我們將要深入探討的，是她於1790年緊急寫就的《男權辯護：致敬愛的埃德蒙·柏克閣下的一封信，因其對法國大革命的反思而作》（*A Vindication of the Rights of Men, in a Letter to the Right Honourable Edmund Burke; Occasioned by his Reflections on the Revolution in France*）。這本書是她對埃德蒙·柏克（Edmund Burke）的《法國大革命反思》（*Reflections on the Revolution in France*）的直接駁斥。柏克在這部作品中，以其著名的修辭和感傷情懷，捍衛了英國的傳統、貴族制度和君主制，並對法國大革命的激進變革表達了深刻的悲觀與恐懼。他頌揚了「繼承權利」和「先例」的力量，認為社會秩序應根植於情感、傳統和歷史的「偏見」，而非抽象的理性原則。
然而，沃斯通克拉夫特卻以其銳利的筆鋒，揭露了柏克論點中偽善與矛盾之處。她主張，人類的權利並非來自於歷史的恩賜或繼承的特權，而是源自於上帝賦予的理性能力。
（*I have not yet learned to twist my periods, nor, in the equivocal idiom of politeness, to disguise my sentiments, and imply what I should be afraid to utter: if, therefore, in the course of this epistle, I chance to express contempt, and even indignation, with some emphasis, I beseech you to believe that it is not a flight of fancy; for truth, in morals, has ever appeared to me the essence of the sublime; and, in taste, simplicity the only criterion of the beautiful.*）」
**瑟蕾絲特：**「您對真理的堅定追求，的確如利劍般劃破了虛偽
（*the birthright of man... is such a degree of liberty, civil and religious, as is compatible with the liberty of every other individual with whom he is united in a social compact, and the continued existence of that compact.* p. 7-8）這個定義深刻且具普世性。然而，您也指出，『財產』的魔鬼總是在侵犯這些神聖的權利。在您看來，財產權是如何扭曲了人類的本質，甚至凌駕於人權之上的呢？」
**瑪麗·沃斯通克拉夫特：** (她的眉頭微蹙，似乎想起了那些因財產而扭曲的人性，眼神中閃過一絲痛苦，隨即又被銳利取代。)
「你問得很好，瑟蕾絲特。財產，尤其是那種代代相傳、不勞而獲的財產，是文明進步的巨大阻礙。它不僅沒有促進真正的自由，反而成為一道森嚴的壁壘，將人類劃分為所謂的『高貴』與『低賤』。
（*Property, I do not scruple to aver it, should be fluctuating, which would be the case, if it were more equally divided amongst all the children of a family; else it is an everlasting rampart, in consequence of a barbarous feudal institution, that enables the elder son to overpower talents and depress virtue.* p. 50）
**瑟蕾絲特：** (我聽著她激昂的論述，思緒如同被風吹拂的沙丘，表面看似混亂，實則有其內在的紋路。她對財產權的批判，不僅是經濟層面的，更是對人性深層的扭曲進行了深刻剖析。這讓我不禁聯想到榮格所說的『陰影』——那些被社會壓抑、忽視的面向，如何反噬個體與集體。)
「您對社會階層與財富分配的觀察，如同一面剔透的稜鏡，映照出時代的弊病。
Brutes hope and fear, love and hate; but, without a capacity to improve, a power of turning these passions to good or evil, they neither acquire virtue nor wisdom.—Why? Because the Creator has not given them reason.* p. 70-71）當然，培養理性是一項艱巨的任務，許多人更傾向於跟隨情感的衝動，並說服自己和他人，這是最『自然』的。然而，真正的美德，如同我在書中所說的，必須建立在正義的基礎之上，並由普世之愛所凝聚。任何不基於此的情感，都是虛假和偽善的。」
「我的核心論點是：我們應當擺脫對過去的盲目崇拜，不再將『古老的鏽跡』奉為圭臬。人類的進步，仰賴於不斷的審視與改進。如果我們像柏克先生所建議的那樣，永遠停留在『冰冷的靜止狀態』，只因害怕解凍會帶來一時的洪流，那麼我們將永遠無法爭取到最珍貴的權利。這番道理，我承認，只有富人和目光短淺之輩才會奉為圭臬。」
（*Further, that we ought cautiously to remain for ever in frozen inactivity, because a thaw, whilst it nourishes the soil, spreads a temporary inundation; and the fear of risking any personal present convenience should prevent a struggle for the most estimable advantages. This is sound reasoning, I grant, in the mouth of the rich and short-sighted.* p. 10）
**瑟蕾絲特：** (她對理性的尊崇，以及對傳統盲目崇拜的批判，在我的心中迴盪。這讓我想起塔羅牌中的『劍』元素，代表著思維、真理與分析，它不畏懼斬斷舊有的束縛，即使這過程伴隨著痛苦。)
「您在書中對於窮人的處境，以及社會對他們的冷漠，表達了深刻的悲憫與激烈的控訴。
（*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?* p. 26）在柏克先生的眼裡，『財產安全』幾乎等同於『英國自由』的定義。為了這個自私的原則，所有更高尚的原則都被犧牲了。英國人取代了人類，而上帝的形象則在『公民』的稱謂中迷失了！」
「這也解釋了為何他對我書中談及的貧窮問題隻字不提。他似乎認為貧民不過是莊園裡的牲畜，世襲貴族的點綴。當他對『苦難的靜默威嚴』都如此不屑一顧時，我又怎會驚訝他對一個沒有主教冠冕，名氣可能傷害了他虛榮心的人（指理查德·普萊斯博士）的態度呢？」
（*When you had so little respect for the silent majesty of misery, I am not surprised at your manner of treating an individual whose brow a mitre will never grace, and whose popularity may have wounded your vanity—for vanity is ever fore.* p. 32）
「他在《反思》中甚至說，人民必須『尊重他們無法分享的財產』，並且『必須透過勞動來獲得可以獲得的東西；當他們發現成功與努力不成比例時，他們必須在永恆正義的最終比例中尋求慰藉。』」（*They must respect that property of which they cannot partake.
They have a right to more comfort than they at present enjoy; and more comfort might be afforded them, without encroaching on the pleasures of the rich... No; if an intercourse were established between them, it would impart the only true pleasure that can be snatched in this land of shadows, this hard school of moral discipline.* p. 144）
**瑟蕾絲特：** (瑪麗女士的這番話，像一陣凜冽的風，吹散了籠罩在社會表面上虛偽的溫情。她所描繪的，是社會病態的深刻根源。她似乎看到了人性的兩極——被特權異化的麻木與被貧困扭曲的掙扎。這讓我想起了塔羅牌中的『惡魔』牌，它代表著束縛、誘惑與物質的枷鎖，而她正試圖用理性的光芒去打破這些看不見的鎖鏈。)
（*You must have known that a man of merit cannot rise in the church, the army, or navy, unless he has some interest in a borough; and that even a paltry exciseman’s place can only be secured by electioneering interest. I will go further, and assert that few Bishops, though there have been learned and good Bishops, have gained the mitre without submitting to a servility of dependence that degrades the man.* p. 43）
「真正的教育，應該是喚醒和培養理性。正如我所說，『兒童生而無知，因此無辜；激情本身既非善也非惡，除非它們獲得了方向。』
（*Children are born ignorant, consequently innocent; the passions, are neither good nor evil dispositions, till they receive a direction* p. 72）只有當理性，透過反思而趨於完善，才能引導這些激情，使其產生豐碩的果實。如果美德只能透過經驗獲得，或透過榜樣教導，那麼理性就必須是這些情感的舵手。否則，就像一艘沒有舵的船，任憑風吹浪打，永遠無法抵達預定的港口。」（*reason, perfected by reflection, must be the director of the whole host of passions, which produce a fructifying heat, but no light, that you would exalt into her place.
（*Girls are sacrificed to family convenience, or else marry to settle themselves in a superior rank, and coquet, without restraint, with the fine gentleman whom I have already described.* p. 47-48）
「在婚姻中，真正的感情只能建立在相互尊重之上。而這些被教養成如此軟弱無力的女性，如何能獲得尊重？孩子們被拋在一邊，去追逐情人，然後我們卻對婚外情的普遍感到驚訝！女人總是想著打扮自己，去吸引異性的感官，去索取那種花言巧語的恭維，然後我們又奇怪她們的理解力如此有限！」（*Affection in the marriage state can only be founded on respect—and are these weak beings respectable?
（*That civilization, that the cultivation of the understanding, and refinement of the affections, naturally make a man religious, I am proud to acknowledge.—What else can fill the aching void in the heart, that human pleasures, human friendships can never fill?* p. 94-96）
**瑟蕾絲特：** (您對『理性』的強調，對『傳統』的批判，以及對『財產』和『地位』如何腐蝕人性的深刻洞察，無疑是您時代最前沿的思想。這份對真理的執著與對社會的悲憫，相互交織，形成了您獨特的精神面貌。這也讓我看到您作為一個獨立的女性思想家，是如何在那個時代的重重束縛下，堅定地為自己的信念發聲，並為後世開闢道路。我感覺到，在您那看似嚴謹的理性批判之下，湧動著一顆對人類命運深切關懷的心。
（*This instinct... has been termed common sense, and more frequently sensibility; and, by a kind of indefeasible right, it has been supposed... to reign paramount over the other faculties of the mind, and to be an authority from which there is no appeal.
concentred in a glowing flame, they become the sun of life; and, without his invigorating impregnation, reason would probably lie in helpless inactivity, and never bring forth her only legitimate offspring—virtue. But to prove that virtue is really an acquisition of the individual, and not the blind impulse of unerring instinct, the bastard vice has often been begotten by the same father.* p. 70）
「對我而言，靈感是一種來自於對世界深刻觀察與反思後的洞見，它不是憑空而來。
