Not Just a Philosophy

Like several others have already said, I am a devoted fan of Mary Wollstonecraft, and it's not just because she was an early supporter of female education. I respect and admire her philosophy because it is a practical one. At one point in our reading, she writes "I do not mean to insinuate, that either sex should be so lost in abstract reflections or distant views, as to forget the affections and duties that lie before them," and when reading through her Vindication, it's apparent that Wollstonecraft herself was not lost in these (502). For her, philosophy was a way of creating a change. Her theories and ideas are all about developing an argument that will change the way people live, and there is a very practical and possible application of her ideas.
Now contrast this to some of the other thinkers we've recently been exposed to. No offensive to figures like Kant and Plato, but really, how do there theories really change the way we live? (To the philosophy majors in this class, please don't beat me up). I understand that they are incredibly significant thinkers, and the way we view the world has been shaped by their ideas, but what about the way we live? Plato's notion that everything here is a shadow doesn't change the fact that we are still living here, and we still have to function around these said shadows. And even if I acknowledge that Kant is correct, and everything is subjective, what does that do? Does my viewing a landscape, knowing I'm seeing it subjectively only, have any tangible influence on my life? I don't know. All I know is that while these theorists might tell me what to think of a tree, they don't tell me what to do with it. And whether I see the tree as a shadow of a higher Form or as an image that has been convoluted by my own brain, the fact still remains the tree is indeed there, and I have to figure out what I want to do about that. Just pondering its tree-ness does nothing but leave me standing there staring at a plant.
Now, I'm not saying Kant and Plato are worthless, and that there's no point in reading them. Far from it. Wollstonecraft herself talks about how women "dwell on effects, and modifications, without tracing them back to causes" and philosophy gives us a way to study those causes (500). And pondering what a tree really is can certainly lead to a better understanding of it and of nature in general. And Wollstonecraft advocates a thorough education of the mind, which would no doubt include figures such as Plato and Aristotle, but she understands that there is still the living aspect, and that all the mere thinking in the world doesn't change anything. And especially in philosophy, and even sometimes in literary studies, it's easy to get caught up in an idea and the "abstract reflections and distant views" and entirely forget about life in general. Hence why I appreciate Wollstonecraft's work so much, and its theories which are grounded in a very real aspect of life. Wollstonecraft isn't just trying to change the way people think; she wants to change the way they live.