What was Montesquieu?s aim in writing The Spirit of the Laws?

The context of the plot found in “The School” presents the readers with the timeless question of the meaning of life. However, this question does not seem to present itself immediately to the reader. In order to appreciate Barthelme’s work in this piece, it is crucial that one utilizes the New Criticism’s approach to reading. New Criticism was first developed in the 20th century and it makes reading and interpreting literature a systematic activity. New Criticism as an analytical tool helps the readers to understand and gain insight into all forms of the written works through sheer understanding and by reading closely. This means that our focus

What entity dictates life on the most fundamental level? Is it the government or the people who permit the government to exist? This is the main point of contention between Baron de Montesquieu 's Spirit of Laws and Jean-Jacques Rousseau 's On the Social Contract. Interestingly, their interpretation of different forms of government converge on the sovereignty of a democracy, but that is where most of their common ground lies. While Rousseau shares similarities on the sovereign authority of a democracy with Montesquieu, he departs by arguing how regardless of government, sovereignty always rests in the hands of the people. He also disagrees on how the populace should participate in the democracy and on their representation in government, making his principles more relevant today.

In order to understand this one must first look at the author’s life. According to Elain Hedges, who

TS: John Locke, often referred to as one of the most influential philosophical and political thinkers of the seventeenth century due to his works about the natural human state and birthrights, would highly agree with the preamble due to his ideas actually being incorporated in it.

The “Reign of Terror” was a threat to outside countries, used a guillotine to execute, and had the ideas of full “liberty, equality, and fraternity.” This phase was not justified; thousands of people were killed

During the French Revolution, the revolutionaries wanted to make a new government that would give the citizens more freedom, liberty, and equality. The Reign of Terror, led by Robespierre, was a period of the French Revolution during which many people were ruthlessly executed by the new government. This period of murder and blood shed started from the execution of Louis XVI in January 1793 to late July 1794 called the Reign of Terror. During those eighteen months, more than 20,000 French people were put to death by guillotine. The behavior by the revolutionaries in the French government was not justified for these three reasons: internal and external threats were not serious, the manipulation of the Committee of Public Safety and Maximilien Robespierre wasn’t for the benefit of the all the French citizen, and the uses of the death machine, the guillotine, was inhumane.

As Montesquieu and Rousseau both bind the idea that sovereignty should be the mindset that is grasped upon when you’re born and you should use it to your highest potential. It is expressed in their own different way but in result, it is involved in the same quest that Voltaire contributes of the common good in the novel. The type of contribution that is discussed in the abuses of power in Candide. Voltaire depicts power being abused from scenes of the novel as they’re reinforced in many views from potential change, human rights, and other Enlightenment values that are portrayed in the book of Candide.

Revolutions are often started as a response to an unjust form of government, and the Reign of Terror’s new revolutionary government was no exception. Although the revolutionary government was meant to replace a tyrannical government, it quickly turned into the dictatorial government it tried to replace and in many cases stepped far outside of the bounds of lawful or just action. During late 18th century France in the time period between the execution of King Louis XVI and the execution of Maximilien de Robespierre, the Reign of Terror senselessly guillotined thousands of people. Conditions in France in 1793 and 1794 were not serious enough to justify the revolutionary government’s response due to the response to external threats, response to internal threats, and the extreme methods deployed.

During the 16th and 17th centuries it is clear and evident that the centralization of power, or the absolutism in and hierarchy, does in fact induce stability in society, however, it is also evident via the given readings that absolutism also had its flaws which were later proved to be its downfall. It essentially all boils down a single concept of the people versus government. This is evident in the history of the French prior and leading up to the Révolution. In addition to, the monarchy of the English under King James VI and I’s rule. As complicated as the nature of government is, when power or authority is concentrated excessively into a single point, the society will crack by that very same point if a healthy relationship between citizen and ruler is not established. One cannot expect to bully and undermine one’s citizens without considering the possibility that one day they will rise up against him or her and “religious” masks can only be worn for so long before people recognize the hypocrisies present within them. Both of these truths are evident as seen in the given texts. Specifically, with The Great Cat Massacre, On The Social Order and Absolute Monarchy, by Jean Domat, and Trew Law of Free Monarchies, King James VI & I.

The 17th century French aristocrat Michel de Montaigne lived in a tumultuous world. With the spark of Luther’s Ninety-Five Theses, the fire spread rapidly to France. The nation divided against itself. The rebellious protestant Huguenots and the traditional staunch Catholics both viewed the other group as idolatrous heretics in time when that crime could justify execution. Consequently, Catholic monarchs throughout Europe felt the impending threat to their reigns, too, because if they supposedly ruled through divine right, what would change concerning the support of their subjects? After the peace-making Edict of Nantes, rehashing the religious conflicts of the century was forbidden, but seeing his country—and even his own family—torn apart, how could one refrain from comment? So in his writings, Montaigne has to write around his actual subjects. This isn’t to say, however, that he conveyed none of his ideas directly. Montaigne criticizes the cultural belief in a correct way of life, opposing the idea with a more relativistic viewpoint, though the way in which he presents it, as mere musings in personal correspondence, fails to effectively convince his readers.

France was experience a great amount of change in the summer of 1793, when the Jacobins succeeded the moderates in the National Convention. With the radical Jacobins in power, the country was in tumult, and a Reign of Terror ensued due to a law of suspects that legalized local revolutionary committees. Because of this, thousands of people were killed by guillotine or other methods. Throughout the summer of 1793, the radical Jacobins’ control of the Committee of Public Safety instituted the Terror which was advantageous in it’s intended purpose, yet it was disadvantageous because of the enemies it created.

French minister Richelieu symbolized absolutism in many ways. With his policy of total subordination of all groups and institutions to the French monarchy, Richelieu worked to break the power of nobility. This is because French nobility’s selfish and independent ways went against the the crown’s goal to centralize the state. To break it Richelieu leveled castles, which were a symbol of feudal independence. He also destroyed aristocratic conspires, with speedy executions. In addition to this Richelieu’s genius is best reflected in the administrative system he established. Extending the use of royal commissioners, known as intendants giving them responsibility for justice, police, and finances in each of Frances 32 generalities or districts.

The Marquis de Sade was a controversial writer from the Enlightenment period. His works were highly controversial at the time although he did acquire some sort of a cult following. The Marquis de Sade uses a variety of techniques in his writing to great effect. The passage being analysed is an extract from The Philosophy of the Bedroom published in 1795.

Not only were Hobbes and Locke influential during the Constitutional Period, but also Charles de Montesquieu and Jean Jacques Rousseau. In Montesquieu’s work, The Spirit of the Laws, Montesquieu described the state of nature as a place of fear where humans avoid violence and war. However, once the state of war enters society, a need for human laws and government is needed in order to maintain law and order. Therefore, Montesquiu helped advocate for governmental authority and raised awareness for the need for separation of powers in the three branches of government. In today’s government, Montesquieu's beliefs in the separation of powers and governmental control are clearly seen in the Constitution. Additionally, Rousseau was able to influence

Any literary work is unique. It is created by the author in accordance with his vision and is permeated with his idea of the world. The reader’s interpretation is also highly individual and depends to a great extent on his knowledge and personal experience. That’s why one cannot lay down a fixed “model” for a piece of critical appreciation. Nevertheless, one can give information and suggestions that may prove helpful.