From my examination of Astell’s philosophical works, I am compelled to argue that Astell definitely deserves a place on this class’s syllabus. Firstly, the sheer variety of philosophical topics she delves into make her a valuable author to include in any philosophy class. She has a number of works which fit into the syllabus aims and objectives, such as exploring sources of knowledge, mind-body metaphysics, and the existence and significance of God. As such, she does effectively fit the criteria of being considered for a place on the syllabus. She also stands out from other philosophers because she regularly related her ideas from different topics to her overarching views on morality; doing this allowed her to derive instructions on how to live a virtuous life. In particular, she connected her views on mind-body metaphysics, theology, and gender equality together in order to put together compelling arguments for the right of women to receive a high-quality education in A Serious Proposal to the Ladies. The strongest reason for her to be included on the syllabus is the fact that she was a pioneering figure in feminist theory, as one of the first English philosophers to publish her feminist ideas and garner popular attention and even support for her arguments. In fact, Astell was such an influential figure in this field that she inspired a number of other female writers, such as Lady Mary Wortley Montagu and Sarah Chapone, which is notable as it shows that she contributed towards the representation of female writers in the typically male-dominated intellectual sphere. These facts establish that Astell was a leader philosopher of her time, and should be recognized as such.
I believe that Astell should replace Sor Juana Inés de la Cruz on the syllabus, as Sor Juana does not match up to Astell’s philosophical and intellectual rigor when comparing their works on women’s education. Astell provides a much more comprehensive, detailed, and sound argument for womens’ education than the one proposed by Sor Juana, whose Respuesta de la poetisa a la muy ilustre Sor Filotea de la Cruz currently has a place in the syllabus. Astell provides more concrete reasoning for her argument that women should have a right to education and are actually intellectually equal to men; she claims that such an education is a necessity for all women, as it is only through education that women can learn how to be virtuous and let go of the vices which they have been conditioned to give importance to. Essentially, Astell argues that women must be educated in order to live a virtuous life devoted to God, and ensure the salvation of their souls after their deaths. Sor Juana puts forward a weaker argument, claiming that since she herself could not suppress her curiosity and passion for studying, it must be that this trait was instilled in her by God, who must thus approve of her seeking an education. Sor Juana also mainly argues that nuns should pursue the study of theology so that they can properly understand and interpret religious texts and administer religious teachings to others. She is not inclusive of all women in her argument, as Astell is. Her line of reasoning that leads her to the conclusion that God approves of women being educated is also not as strong as Astell’s reasoning, as it only leads people to accept that women might have a right to study, but does not explain why they should act on this right and actually pursue an education. Astell makes a much more convincing and urgent argument in her works, referring to a variety of philosophical topics while doing so.
As such, Astell’s Serious Proposal would be a much more worthwhile text to study in this class as compared to Sor Juana’s works, because it is inclusive of all women in society, making it much more relatable to the reader. Furthermore, there is a larger scope for discussion due to the number of different philosophical topics Astell weaves into her argument on this social injustice, which also serve to strengthen her argument. Astell’s logic is more compelling than Sor Juana’s, because she is able to defend her argument with a number of philosophical theories and ideas, beyond just her own anecdotal experience and narrow logic as Sor Juana does.
On the other hand, it could be argued that Astell does not actually deserve a place on the syllabus. This can be attributed to a few factors, such as the representation of her conservative political views in her writing, which often limit the scope of her ideas and weaken her arguments. Particularly in her feminist works, Astell’s conservative caveats seem quite counterproductive to the overall point of gender equality which she tries to advance. As such, it can be difficult to gauge where exactly she stands, making it difficult for potential students to effectively understand her writing and arguments. In addition, due to the fact that she often ties a number of different philosophical topics together in her works, this can serve to convolute her argument and make it confusing to students. However, I still maintain that these factors should not be deterrents to giving Astell a place on the syllabus. The influence of her conservative political views in her works would only serve to add an educational aspect to the syllabus, as it would show how philosophers draw on their personal beliefs and work them into their arguments in a way that they are still intellectually coherent. This is practiced by a number of different philosophers and is often a distinguishing characteristic of their philosophical ideas, so it would not make sense to exclude Astell based on this. As for her potentially convoluted arguments, Astell actually takes care to prevent this from happening, making it relatively easy and intuitive to follow her line of reasoning. She constructs each argument which draws on a number of philosophical ideas in a way where the different premises are clearly linked to each other, thus allowing the overall argument to flow nicely. This would allow students to understand her complex philosophical ideas much more easily than they would be able to for a number of contemporaries.
To conclude, I affirm that Astell’s unique focus on a critical social issue – women’s rights and gender equality – as well as the clarity and multifaceted nature of her arguments make her the strongest contender for a place on next year’s syllabus. Adding Astell to the syllabus would only enhance students’ understanding of the issues and philosophical ideas she discusses, and allow them to more easily understand these complex topics and develop an appreciation for them. Astell’s famous, extensive body of work in feminist theory and her well-respected works in theology and other philosophical topics would fit perfectly into the syllabus, particularly with regards to feminist theory. As one of the leading philosophers and pioneers in this field, it would only make sense to include Astell in a course that studies philosophers and topics of the 17th century.
Works Cited
Shaw, Will. “Astell (1666-1731).” Project Vox, Duke University Libraries, projectvox.org/astell-1666-1731/.
Peterman, Alison. “Sor Juana Inés de la Cruz”. PHIL 202, University of Rochester. Microsoft PowerPoint presentation.
home
introduction
biography
philosophical expansion
comparison with John Locke
closing arguments
bibliography