigne's reference to authorities by calling them hypocritical. After all, it seems logical that if they were to criticize authorities in general, they would be reluctant to cite them at all. However, it is important to note that both authors do not bash authorities; rather, they only criticize the blind acceptance of such authorities. Thus, in analyzing both authors' viewpoints about the role that authority should have in one's life, it can be concluded that they ultimately share more than they do differ in their opinions. Their belief that acquiring knowledge should have high priority in daily activity, the theme of "knowing yourself" as the ultimate requisite before becoming an authority yourself, and finally, guidelines that reflect the danger of blind acceptance of authority in critical decisions, indeed run parallel throughout Rabelais' and Montaigne's thought. ...read more.


Throughout Gargantua and Pantagruel, Rabelais emphasizes what seems to be the theme of the book: "know yourself." Montaigne indeed is no different in his beliefs on the importance self reflection and self discovery, before beginning to make any judgments as an authority. As a matter of fact, Montaigne begins his entire treatise by emphasizing that "I, myself, am the subject of this book" (3). His essays, therefore, were meant as a source of self-reflection, not necessarily to become an authority on subjects such as education of children. Although Montaigne does feel that many could learn from his own experiences, he does not intend this as the primary purpose of the book. His Essays therefore are the ultimate culmination and end product of "knowing yourself," in written form. Self-criticism, thus, is an important part of both authors' works. For example, Montaigne encourages students to "be satisfied with correcting himself without being seen to reproach others for doing things he would not do himself and without flouting public morality" (47). Thus, what Montaigne is asserting is that authorities do not always have to be another scholar or person: they can often be oneself. However, doing so requires much discipline and the ability to use reason to assess, analyze and evaluate one's own mistakes. Also, another point is the idea of doing what makes sense and what is reasonable for each individual. However, rational decisions are prevented if authorities are in that individual's mind superior to reason. ...read more.


out the capacity for each person...he must use what he can get, take what a man has to sell and see that nothing goes wasted: even other people's stupidity and weakness serve to instruct him" (49). Montaigne echoes his thoughts about the importance of allowing only those who are qualified to truly be considered authorities by asserting the importance for men to "leave all that to those who make it their express profession" (63). Without set guidelines for discerning who is an authority and who is not, society becomes chaotic without any guide. While both Rabelais and Montaigne realize that it is only natural for men to look up to other men for assistance help, they encourage the importance of rationality in allowing those authorities to make judgments. Throughout the sixteenth century, the place of authority in the average man's life was troubling. Because of the convenience, men were less inclined to learn and think for themselves; instead, they let others think for them. Montaigne and Rableais were particularly interested in revitalizing the minds of western Europe. This would eventually pave the way to the Enlightenment period and modern thinking, even as we know it today. Without writers like Montaigne and Rabelais, there is a good chance that society would still for the most part be in a western dogmatic daze. Without Montaigne and Rabelais questioning authority, knowledge would be minimized to mere recitation more than anything else. When intellect and scholasticism begins to be trivialized, this is when society falls to those who act upon petty emotion and irrationality. Tran 3 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our University Degree Political & Economic Sociology section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related University Degree Political & Economic Sociology essays

  1. Pathway to Purity - Nathaniel Hawthorn's The Scarlet Letter

    Despite the alienation and humiliation experienced by Hester and Dimmesdale in The Scarlet Letter, there are some positive results to their sin at the end of the story. Hester eventually overcomes her sin and successfully raises a child. Ironically, she also manages to better understand herself by the end of

  2. Works of great thinkers such as Rousseau, Diderot, Voltaire, Kant and Condorcet

    Holding that "l'homme moderne ne sait vivre en soi-m(me,"4 he viewed society as a hollow pit in which man's authenticity was lost, the idea of living through others and according to routine and passivity creates a trap in which we lose ourselves.

  1. Santayana - Life of Reason.

    When one's existence is formulated, man acknowledges his urge to find purpose in life, which can be also regarded as ideal, a cause of satisfaction. The completion of these concepts spawns satisfaction in man's life. From then on, man continues to move on to the next level of idealistic goals, explaining the essence's constantly moving nature.

  2. Critically assess the strengths and weaknesses of Chauncey Starr(TM)s approach to societal risk assessment ...

    In the case of involuntary risk, the cost benefit trade off is decided usually by a controlling body who will not be themselves taking on the risk, and those who are taking on the risk are usually not fully aware of the consequences and issues involved.

  1. Explain and evaluate the concepts of the core, semi - peripheral and peripheral states

    He outlined a progression of historical stages which began with primitive communist societies of hunters and gatherers, then ancient slave owning systems, on to feudal systems based on the division between landowners and serfs. The emergence of merchants and craftspeople marked the beginning of commercial or capitalist class which came to displace the landed nobility.

  2. Modern Political Thought.

    In other words, only a good will has unconditional moral value that is independent of circumstances or actions. Regardless of how one uses good will, it cannot be used for immoral purposes. He then reasons the motivations of human action and finds three general categories.

  1. Can and should public policy decisions be based solely on scientific evidence?

    First, it is argued that the use of empirical evidence should not be the central thread of every social policy-related decision. Scientific evidence, it is argued, fails to give proper meaning to the context of real life and the collateral consequences of acting solely upon scientific evaluation would undoubtedly result

  2. The role of expert and lay knowledge in understanding and managing risk

    are ?in a period of transition towards a risk society?, ( Carter and Jordan,2009, p.80), where focus is placed upon ?the distribution of harm?, (Carter and Jordan, 2009, p.80), not that of wealth. This change has given rise for a need to alter how risks are assertained, modern day risks

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work