In this blog post, we’ll examine the historical context of Thomas More’s life, his personal struggles, and how the Renaissance, the Reformation, the discovery of new sea routes, and early capitalism influenced his ideas and ‘Utopia’.

Thomas More: His Era and Life

Thomas More was born in 1478 and died in 1535 after being executed for treason. Although he grew up during the late Middle Ages, a period of strong Christian influence, the stage on which he served as a judge and politician was an England that was beginning its transition to a modern society. In other words, More formed his ideas at the very center of the massive transformation from the Middle Ages to the modern era.
Intellectually, the Renaissance and the Reformation were underway; in the fields of natural science and economics, the emergence of the heliocentric theory, the opening of new sea routes, and the commercial revolution resulting from the discovery of the New World laid the foundations for early capitalism. This whirlwind of change provides a crucial backdrop for interpreting More and his work, ‘Utopia’.
The Renaissance was a movement that broke away from the medieval, God-centered view of humanity and revived a modern conception of humanity that emphasized human reason and sensibility. This movement, which revived ancient Greek sensibilities and humanism—a belief in human dignity—opposed unconditional obedience to the clergy or the Church and was led by humanists. More was a close friend of the humanist Erasmus and advocated for a humanist perspective.
The Reformation arose as a reaction against the corruption of the Catholic Church, such as its secularization and the excessive issuance of indulgences; this movement, sparked by Luther’s teachings, was an attempt to return to the spirit of early Christianity. Supporters of the Reformation were divided into two camps: those advocating an anti-Catholic course and those within the Catholic Church supporting gradual reform; Luther and the Church of England belonged to the former, while More, Erasmus, and others belonged to the latter.
The separation of the Church in England differed in nature from other reforms. It began as a political event stemming from Henry VIII’s divorce; when the Papal Court refused to grant him a divorce, Henry VIII declared himself head of the Church of England and broke away from Roman Catholicism. More opposed the justification of this marriage and was ultimately executed over this issue.
Meanwhile, the opening of new sea routes, the discovery of the New World, and the Commercial Revolution brought about socio-economic changes. Advances in the compass, printing, cartography, and navigation paved the way for Europe’s transition from a feudal rural society to an industry-centered urban economy, and industrial productivity grew significantly with the emergence of new markets and trade routes.
As More described in Book I of ‘Utopia’, the discovery of the New World and the development of the wool industry led to serious social problems, such as the decline of the peasantry and the oppression by the nobility and the clergy. The harsh enforcement of laws and exploitation by those seeking to amass greater wealth were also the direct motivations that led More to write ‘Utopia’.
Thus, while More maintained a medieval Catholic faith, he was intellectually influenced by modern humanism and dreamed of a society where people could live with dignity, in opposition to the indiscriminate exploitation of early capitalism. In ‘Utopia’, he emphasizes a frugal lifestyle, high moral standards, and the idea of equality grounded in human dignity and freedom.
The ideal society depicted in ‘Utopia’ is a pious and moral community where freedom of religion is guaranteed, and members abandon selfishness to care for one another. This vision lies at the intersection of Christian ideals, Renaissance humanism, and the ideals of Plato from ancient Greece.
Furthermore, Utopia is a society based on communal ownership where all people are equal, everyone participates in labor, and no one has to worry about their livelihood. It presents a vision of society that eliminates unnecessary labor to maximize leisure time for meaningful human activities and provides the conditions for each individual to strive for self-improvement.

From the Son of a Distinguished Family to Execution for Treason

Thomas More’s life was as tumultuous as it was brilliant, and his final nine years (1526–1535) are considered particularly dramatic. His final years were so dramatic that Robert Bowlt’s play ‘A Man of All Seasons’, based on this period, became a huge hit.
More was born as the second son of John More, a judge, and was so bright from a young age that he entered the tutelage of Archbishop John Morton at the age of twelve. He entered Oxford on the archbishop’s recommendation but withdrew at his father’s behest to study law. During this time, he formed friendships with humanists, including Erasmus.
Continuing his legal studies, More passed the bar exam in 1500 at the age of 22 and, in addition to his work as a lawyer, pursued an academic career lecturing at the law school. At the age of 27, he was elected to the House of Commons, but lost his seat after opposing Henry VII’s tax policies. After stepping down from public office, he devoted himself to the study and writing of classical literature, philosophy, and history, and married the young Jane Colt, with whom he raised a modest and devout family.
In 1509, with the accession of Henry VIII, More returned to politics and was recognized for his talents as an administrator and diplomat. Beginning with his dispatch to Flanders as Deputy Mayor of London in 1510, he held various public offices until his appointment as Lord Chancellor in 1529, serving as a trusted advisor and supporter of Henry VIII.
Henry VIII was welcomed as a young and charismatic monarch, and More was so favorably disposed toward him that he even wrote poems in his praise. After his accession, Henry VIII publicly vowed to root out corruption and malpractice, and More—with his reformist and humanist leanings—earned the king’s trust as a political advisor, diplomatic mediator, and interlocutor in literature, philosophy, and the arts.
However, their friendship was shattered by the king’s divorce issue. Henry VIII sought to end his marriage to Catherine, his brother’s widow, and make the court lady Anne Boleyn his new queen; when the Holy See refused, he chose to break with the Roman Catholic Church. Henry VIII proclaimed himself Head of the Church of England, leading to the establishment of the Anglican Church.
More did not consider the divorce legitimate, and to avoid unnecessary misunderstandings, he resigned from his post as Lord Chancellor on May 16, 1532, citing health reasons. Coincidentally, that very day was when the Church of England formally accepted Henry VIII as its head. Although he was invited to the queen’s coronation in 1533, More did not attend. Although he did not speak out publicly, he made his position clear through his silence.

The Final Days of Thomas More

More’s actions soon fell out of favor with Henry VIII, and he was eventually charged with treason in 1534 and imprisoned in the Tower of London. A man who had once been Lord Chancellor and enjoyed the king’s favor now found himself behind bars.
Even in prison, he was asked to sign the Act of Succession, which established the line of succession for the children born to Henry VIII and Anne, but he refused.
After remaining unyielding in the face of approximately 15 months of persuasion and pressure, More’s death sentence was finalized. He met his end with such composure that he did not lose his sense of humor even as he ascended the scaffold. When the steps leading up to the scaffold creaked and he needed the jailer’s help, he showed his composure by saying, “If you pull me up safely, I’ll come down on my own.” He also joked with the executioner, tucking his beard over the edge of the scaffold and asking, “Has my beard ever committed high treason?” He was executed on July 6, 1535.
About 400 years later, the Roman Catholic Church canonized Thomas More for sacrificing his life to uphold his faith. Although More, who led an eventful life, is often regarded as a statesman, humanist, and masterful writer, he himself was closer to a Christian humanist who pursued spiritual pleasure while living a frugal and ascetic life, much like the inhabitants he depicted in ‘Utopia’.

The Genealogy of Utopian Thought

When did utopian thought begin? In the West, Plato’s ‘The Republic’ is often cited as its origin, while in the East, the Confucian “Great Harmony” society is commonly identified as the source. It is interesting to note that both the East and the West contemplated an ideal society around the same time—approximately 2,500 years ago—though the exact reason for this remains unclear. However, it is clear that utopian thought generally emerged amid class discrimination, oppression, and social turmoil.
Plato’s ‘The Republic’ was written during a period when Athens had been defeated by Sparta and politics and morality were in a state of extreme turmoil. The ideal state proposed by Plato refers to a state in which both the leaders and citizens are in the most virtuous condition. It is a state where perfect justice is realized, where not only property but even wives and children are thoroughly shared, and where the state is governed by the wisest and most virtuous philosophers.
Plato’s ideal state differs from a democratic republic in that it divides society’s members broadly into the productive class of citizens and the guardian class in the broad sense. The guardian class is further divided into the ruling class and the warrior class; this stems from the idea that just as a person requires three elements—reason, courage, and physical strength—so too does the state. Classes are not fixed at birth but are determined after a child’s aptitudes are assessed through collective upbringing and education, following which the child is assigned to the appropriate class.
The ruling class consists of the most ideal and intellectual members of society—that is, philosophers—and governs the state through a form of collective leadership, with the eldest or most capable among them serving as the leader. This vision proposed by Plato had a significant influence on subsequent Western utopian thought, particularly because it employed the concept of communal ownership of property.
In Thomas More’s ‘Utopia’, communal ownership of property is also presented as a fundamental condition for an ideal state, and this theme can be found in many utopian ideas that emerged later. Furthermore, Plato’s advocacy of a philosopher-king regime influenced various utopian discourses, including those of More. Although the ideal image of a ruler presented in each work differs, they share the common view that a leader must be moral, wise, and respected by others.
Following Plato, Western utopian thought continued into the modern era through the tradition of medieval Catholic monks living in communal faith-based communities; in particular, Thomas More’s ‘Utopia’ was so influential that it became a common noun denoting an ideal society. This is because More envisioned the ideal state based on a modern political system—namely, a democratic republic. Subsequently, utopian thought continued with works such as Campanella’s ‘The City of the Sun’ (1602) and Bacon’s ‘New Atlantis’ (1624).
Campanella’s ‘The City of the Sun’, while proposing alternatives to real-world political and social systems—much like More’s suggestions—advocates for a strongly centralized theocratic society. Given that Campanella himself was a former priest, his arguments stemmed from the belief—shared by some clergy—that an ideal Christian community must be established in opposition to the flawed policies of both secular politics and the Church.
In the City of the Sun he envisioned, there is no private property, unjust accumulation of wealth, or poverty; residents work only four hours a day and receive the necessary goods through distribution. Viewing monogamy as the root cause of private property, he implements—like Plato—the sharing of wives and children, as well as communal child-rearing and education. In this theocratic society ruled by a priest-ruler known as the “Sun,” all members find true happiness in life by working according to their aptitudes and serving both the state and God.
While Campanella’s vision incorporates many elements from Plato and More, it also presents a new perspective on the religious community. Furthermore, he emphasized centralized authority and command over the democratic politics based on free debate—which More supported to some extent—a stance that bears some resemblance to Plato’s perspective.
Bacon’s ‘New Atlantis’ envisions an elite society ruled by scientists as the ideal state. In this kingdom, a wise legislator establishes an institution called the “Temple of Solomon” to research and advance the natural sciences and technology, thereby enriching society. Consequently, scientists enjoy authority and social respect that surpass even those of bureaucrats or kings.
Unlike More, who focused on social structure and distribution, Bacon believed that advances in science and technology could enrich people’s material lives and bring them happiness. This perspective is closely linked to the development of science in modern society.
Meanwhile, in the East, although utopia was not presented in a concrete form, the Confucian “Great Harmony” society and Laozi’s ideas of a “small state” and “minimal governance” can be cited as philosophical responses to the concept of an ideal society. The “Great Harmony” society refers to a society where people live in harmony with heaven, earth, and all things, so that everything becomes one. It envisions a society governed by the most moral and wise sage, where the throne is not hereditary, everyone lives together like family, and wealth is not used solely for the benefit of a specific class.
Confucianism identifies the reigns of Emperor Yao and Emperor Shun as representative eras of this ideal society. During those times, the people did not worry about their daily livelihood, and under the guidance of a virtuous king, everyone lived a righteous life. To achieve this, Mencius advocated for the “Well-Field System” (井田制), in which nine households shared land equally in a grid pattern resembling the character for “well” (井), with the central plot cultivated collectively to pay taxes.
The concept of “small states with few people” (小国寡民) proposed by Daoism refers to a society where “few people live in a small state.” It holds up as an ideal a life of “non-action” (wu-wei) and “non-desire” (wu-yu), distancing oneself from civilization and abandoning artificial actions and greed. It rejects artificial institutions and orders that restrict human freedom and seeks to restore human nature in harmony with nature through a self-sufficient life—one that does not involve owning vast tracts of land or engaging in excessive labor.
This attitude of “small states with few people” shares common ground with those who dream of small communities today, environmentalists who advocate returning to nature, and anarchists who advocate for a communal life based on a system of common ownership.
In summary, Eastern utopian thought is broadly divided into the “Great Unity” society and “small states with few people.” While the “Great Unity” society shares some similarities with More’s utopia—such as the election of leaders, a system of shared property, and the protection of the socially vulnerable—the “Small State, Few People” concept differs significantly from typical utopian visions in that it requires no social institutions, education, or leadership at all.

Utopian Thought and Modern Ideals

As examined above, people in both the East and West have always dreamed of an ideal society and have strived ceaselessly to build it in reality. By the modern era, the notion that human dignity is innate and the idea that human freedom and equality must not be infringed upon by anything had spread widely.
As material productivity increased dramatically due to advances in the natural sciences and technology, people were filled with new hope that an ideal state could be realized on earth. As a result, socialist thought, which proposed a scientific utopia, gained significant influence, and socialist states such as the Soviet Union emerged.
However, the socialist states of that era were not understood as societies that had fully realized a system of communal property, but rather as transitional societies on the path toward communism—a system characterized by complete equality and material abundance. With the collapse of the Soviet Union and the socialist states of Eastern Europe in 1989, the realization of a communist society based on communal property came to seem practically impossible.
While there are various causes for the collapse of the socialist states, the primary cause cited is the failure to morally overcome human selfishness and desire. This reveals the fact that it is difficult to realize a completely equal, ideal society as long as human greed and selfishness persist. Furthermore, the dream of building a prosperous utopia through scientific and technological progress carries the risk of leading to surveillance and oppression by a powerful minority, as George Orwell warned in his novel ‘1984’.
Nevertheless, as long as human-caused oppression and violence—such as the wealth gap, environmental destruction, cloning, and endless wars—persist, the yearning for an ideal society will not fade. Therefore, as long as humanity does not deny its own infinite potential, utopian thought will continue to emerge in various forms and with diverse content.

A Fresh Look at “Utopia”

When “Utopia” was first published in 1516, its original title was “Nusquama” (a place that exists nowhere), accompanied by a lengthy subtitle in Latin: “A Useful and Pleasant Treatise on the Best State of Society and on a New Island Called Utopia.” The title was subsequently changed to “Utopia,” which is the Greek word “Aipotu” read backward; like the Latin term, it combines “ou” (not) and “topos” (place) to mean “a place that is nowhere.”
‘Utopia’ consists of “Two Letters” and Books I and II. The Two Letters detail the author’s discussions with those around him regarding the publication of a book about Utopia; they serve as a fictional device created by More to present Utopia as if it were a real place.
Book I, through the voice of a character named Raphael, fiercely criticizes the corruption and malfeasance committed by the ruling class of contemporary English society, while Book II introduces Utopia’s political, economic, social, and educational systems as a solution that stands in contrast to that flawed world.
Book I begins with a scene in Antwerp where More, while negotiating with the Castilians on the king’s orders, meets Peter Giles—an old acquaintance—and Raphael, a man of Portuguese origin. More and Raphael take a liking to one another and engage in conversation on various topics.
First, Raphael offers a critical assessment of the political reality in Europe. He points out that the majority of kings govern not for the sake of their people but to satisfy their own self-interest, while ministers and advisors are more concerned with flattery and sycophancy than with offering sound advice. Raphael expresses his refusal to participate in politics, arguing that sound advice cannot be accepted under such circumstances.
Next, he takes a structural approach to the issue of punishing thieves. He argues that the failure to reduce crime rates even with extreme punishments like the death penalty is not due to the severity of the punishment itself, but rather because the fundamental social structure that gives rise to theft has not changed. Therefore, he argues that the path to reform lies in abolishing the system of private property—which creates wealth disparities—and adopting a system of communal property; more fundamentally, it lies in nullifying the value of money.
Raphael presents Utopia as a place where these two principles are fully realized, and its specific details are explained in detail in Book II.
Book II recounts the story of the island of Utopia as told by Raphael, providing a detailed introduction to various aspects such as Utopia’s location, natural environment, social institutions, religious beliefs, and the issue of war. This includes a socio-economic system based on the system of common property, an economic system centered on self-sufficient agriculture, a six-hour workday, a democratic method of electing leaders, and a system of self-governance centered on 54 cities.
In addition, the book presents a monogamous marriage system with strict marital norms; a welfare system featuring comfortable, free medical facilities and communal dining halls operated in designated districts; a religious life that permits diverse faiths and a moral code based on moderate pleasure; and a war policy that opposes wars of aggression but thoroughly punishes invading enemies.
Looking at the details in Book II, Utopia is a crescent-shaped island nation with a history dating back to 1760, comprising 54 cities of equal size, sharing the same language and customs. Each city practices local self-government by electing officials through democratic elections, and every year, three representatives are elected from each city and sent to the capital, Amaurotum, to discuss and decide on important matters affecting the entire nation.
The mayor of each city is elected by a group of 200 “Sipograntus,” who are themselves selected from among 30 households. The Sipograntus are responsible for guiding and supervising civic life; in modern terms, they hold a position equivalent to that of an administrative official and a local council member combined.
The people of Utopia work six hours a day and sleep eight hours; they spend the remaining time on leisure activities such as reading or attending public lectures, depending on their individual interests. With the exception of the Sipograntus, priests, and some scholars, everyone—regardless of age or gender—participates in productive labor and lives frugally; as a result, the system is structured so that even with only six hours of daily labor, there is a surplus of goods necessary for daily life.
Through a strictly planned economy, Utopia avoids wasting resources and labor and maintains an appropriately controlled urban population. No city may exceed 6,000 households, and each household consists of a minimum of ten and a maximum of sixteen members. If the population exceeds the average, citizens are relocated to other cities or dispersed by establishing colonies in neighboring countries.
Each city has four large hospitals, so anyone who falls ill can receive free treatment, and meals are taken together in communal dining halls. Since essential household goods are provided free of charge, currency is almost unnecessary, and all property is held and used collectively.
Criminals are not executed but are made into slaves and put to work. The slave population is replenished by criminals, death row inmates purchased from foreign countries, and foreigners who volunteer; however, unlike slaves in Europe, they can be pardoned and become citizens if they work diligently. They live in communal detention centers and serve their punishment by performing tasks that citizens shun, but aside from being shackled—depending on the severity of their crime—there is little difference between them and ordinary citizens.
Those with a aptitude for scholarship or who devote themselves to academic pursuits are exempt from labor so they can dedicate themselves to their studies, thereby contributing to the development of society. All children receive free education, and upon completing their studies, they choose a profession suited to their aptitudes. All citizens are required to learn the basics of agriculture, and since everyone takes turns farming, they must master farming techniques.
The people of Utopia believe that in the afterlife, those who have done good deeds will be rewarded, while those who have committed evil deeds will be punished. To them, goodness consists of actions that follow reason and the laws of nature, while acts of selfishness that deprive others of their freedom or pleasure are considered evil. While they believe humans should live joyfully, they hold that true pleasure comes from upholding proper virtue and conscience.
Therefore, in Utopia, luxury and hedonism are shunned, and greed for gold, jewels, and the like is regarded as a sin. A life of moderation and morality is held in the highest regard, and intellectual pleasure derived from reason is particularly valued.
There are strict rules regarding marriage. Men may marry at age 22 and women at age 18, and once married, divorce is not permitted. Premarital sex and adultery are strictly punished, and there is also a system requiring couples to reveal their naked bodies to one another before marriage to check for physical defects. This is a measure designed to prevent defects from being discovered later and causing domestic discord, taking into account the fact that divorce is not easily granted.

Utopia’s Institutions and Customs

Utopia has very few legal statutes, and there are no separate judges or lawyers. This is because the people of Utopia themselves regard a moral life as the highest good, and because there is no poverty or greed in society that might lead to crime, and they are strict regarding criminal offenses.
The people of Utopia do not wage wars without cause, and even when they do go to war, they strive to wage wars without armed conflict because they do not want their citizens to be harmed. Consequently, they take no pride in military victories. Priests admonish soldiers not to commit acts of cruelty against enemy forces.
In matters of religion, freedom of belief and tolerance toward other faiths are fundamental principles, as evidenced by the practice of conducting worship services in a communal church using a common prayer. On the other hand, those who denounce other religions or excessively impose their own beliefs in public are exiled from the country.
After explaining the various customs and institutions of the island of Utopia in Book II, More—perhaps out of concern for the shock and sense of unreality this would cause in contemporary English society—raises the question through his own voice as to whether the system of communal property could actually be applied to the reality of Europe. However, he goes on to acknowledge the merits of such a system and expresses the hope that it would be worth considering in Europe as well.

Intellectual Background

Christian Humanism

As mentioned earlier, Thomas More lived during the late Middle Ages and early modern period. Consequently, he embodied both intellectual traditions: medieval Christian philosophy and early modern humanism. In other words, while he was a humanist in his thinking, he remained a medieval Catholic in his religious beliefs.
However, the ideal Catholic faith he envisioned was a monastic one, characterized by communal living and self-discipline through asceticism. Consequently, Thomas More lived a life of self-discipline throughout his life—wearing an ascetic linen shirt woven from horsehair and tailhair, shunning luxury and entertainment—and continued to offer devout prayers every morning and evening until his imprisonment in the Tower of London. In other words, he lived exactly the same life as the inhabitants of “Utopia” he depicted in Book II of ‘Utopia’. He avoided pastimes such as dice and card games, slept no more than four or, at most, five hours a day, and rose at two o’clock in the morning to study and pray until seven o’clock.
Therefore, his core philosophy can be described as Christian humanism. As evident throughout ‘Utopia’, he pursued a moral and devout life grounded in humanism—a vision of a world where everyone is treated with dignity. He also sought to transform a society where people discriminate against one another, where the haves ignore and oppress the have-nots, and where those in power suppress the powerless through various laws and institutions.
Outraged by a social reality in which even petty theft committed out of poverty was punished by capital punishment, More argued that crime would disappear if those who stole were provided with the means to make a living. He also strongly criticized the corrupt lifestyles—such as revelry, prostitution, and gambling—led by the nobility and clergy, who did not engage in labor, calling such behavior a crime in itself.
Therefore, the utopia More envisioned was a society that guaranteed a dignified life to everyone, without exception. Underlying these ideas were Christian love—which calls for loving all people equally—and humanism, which advocates for respect for human dignity.

A Christian Communist Society

In ‘Utopia’, More advocated for the abolition of private property and the communal ownership of wealth. Where did these ideas come from? Even in 16th-century Europe, where More lived, the Catholic Church and monastic orders required priests to practice asceticism and communal living—traditions upheld throughout their long history. Therefore, for More, who aspired to become a priest, the idea of sharing property and living in community would certainly not have been unfamiliar.
Furthermore, More viewed greed as the root of all evil. He believed that greed drives people to seek money and power, even going so far as to commit crimes in pursuit of them. In fact, it was greed that drove nobles and abbots to fence off vast tracts of land for sheep grazing, thereby forcing peasants into vagrancy. Nobles who lived off the labor of others without lifting a finger, as well as their servants and retainers who had grown accustomed to idleness and luxury, were all embodiments of greed.
Viewing greed as the root of social evils and well aware of the virtues of moderation and communal living, More proposed as a solution a communal life based on the sharing of property and adherence to strict rules. In short, he proposed a Christian communist society. Of course, More had read Plato’s ‘The Republic’ and sympathized with its system of thoroughgoing communal property. However, his belief that such a system was realistically achievable likely stemmed from the way of life to which he had become accustomed.
Nevertheless, More was skeptical about whether a communist society or communal living could be realized in the society of his time. In the final section of Book II of ‘Utopia’, after hearing Raphael Hydrodæus’s story in its entirety, More expresses his thoughts as follows:

“I thought there was no doubt that Raphael was a man of great learning and experience, but I could not fully agree with his story.
Nevertheless, I frankly admit that the Republic of Utopia has many virtues, and although I can hardly expect it, I hope that Europe will emulate these virtues.”

As he himself said, More “hoped that they would be emulated,” but he frankly admitted that he “could hardly expect it.” However, this statement can be interpreted to mean that while it might be impossible to realize at that time, he believed it would be realized someday in the future.

Ascetic Hedonism

The moral philosophy More presents in ‘Utopia’ is a blend of the Epicurean school’s hedonism and the Stoic school’s asceticism. Furthermore, it incorporates More’s Christian worldview.
The most important element of happiness that More advocates in ‘Utopia’ is pleasure. From this perspective, More can clearly be described as a hedonist. However, More did not believe that happiness comes from all forms of pleasure. He held that true happiness comes only from good and proper pleasures. In this context, he viewed good and proper pleasures as those that follow human natural impulses—that is, human nature—which he believed stems from human reason.
More distinguished between foolish and true pleasures, as well as between physical and mental pleasures, and took a stance opposed to mere physical pleasure. This stemmed from his attempt to reconcile hedonism with asceticism. He considered spiritual pleasures—based on moderation and asceticism—to be more noble than foolish pleasures, such as the pursuit of vain fame or wealth, or physical pleasures aimed solely at satisfying bodily desires. Therefore, More regarded good deeds and a clear conscience as the highest forms of pleasure.
Furthermore, a Christian worldview underlies the ascetic concept of pleasure that More advocated. This point can be confirmed in Book II of ‘Utopia’, where he identifies proper pleasure as the standard of happiness and grounds this in a religious worldview. In other words, while all humans desire joy and pursue happiness, happiness is most rightly attained when pursued through virtue. However, human virtue is perfected when one lives according to reason, and the reason humans must live this way is that God has endowed them with this nature. In short, it means that humans can only attain true happiness by living morally in accordance with God’s will. This argument can be viewed as a devout Christian moral perspective.

The Modern Significance of Utopian Thought

Thomas More wrote ‘Utopia’ to find an alternative solution to the social and economic corruption and injustice rampant in English society at the time, as well as to the exploitation and oppression perpetrated by the haves against the have-nots—whether through institutional means or otherwise. Therefore, the island of Utopia can be viewed as the “aspiration” Thomas More held for transforming the society of his time.
In fact, at first glance, ‘Utopia’ may seem like a far-fetched work of fantasy. Yet why has ‘Utopia’ become a common noun referring to an ideal society? Why has it not only greatly influenced the formation of socialist thought but also remained a classic to this day?
There are likely many reasons, but above all, it can be found in his sharp critique of the contradictions inherent in the political and economic systems of England and Europe at the time. Observing the problems that arose during England’s modernization process, More keenly recognized how the oppression of humans by humans devastates humanity. Consequently, he believed that a system guaranteeing freedom and equality was necessary to uphold human dignity.
Furthermore, Thomas More’s ‘Utopia’ did not merely present the structure of an ideal society; it also depicted, without prejudice, the concrete lives of the people living within it—particularly their religious and moral lives. No matter how ideally structured a society may be, if the people living within it are spiritually or morally corrupt, that society will ultimately collapse. Therefore, before even considering the maintenance of an ideal society through institutions, he portrayed the ideal human being as one endowed with warm emotions and morality, grounded in self-restraint and frugality.
However, the primary reason ‘Utopia’ continues to capture people’s interest to this day lies in its humanism, which is rooted in boundless trust and affection for humanity. In ‘Utopia’, More demonstrates a deep faith in and affection for humanity that might even seem naive. This is evident in his emphasis on addressing the most basic necessities of human life—food, clothing, and shelter—as well as education and welfare, and his consideration of a moral and simple way of life.
Of course, from today’s perspective, ‘Utopia’ does have a few shortcomings. First, I would like to point out the limitations of the self-sufficient economy that More establishes as the most ideal economic system on the island of Utopia. The island of Utopia operates under an agriculture-centered, self-sufficient economic system based on the sharing of property. Therefore, since there is no fear of scarcity in Utopia, the desire for accumulation may be unnecessary, and because people lead frugal and disciplined lives, there is presumably no need for more convenient tools. However, human desire can also be the source of a creative and free life. This is why socialist societies, which sought to resolve inequality through a system of shared property, collapsed due to weakened productivity and inefficiency. Furthermore, in an era like today’s—marked by tremendous scientific progress and the global village’s interconnectedness—advocating for an agriculture-based, self-sufficient economy might appear to be a call to return to a society of the past.
Next, we must address the issue of uniformity and standardization. Utopia consists of 54 cities that are identical in size, structure, and even customs, and all Utopians wear clothes of the same style and color. The communal dining hall best illustrates the uniformity of this society, as everyone eats together in a communal space resembling a village hall. However, human nature inherently seeks change and diversity. At times, eating the same meal every day can become tedious, and one might grow weary of wearing the same clothes. In this regard, it can be argued that More, by overemphasizing uniformity and efficiency, overlooked the diverse individuality of human beings.
Finally, we can point to the imperialistic tendency to colonize neighboring countries as needed, as well as a sense of superiority that regards hiring mercenaries to fight wars on their behalf as perfectly natural. It is also worth noting that slavery exists in Utopia, a society where no privileged political or economic class exists. This demonstrates that no matter how brilliant a visionary Thomas More was, he could not escape the constraints of the society and era in which he lived. He could not free himself from the limitations of Eurocentric thinking and an aristocratic worldview.
However, despite these limitations, we still use Thomas More’s ‘Utopia’ as a model and continue to dream of a utopia. This may be because the ideal society that Thomas More envisioned 500 years ago—and that countless people have sought to achieve ever since—has yet to be realized.
Human beings are, by nature, creatures who dream of a better tomorrow than today and a better future than tomorrow, and who strive to make those dreams a reality. The reason we continue to read “Utopia” today and dream of a better world is likely because the reality of today’s world has its irrational aspects, and because we harbor a desire to build a more desirable society. Therefore, utopia is always a vision of the future—an unfulfilled perfection.