John is taking the middle ground whereas Dante is pro-monarchy. How do their arguments differ? Like, for example, Dante is taking an Aristotelian idea and justifying his claims based on Aristotle's high status and inductive reasoning: humans are distinguished by reason and they exercise that to do what they do best in groups, and that needs to be universal. I hope I'm interpreting it right. How does it differ from John of Paris's argument in On Royal and Papal Power?