After our discussion today, I got to thinking about whether John Winthrop was a hipocrite and whether he was a fundamentally bad person for adhering to the sexist, racist, and elitist principles of Puritan society. Certainly, from the perspective of our modern culture he would be considered these things. However, almost everyone in the world from that time period had certain beliefs that would be frowned upon by most people in our society today. So what do you guys think? Was he really that bad a person and that much of a hypocrite? Or was he simply a man of his time?
-Bryce C.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Like everyone was saying today, what Winthrop considered "all men" was not what we currently define the expression as. He could have been simply talking about the "select" or male land-owners. At the time, he was practicing what he preached because all elite Puritans were treated equal, and as an elitist himself, they were the only people that matter.
ReplyDelete-Alexa
I would not consider him a bad person or a hyprocrite, but a man of his times. I think it was nearly impossible for him to have been anything but what he was. How many of us, would have thought to break the sexist, racist, and elitist attitude if we were in his place? I can guarentee not a single one. The idea of women as not being a lower class was simply unheard of. And as a leader of a new colony in a hostile wilderness, I hardly think he had the time to think up something so radical.
ReplyDelete~Becca
He's a man of his times and a hypocrite. The two aren't mutually exclusive.
ReplyDelete-Colin
In a Puritan society, a society that is fundamentally elistist, I don't really think that Winthrop can be considered a hypocrite. I believe that the Puritan belief that the elites would be rewarded as the "desevering memebers of society" only served to back up Winthrops definition of "man" (someone who was white, Puritan, and a landowner).
ReplyDelete-Tara