After reading the pieces regarding the French revolution, I found that Thomas Paine's "Rights of Man" proved to be the most persuasive. Thomas Paine's pamphlet intended to reveal the flaws in Edmund Burke's pamphlet regarding his views on the French Revolution. Through Paine’s valid reasoning, he successfully presented the imperfections in Burke’s pamphlet.
Burke's "Reflections on the Revolution in France" left me in a state of confusion. Only after reading Paine's pamphlet, and Mary Wollstonecraft's letters as well, did I grasp an understanding of Burke's pamphlet. From my interpretation, it seems that Burke believed that the problem with the French government lied with the person in charge rather than the laws that the person in charge was obligated to enforce. Paine responded to this speculation by saying that Burke was “ignorant of the springs and principles of the French revolution”.
Throughout Paine’s work, he expressed that Burke did not fully comprehend the subject matter in which he chose to write. I found one section of the excerpt to be especially interesting; this was the section explaining that Burke did not understand the distinction between man and principle. Paine explained that the revolution took place as a result of the principles of the government, not as a result of the king. I found this exceptionally insightful and a valid reason to disprove Burke’s theory.
Paine’s work was created to dispute the ideas that Burke presented in his pamphlet. Paine successfully presented his argument by presenting the flaws in Burke’s work and by supporting his argument with valid explanations. As a result, I found this piece the most persuasive as opposed to the others that I read.
No comments:
Post a Comment