Astell and the feminist question

“Altho’ it has been said by Men of more Wit than Wisdom , and perhaps of more malice than either, that Women are naturally incapable of acting Prudently, or that they are necessarily determined to folly, I must by no means grant it ; that Hypothesis would render my endeavours impertinent, for then it would be in vain to advise the one, or endeavour the Reformation of the other. Besides, there are Examples in all Ages, which sufficiently confute the Ignorance and Malice of this Affertion.”

The feminist question for Mary Astell really boils down to a nature/nurture debate. The injustice Astell experiences in society is based off descriptive propositions, about what a woman's place is in society, and how they are viewed and treated. The problem first noted is that if it is in a woman's nature to act and be treated that way, there might not be a reason for change. However if it was a case of nurture, the situation for all women could be improved upon, as the possibility of change then exists. Another important question is whether it must stay a debate, or that it could be solved or proven via some method. As I mentioned, it is a descriptive statement that Astell makes, whereafter she proceeds to a normative statement. There lays a gap between these statements however as information about how things are does not imply or include how things should be.

So one must look for other reasons or grounds to support a normative claim. Astell uses her Cartesian metaphysics, especially dualism, to divide body and mind. Whereas females bodies inarguably differ (in general) from male bodies, she claims that minds do not. This is based off religious ideas, as the mind for Astell is closest to being divine, not the body. These arguments she uses to claim that women need the same opportunities as men to develop their mental capacities.

I am not religiously engaged, and thus do not find Astell’s arguments very convincing, whilst I obviously support her aim. It is not clear to me how one would go about finding grounds for these normative claims, but there are some possibilities. As Astell mentions in the quote, a historical or inter-cultural perspective could shed light on if the differences between men and women in 17th century England are natural (if this occurs everywhere), or cultural (if it is not overwhelmingly common). Other grounds could be metaphysical, or found in the natural sciences. Mainly it is a way in which a society would like to have their social landscape shaped, and how people treat each other.