Bodily strength from being the distinction of heroes is now sunk into such unmerited contempt that men, as well as women, seem to think it unnecessary: the latter, as it takes from their feminine graces, and from that lovely weakness the source of their undue power; and the former, because it appears inimical to the character of a gentleman.

That they have both by departing from one extreme run into another, may easily be proved; but first it may be proper to observe, that a vulgar error has obtained a degree of credit, which has given force to a false conclusion, in which an effect has been mistaken for a cause.

People of genius have, very frequently, impaired their constitutions by study or careless inattention to their health, and the violence of their passions bearing a proportion to the vigour of their intellects, the sword's destroying the scabbard has become almost proverbial, and superficial observers have inferred from thence, that men of genius have commonly weak, or, to use a more fashionable phrase, delicate constitutions. Yet the contrary, I believe, will appear to be the fact; for, on diligent inquiry, I find that strength of mind has, in most cases, been accompanied by superior strength of body, – natural soundness of constitution, – not that robust tone of nerves and vigour of muscles, which arise from bodily labour, when the mind is quiescent, or only directs the hands.

The good effects resulting from attention to private education will ever be very confined, and the parent who really puts his own hand to the plow, will always, in some degree, be disappointed, till education becomes a grand national concern. A man cannot retire into a desert with his child, and if he did he could not bring himself back to childhood, and become the proper friend and play-fellow of an infant or youth. And when children are confined to the society of men and women, they very soon acquire that kind of premature manhood which stops the growth of every vigorous power of mind or body. In order to open their faculties they should be excited to think for themselves; and this can only be done by mixing a number of children together, and making them jointly pursue the same objects.

A child very soon contracts a benumbing indolence of mind, which he has seldom sufficient vigour afterwards to shake off, when he only asks a question instead of seeking for information, and then relies implicitly on the answer he receives. With his equals in age this could never be the case, and the subjects of inquiry, though they might be influenced, would not be entirely under the direction of men, who frequently damp, if not destroy, abilities, by bringing them forward too hastily: and too hastily they will infallibly be brought forward, if the child be confined to the society of a man, however sagacious that man may be.

It has long since occurred to me that advice respecting behaviour, and all the various modes of preserving a good reputation, which have been so strenuously inculcated on the female world, were specious poisons, that incrusting morality eat away the substance. And, that this measuring of shadows produced a false calculation, because their length depends so much on the height of the sun, and other adventitious circumstances.

Whence arises the easy fallacious behaviour of a courtier? From his situation, undoubtedly: for standing in need of dependents, he is obliged to learn the art of denying without giving offence, and, of evasively feeding hope with the chameleon's food: thus does politeness sport with truth, and eating away the sincerity and humanity natural to man, produce the fine gentleman.

Women likewise acquire, from a supposed necessity, an equally artificial mode of behaviour. Yet truth is not with impunity to be sported with, for the practised dissembler, at last, become the dupe of his own arts, loses that sagacity, which has been justly termed common sense; namely, a quick perception of common truths: which are constantly received as such by the unsophisticated mind, though it might not have had sufficient energy to discover them itself, when obscured by local prejudices. The greater number of people take their opinions on trust to avoid the trouble of exercising their own minds, and these indolent beings naturally adhere to the letter, rather than the spirit of a law, divine or human.

Educated in the enervating style recommended by the writers on whom I have been animadverting; and not having a chance, from their subordinate state of society, to recover their lost ground, is it surprising that women every where appear a defect in nature? Is it surprising, when we consider what a determinate effect an early association of ideas has on the character, that they neglect their understandings, and turn all their attention to their persons?

The great advantages which naturally result from storing the mind with knowledge, are obvious from the following considerations. The association of our ideas is either habitual or instantaneous; and the latter mode seems rather to depend on the original temperature of the mind than on the will. When the ideas, and matters of fact, are once taken in, they lie by for use, till some fortuitous circumstance makes the information dart into the mind with illustrative force, that has been received at very different periods of our lives. Like the lightning's flash are many recollections; one idea assimilating and explaining another, with astonishing rapidity. I do not now allude to that quick perception of truth, which is so intuitive that it baffles research, and makes us at a loss to determine whether it is reminiscence or ratiocination, lost sight of in its celerity, that opens the dark cloud. Over those instantaneous associations we have little power; for when the mind is once enlarged by excursive flights, or profound reflection, the raw materials will, in some degree, arrange themselves.

Judging from the texts that follow, and others of her works, Mary Wollstonecraft disapproved of many things and a good number of people. She denounced astrology, trivial pursuits, inferior books, especially novels – though she did believe that it was better to read books of this kind than not to read at all – a standing army, monarchical rule, financial speculators, primogeniture, the entry of men into what were traditionally female occupations – like midwifery – the cult of sensibility, the practice of sending infants to be suckled by wet-nurses, pre-arranged marriages, conversations about fashion, and the maltreatment of animals. Some of these, as well as others of her criticisms, such as her condemnation of slavery, are not altogether surprising coming as they do from the pen of an Enlightenment thinker. Others are less predictable. Amongst these are topics which one might not have expected her to address at all, let alone feel strongly about. An instance of this is her finding physical intimacy between girls at boarding school offensive. On the other hand, several of her objections might seem familiar kinds of prejudice. She could not countenance effeminacy in men, for example; and although she might have admitted of some exceptions, she cared very little for Catholics and was suspicious of clergymen, generally speaking. Besides members of royal dynasties, she also spoke ill of aristocrats, courtiers, courtesans, and often also of servants and the French.

Do you want to prevent crimes? Then see to it that enlightenment and freedom go hand in hand. The evils which arise from knowledge are in inverse proportion to its diffusion, and the benefits are in direct proportion. A daring impostor, who is always an uncommon man, wins the adoration of an ignorant people and the jeers of an enlightened one. By facilitating the making of comparisons and multiplying the points of view, knowledge counterposes different sentiments, which modify each other reciprocally, a process that becomes all the easier as we learn to anticipate the same views and the same objections in others. In the face of widespread enlightenment within a nation, foul-mouthed ignorance is silenced and the authority which has no defences in reason trembles. Only the vigour of the laws remains unshaken. For there is no enlightened man who does not love the public, clear and useful compacts that guarantee the common security, comparing that small portion of useless freedom that he has sacrificed with the sum of the freedoms sacrificed by others who, without the laws, could become conspirators against him. Looking upon a well-framed code of laws and finding that he has lost nothing but the sorry freedom to do harm to others, any sensitive soul will be compelled to bless the throne and its occupant.

The first consequence of these principles is that laws alone can decree punishments for crimes, and that this authority resides only with the legislator, who represents the whole of society united by the social contract. No magistrate (who is a member of society) can justly establish of his own accord any punishment for any member of the same society. A punishment which exceeds the limit laid down by law is the just punishment with another punishment superadded. Therefore, a magistrate may not, on any pretext of zeal or concern for the public good whatsoever, increase the punishment laid down by law for a miscreant citizen.

The second consequence is that whilst every individual is bound to society, society is likewise bound to every individual member of it by a pact which, by its very nature, places obligations on both parties. {These obligations, which descend from the palace to the hovel, bind equally the most elevated and the humblest of men, mean nothing other than that it is in the interests of all that the pacts useful to the greatest number be observed. Violation by even one man begins to legitimate anarchy.} The sovereign, as the representative of society, may only frame laws in general terms which are binding on all members. He may not rule on whether an individual has violated the social pact, because that would divide the nation into two parts: one, represented by the sovereign, who asserts the violation of the contract, and the other, represented by the accused, who denies it.

Another means of preventing crimes is to reward virtue. I notice that the laws of all nations today are totally silent on this matter. If the prizes given by academies to the discoverers of useful truths have increased both knowledge and the number of good books, why should not prizes distributed by the beneficent hand of the sovereign likewise increase the number of virtuous actions? In the hands of the wise distributor, the coin of honour will prove a lasting investment.

Allow me, sir, to address you with the formulae in common use in your language, which are the most convenient, the simplest, the truest and so the most worthy of a philosopher such as you. Allow me also to make use of a copyist, the letter which I wrote you being barely legible. The charming letter you so kindly wrote to me excited in me feelings of the deepest respect, the greatest regard and the liveliest friendship. I cannot know how to express to you how honoured I felt on hearing my work had been translated into your language – the language of the nation that enlightens and instructs all Europe. I myself owe everything to French books. They developed in my soul the sentiments of humanity which had been stifled by eight years of fanatical and servile education. I already regard your name with respect because of the excellent articles you contributed to that immortal work, the Encyclopaedia; and it was the pleasantest surprise possible for me to discover that a scholar of your reputation had condescended to translate my book. I thank you with all my heart for the gift you have made me with your excellent translation and with your thoughtfulness in satisfying my curiosity so promptly. I have read it with inexpressible pleasure, and found that you have improved on the original.

The reader of these pages will observe that I have said nothing about a particular sort of crime which once covered Europe with human blood and raised those sorry pyres whose flames were fed with the bodies of living men. These were times when the blind mob enjoyed the pleasing spectacle and sweet harmony of hearing muffled and chaotic groans issuing from swirling black smoke – smoke of human limbs, together with the cracking of charring bones and the frying of still-quivering organs. But reasonable men will see that neither the place, the time nor the present subject-matter allow me to discuss the nature of such a crime. It would take too long, and would take me too far from my topic to show, the example of many countries notwithstanding, how necessary perfect uniformity of thought ought to be in a state; how opinions, which differ only on a few very subtle and obscure points no human intelligence can grasp, can nevertheless overthrow the public good if one view is not preferred by authority to another; and how the nature of opinion is such that, whilst some opinions are clarified by being bandied and debated so that the true rise to the top and the false sink into oblivion, others, being insecure for all the steadfastness with which they are held, need to be arrayed in authority and power.

There is a contradiction between the laws and the natural sentiments of men in the matter of the oaths which a criminal is required to take so as to make him truthful when he has the greatest interest in being deceitful. As if a man could swear himself into the duty of promoting his own destruction, and religion did not fall silent in most men when their interests were speaking. The experience of every century shows that men have abused religion, that precious gift from Heaven, more than anything. And why should knaves respect religion if the men who are considered wisest have often defiled it? For most men, the motives which religion opposes to the cries of fear and love of life, are too weak because too remote from the senses. The affairs of Heaven are conducted according to laws altogether different from those that govern the affairs of men. Why should the former be confused with the latter? And why should a man be put in the terrible dilemma of being either lost to God or conniving at his own ruin? The law which demands such an oath requires one to be either a bad Christian or a martyr. Oaths slowly become a mere formality, thereby sapping the strength of religious feelings which, in most men, are the sole pledges of virtue. Experience has shown how useless oaths are.