The Two Enantiomers (An Analysis of Thomas Hobbes and Sebastian Casteillo)

814 Words3 Pages
At first glance, Sebastian Casteillo and Thomas Hobbes appear to be very similar. They were both men who were educated and held strong beliefs about their country and how it should be run. After closer inspection, Casteillo and Hobbes are near complete opposites. One philosopher believes in a strong central government, while the other promoted self-rule. Topics that include religious toleration and the fear of the title “heretic” included completely different perspectives among the two people. Despite their differences, they endured similar fates and continued to argue for their cause.
Sebastian Casteillo was a huge advocate for freedom of religion. He expressed a great deal of this particular perspective in his book, De Haereticis. He even challenged John Calvin’s perspective on religious tolerance. They had met at one point and were in agreement about accepting different religious. However, once Sebastian started questioning Calvin’s Christian perspective, Calvin no longer associated with Casteillo. For Calvin, as long as he is not questioned, he can tolerate other viewpoints. Sebastian believed in multiple interpretations of the bible and that people can challenge an interpretation if it does not bring clarity to how the bible should be read. He also believed in people ruling without the need for a central government. Sebastian concluded that a powerful central government would take too much power away from the people (Hillar 1).
Casteillo’s opinionated nature caused

    More about The Two Enantiomers (An Analysis of Thomas Hobbes and Sebastian Casteillo)

      Get Access