Hegel and Wollstonecraft: What is Reason?

Coming to the end of our first section of 503 on the Age of the Enlightenment, it would seem high time to finally gain a decent understanding of the term: “reason”. Both Wollstonecraft and Hegel begin their texts with the question of what separates man from “brute creation” (Wollstonecraft 11) or “animals” (Hegel 10). Wollstonecraft clearly distinguishes this as Reason. In answering this question, Hegel generalizes by determining the distinction as lying in man’s ability to think. Later in the introduction, he reveals Reason to be a simple thought. Putting two and two together, it would seem that both authors make the assumption that Reason is what distinguishes man from animal, and that their respective arguments will be based on this assumption. But what does this mean?

In his essay defining Enlightenment, he describes this as a process towards becoming a free thinker, towards gaining the courage to use one’s own understanding. Reason, mentioned once in the essay, is to be used by free men in all matters of conscience. What this reason is, however, is left unexplained.

In his Introduction to the Philosophy of History, Hegel presents two understandings of the term, which together, provide a perhaps more holistic understanding of the term. The ancients, the Greek Anaxagoras specifically, used the term reason (nous) to describe the immutable laws in nature, like gravity, which are free from the “mind”, from conscious thought. For example, neither the earth nor the falling apple are conscious of the force that brings them together, but the force exists. Nature is the “organic whole brought forth by Reason” (Hegel 15). Whereas Reason in nature is unknowing, the second and complementary understanding of reason is “knowing” reason (knowing in the sense of conscious). In his own terms (in translation), Hegel defines this second understanding of Reason as “Thought, quite freely determining itself” (16).

Wollstonecraft’s definition of Reason pairs well with Hegel’s. As far as I gathered from her text (which was, at times, a bit long) Wollstonecraft gives Reason the following definition: “the simple power of improvement; or, more properly speaking, of discerning truth” (53). Coupling this definition with Hegel’s adds a vital aspect of freedom of thought to Reason. While freedom of thought is not explicitly stated in her definition of Reason, she maintains the importance of independence throughout her text. To return to Kant, his essay argues for similar independence of thought as a means for releasing man from his own immaturity.

Reason, then, is the ability to freely think in order to discern truth for the self, and yet it’s more complicated than simple independence: the independent thinker in search of his (or her) own understanding of truth must also be an integrated member of society. Kant’s argument assumes this societal obligation in his essay, and the importance of this can be deduced from Hegel’s topic of study. History is not the study of just one individual, but of the deeds of many individuals within their respective cultures. Wollstonecraft is much more explicit regarding the importance of society. While an individual must be an independent thinker and self-sufficient, they require exposure to the “opinions and manners of the society they live in” (20). W. further elaborates on this point in her chapter on National Education, arguing that in order to excite children to think for themselves, they must needs by mixed together with a number of other children in the joint pursuit of the same objects (163).

I hope you’ll forgive me using this Blog post as an opportunity to work this understanding of Reason out for myself; I wanted a takeaway from all that we’ve read. Concluding with Wollstonecraft’s publication was a real treat, not least for the pleasure of watching her take Rousseau to task for being publically obtuse about women. More than this, her thoughts on education are truly profound and find their echoes in the 20^th century with Lev Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory, that (wo)man is shaped by the society in which they live. Being able to understand this is vital for interacting with other cultures and overcoming prejudices. People are products of their own cultures, both judger and judgee. Understanding this reduces differences not to questions of who’s right and who’s wrong, but to investigations of how the values of each culture differ. I’d like to keep this in mind as I present the German culture to my students, to give them with the opportunity to question their own socialization in a comparison of cultures as equals. (I wish I could communicate that better). Further, I’m going to make it my intention with every class I teach, to help my students on their way to becoming independent thinkers pursuing knowledge, rather than simply asking questions.

Hegel, G.W.F. Introduction to The Philosophy of History. Trans. Leo Rauch. Indianapolis: Hackett, 1988.

Wollstonecraft, Mary. A Vindication of the Rights of Woman. Mineola: Dover Publications, Inc., 1996.