A Vindication of the Rights of Men by Mary Wollstonecraft is a political pamphlet which conveys Wollstonecraft’s’ complete disapproval of the aristocratic (high born) structure of English society. And states her thesis through criticizing Edmund Burke’s Reflections of the Revolution in France, “a political writing that placed heavy emphasis on the role of established tradition and the aristocracy in governing society.” Detailing the problems of his philosophies in governing the British people and laying out the solutions.
Wollstonecraft uses reasoning to counter argue Burke’s philosophy, which adds credibility to her argument to Burke’s reflection of the revolution in France. With this technique, Wollstonecraft directly countered each of Burke’s points and made her thesis stronger for the reader. In this pamphlet, she voices her opinion on the importance of equal rights by birth and the “importance that a society based solely on tradition be abolished.” Continuing to this point, she provides a few examples in her writing, including her belief that the common man should be able to obtain public offices without making financial contributions. Wollstonecraft specifies how at that point in time, public positions, such as the clergy, were based solely upon social standing and contributions to the specific organization. “The servility to superiors, and tyranny to inferiors said to characterize our clergy, have rationally been supposed to arise naturally from their associating with the nobility. Among unequals there can be no society; (Page 29) “or the hierarchy of the clergy, an ideal part of the constitution… posterity been injured by a distribution of the property snatched, perhaps, from innocent hands, but accumulated by the most abominable violation of every sentiment of justice and piety? (page 36) in these lines, Wollstonecraft is pointing out how the constitution is flawed and how this class system is taking away the rights of innocent men.
Wollstonecraft also speaks out about how Burke was all about slavery, “the slave trade ought never to be abolished;” (Page 12) she criticizes Burks statement by saying how this idea of slavery in the name of “Security of property”, is nothing but inhuman custom an atrocious insult to humanity and love of the country. Another example she provided was suffrage for every citizen in society because of the corrupt criminal justice system. Since all men are born equal, it is obvious to Wollstonecraft for all members of society to have equal justice in the eyes of law. Mary Wollstonecraft points out her opinions against the criminal laws in England. She concludes how Oftentimes the rich would receive no punishment for the crimes they committed. Conversely, the punishments for poor would regularly result in death. Wollstonecraft wished to change this and believed that everyone should be viewed equally under the law. At the very least, Wollstonecraft desired to end capital punishment for apparently “harmless crimes such as killing a deer on the King’s property”. On page 12 Wollstonecraft speaks her concerns of unjust laws, “Our penal laws punish with death the thief who steals a few pounds; but to take by violence, or trepan, a man, is no such heinous offence.–For who shall dare to complain of the venerable vestige of the law that rendered the life of a deer more sacred than that of a man? But it was the poor man with only his native dignity who was thus oppressed”. Wollstonecraft further shows concerns for the poor, how they don’t have a voice nor they have laws protecting them. She makes fun of laws by calling it a game on page 13, “The game laws are almost as oppressive to the peasantry as press-warrants to the mechanic. In this land of liberty what is to secure the property of the poor farmer when his noble landlord chooses to plant a decoy field near his little property?” what can the poor do when the rich man wants to devour the fruit of his labor asks Wollstonecraft. These are some questions which Wollstonecraft raises to the reader.
One important point to mention is that Wollstonecraft’s reasoning behind why each individual deserves basic human rights. She believes that each and every person is born with the ability to reason which is a distinctively human characteristic and possibly the most important characteristic of all. Wollstonecraft believes that everyone should have the opportunity to exercise this ability and no class system should interfere in reasoning. The hierarchical structure of English society did just that, and the common man struggled to exercise his reason to the fullest extent which rendered them of their personal growth and development and most importantly robbed them of their natural rights. Wollstonecraft states on page 18, “The only security of property that nature authorizes and reason sanctions is, the right a man has to enjoy the acquisitions which his talents and industry have acquired; and to bequeath them to whom he chooses. Happy would it be for the world if there were no other road to wealth or honour;” this is elaborating on how the world would be a better place only if men gained wealth and honor the right way. This idea of justice is also reflected in her evident support for the French Revolution, as she supports the uprising against the noble class by the common man. She critiques the class situation in Britain at the time by stating on page 12 “it is only the property of the rich that is secure; the man who lives by the sweat of his brow has no asylum from oppression.” Wollstonecraft also contrasts from Burke in that he is in support of tradition, whereas she believes rights should exist because they are reasonable and just, not merely a British tradition.
Another one of the claims that are made in this letter is that people are not born naturally good or evil; they merely end up doing evil because they are trying to find self-satisfaction (page 39) “It may be confidently asserted that no man chooses evil, because it is evil; he only mistakes it for happiness, the good he seeks And the desire of rectifying these mistakes, is the noble ambition of an enlightened understanding, the impulse of feelings that Philosophy invigorates.”. in this statement she also claims that an enlightened person is the one who looks for those mistakes and tries to correct their own actions. The evidence that she uses to back up this claim is that people act only on emotions without any forethought about consequences. She says that if people used reason in their decisions, everyone could be able to develop their skills, and this could allow people to be good. This is a generalized assumption about people in general. Wollstonecraft is clearly against the notion that power comes with wealth and social background.
One thing I have noticed while reading this pamphlet is that Wollstonecraft was jumping from one point to another on each topic to address her audience, which makes this reading more interesting. Also, it is evident that her writing style was sophisticated yet repetitive to address the upper class and the lower class who lacked higher education. Her overall thesis of Wollstonecraft’s writing is that everyone should have the same dignities because we are all gifted with reason. She believes that if everyone starts out equally in life, everyone will have an equal opportunity to reach their full potential and develop their own set of skills, which one cannot accomplish if they do not have the same opportunities. The opportunity which is taken away from them, merely because of their station in society.
Disussion Questions:
- Does it help Wollstonecraft to directly address Edmund Burke to pass her message to the reader?
- Based on her argument, reasoning is why we should have natural rights. what are your thoughts on this statement?
- If no man chooses evil; he only mistakes it for happiness according to Wollstonecraft, then why attack Burke with such violent words in public?
10 replies on “Mary Wollstonecraft, A Vindication of the Rights of Men [1790]”
Mary Wollstonecraft seems to exhibit philosophical reasoning beyond her years with this pamphlet. Her ideas reflect the values we have come to live by in a 21st-century society. Even other thinkers of the time that have had similar philosophies about the equality of man, like Thomas Jefferson for instance, still had limits to their reasoning of who equality applies to. They claim all men are created equal, but still do not believe in universal suffrage or the complete abolition of slavery. I think to say that her writing is feminist is a mistake. Her ideas demand the equality of all people, regardless of gender or socioeconomic status, rather than just claiming that women ought to have more rights. I think that had governments given her ideas more attention, we would have achieved many of the civil rights that we have now much earlier and with much less struggle and sacrifice.
Caleb Williams, by William Godwin, condemns aristocratic privilege and criticizes the oppressive English government of that time. The novel was controversial when it was published. in 1794. Mary Wollstonecraft wrote A Vindication of the Rights of Men in 1790. Wollstonecraft’s political pamphlet criticizes and shows disapproval of the aristocratic English government as William Godwin did in his novel and it also makes clear her idea of natural rights. She says that if humans are rational beings, and men and women are both humans, than all men and women must be allowed the same natural rights.
Farah mentioned Wollstonecraft’s argument that reasoning is why we should have natural rights. In the USA, natural rights have been likened to “life, liberty, and property.” In the Declaration of Independence it lists life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness as natural rights. In a perfect world all human beings would have the same natural rights and be treated equally from birth regardless of social, political, or economic status. I personally believe in the equality of all men and women and therefore must be treated as equals, and this is why I would argue we should all have the same natural rights.
As we have seen throughout history and present day, not everyone is given the same natural rights nor treated equally. Godwin and Wollstonecraft both wrote during the time period of the French Revolution and both showed their distaste of the English government and aristocratic society.
I think Farah makes a really interesting point when she said that her writing style is “repetitive to address the upper and lower class who lacked higher education.” Throughout the novel, the role of birth that plays in social class is significant. Despite her opinion that everyone is created equal, there is very much a divide in the different classes. Letters written in Sweden, Norway, and Denmark, is about her response to nature and society.She describes the monarch because incredibly corrupt and powerful.
Wollstonecraft notes that “It may be confidently asserted that no man chooses evil, because it is evil; he only mistakes it for happiness, the good he seeks.” People don’t choose to be good or evil, they just do what what makes them happy. This statement ties to William Godwin’s book Enquiry Concerning Political Justice. Godwin notes that people are not born good or evil – they are influenced and corrupted by society. Both Wollstonecraft and Godwin believe that people are born innocent – not good or bad.
Erica’s connection to Godwin brings a meaning to Wollstonecraft’s ideas in how both thinkers advocate for a reform in society that focuses on the idea that all people are created equally and start off as innocent. Having a social structure that realizes these two factors would likely have rectified many of the issues that Godwin and Wollstonecraft raise and build a society which is not as oppressive as those of Godwin and Wollstonecraft
“Reasoning” should be the dictator of natural rights, Wollstonecraft emphasizes the importance of our own decision making and our actions in self interest. As children and young adults we need to be treated equally for us to progress as individuals without the social stigma of acting like “man” or “woman.” Wollstonecraft explores both topics in “Vindication of the Rights of Men” and “Vindication of the Rights of Woman.” Wollstonecraft was also born during the industrial revolution attributing to the fact society was changing to a knowledge based society.
In A Vindication of the Rights of Men, Wollstonecraft uses reason to counter Burke’s argument and adds credibility to her arguments. Like Farah mentioned Wollstonecraft not only fights for women, but she believes that every person should have the opportunity to exercise their ability and no class system should interfere in reasoning. Wollstonecraft also claims that people act only on emotions without forethought about consequences. Being emotional doesn’t mean that feelings are not important. For her ethics, the goal is to bring feeling and thought into harmony. This is probably why she suggests people use reason in their decision, then everyone could be able to develop their skills.
As Farah mentioned, Wollstonecraft’s pamphlet was intended to be a refute of Burke’s writings on the French Revolution. Like William Godwin, Wollstonecraft’s liberal views were the opposite of Burke’s conservative views on society (no wonder Godwin and Wollstonecraft got married). When I read Burke’s Reflections, I thought his points were made sense and were very well thought-out. Wollstonecraft was able to create a compelling argument against Burke, and it’s interesting to see how two people from England can differ so much in perspective.
“Our penal laws punish with death the thief who steals a few pounds; but to take by violence, or trepan, a man, is no such heinous offence.–For who shall dare to complain of the venerable vestige of the law that rendered the life of a deer more sacred than that of a man? But it was the poor man with only his native dignity who was thus oppressed”. This quote stating that poor will be punished with no limits even if it’s a really small mistake, there is no one to defend or save them.
But if the same mistake is done by the rich or “higher class” will the be punished. I don’t think so because they treated poor people like they are not humans, they have no rights. so the fight was very important that everyone should be treated equally.
Edwin Burke’s piece on “the reflection on the revolution in France” is a book typical book in support of the ruling elite, while Mary Wollstonecraft’s pamphlet stated her support for an ideal society which does not discriminate and provides every member of the community similar right and opportunities.
Mary Wollstonecraft chose to critique Edwin Burke’s material because it contains a lot of arguments in support for hierarchy and unmerited opportunism for the elite class, and as such serves as a perfect material worth critiquing.
“The reflection on the revolution in France” supports aristocracy and high born into power, encourages the use of traditional methods in politicking and supports hierarchy, this is sensitive positions that contradict Mary’s liberal and classless believes. All criticism and analysis in both books are aimed at achieving a better and working environment through the adoption of different methods of political operations.