Consider the following questions:

What is Raphael's view of the court, and of participation in its affairs? In what sense are his statements in part a justification of author Thomas More's purpose in offering his readers the book Utopia? How did Utopus found his kingdom? Why do you suppose he preferred his people to be island dwellers rather than mainlanders? How does the development of Utopia's urban areas differ from the way cities develop in the real world? What implied criticism is More making of town life and growth in his day? How does the society Raphael describes amount to something like "communism," at least in a pre-Marxian (i.e. pre-technological) sense? Raphael says that the Utopians, unlike Europeans, make utility rather than scarcity the basis of their economic system. What does he suggest lies at the root of systems that privilege scarcity as an index of value? How does the anecdote about the pompous Anemolian ambassador help him illustrate his argument? What is the use of such criticisms of what we would now call "market economics," given that the principles of scarcity and competition were already rather deeply entrenched even in More's day? Observe Raphael's comments about the Utopian view of a successful marriage. What value do the Utopians place on marriage? How, that is, does the institution serve the people and the State? What is the contrast between Utopian marriage customs and European ones in More's time? Do we moderns have something in common with the Utopians when it comes to relations before marriage? How does Raphael say he first represented Christian doctrine to the Utopians? What effect did his presentation have? What is the status of religion in Utopia? It religion closely connected to the State, or is it independent?

How might Utopian customs imply criticism of European religious practices? What view of human nature emerges from the Utopians' handling of religious beliefs? To what extent do they favor reason as the basis of religion--that is, what is the balance or relationship between intellect and emotion in religion? Raphael frankly condemns the money-based economy of Western Europe, based on his favorable experience with Utopia's practices. To what extent do his criticisms ring true? What points of his do you agree with and disagree with? Why? After Raphael has finished his story, the narrator "More" (not to be simply identified with Thomas More the reallife author) weighs in with his view of what he has heard. What is the basis of his (silent) defense of Europe's nascent market economics? What does he say disparity in the distribution of wealth makes possible? Does he make a strong defense, or a flawed one? Explain. The narrator "More" admits to being dubious about the prospects for actually achieving the reforms suggested by Raphael's his admiring presentation of Utopian customs. What, then, is the point of writing a story that compares a non-existent society with real ones? If the point isn't necessarily to change the real societies, what is it? What danger lies in not constructing Utopias and making the kinds of comparisons More offers?