How did Henry David Thoreau disagree with William Paley’s ideas about obedience to government?

In his essay Civil Disobedience, Henry David Thoreau directly challenges the views of William Paley, an English philosopher who argued in The Principles of Moral and Political Philosophy that civil obedience is a moral duty.1

While Paley contended that resistance to government is justified only when it serves the expediency or convenience of the majority, Thoreau rejected this utilitarian framework. Thoreau argued that Paley’s perspective failed to account for the individual citizen’s moral conscience.1

For Thoreau, justice is a fundamental requirement that transcends political expediency. He maintained that there is a higher law than the civil one, and individuals have a moral obligation to act justly—even at a personal cost—regardless of whether such actions align with the convenience of the majority. Ultimately, Thoreau asserted that when a government acts unjustly, such as by supporting slavery, the individual must prioritize their conscience over submission to the state.1