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

    The process of re-evaluation and adjustment in this case is usually much slower. Starr claims that when analysing involuntary risks, the public acceptance of the risk should also be considered. He actually found that the public were willing to accept risk one thousand times greater if the risk was voluntary than if the risk was imposed on them.

  2. Discuss Rousseau's claim that 'Since no man has any natural authority over his fellows, ...

    As for the latter concept he rejects the idea that society is formed due to innate sociability and spontaneous feeling, he instead opts for the belief that the formation of society depends on rational choice. It is on these same assumptions that Rousseau discards any analogy between the family and society.

  1. 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.

  2. Witch Hunts Throughout The Ages.

    Protestants used the argument that the number of victims in Catholic communities was bigger by absolute number. In this way they intended to prove that their concept on society is better. When the abuse of this topic decreased in the churches it was picked up by politics (1850-1945).

  1. The Fallibility of Man: The Fallibility of Humanism.

    philosophy as it places an incredible emphasis on the 'goodness' of man and individualism. In the following example, Hythloday is being completely idiosyncratic about diplomacy and winds up doing no good for society and just himself again showing how unrealistic a fully functional humanist society is.

  2. There goes a man!

    This is primary motivation for the admiration of the rich rather than sympathy towards happiness. Adams, himself acknowledges the weakness of the sympathy directed towards the happiness of others, although; he is correct that the motivation for being rich is in fact that it affords convenience, but above all else approval and acknowledgement of the fellow.

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

    As an illustration to this concern, The British Educational Association stated in 2001 that both Liberal Democratic politicians and sections of the academia in the United Kingdom have publicly raised their concerns over government departments amending research reports before publication and the inclusion of conditions to the effect that researchers

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

    are not necessarily obvious like the risk of cancer from sun exposure or smoking, such risks are refferred to as ?invisible risks?, (Carter and Jordan, 2009, p.80). It is down to this change that Beck?s argues that we have ?become dependent on external, usually expert, knowledge in order to define

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