Dorothea Erxleben was the first woman in Germany to become a doctor of medicine and was also the author of a feminist treatise advocating the admission of women to schools and universities.
Educated and trained by her father who was a local doctor, Erxleben lamented the fact that she was unable to gain a formal qualification to practice medicine on the simple basis that she was a woman. Frustrated she wrote down her thoughts on the exclusion of women from schools and universities which was then subsequently published as a book in 1742. Despite calls of 'quackery' Erxleben went on to pass all of her exams and received her doctorate in medicine becoming the first female medical doctor in theGerman states. She continued to practise medicine until her death in 1762.
Her work of 1742 is one of the most significant pieces of Enlightenment feminist theory, yet it has been surprisingly neglected. Erxleben criticizes the standard prejudices, faulty arguments, and social impediments that exclude women from schooling in general and academic studies in particular. She does so with steadfast appeal to logic, standards of empirical evidence, and the generally shared values of the times, aiming to clear up prejudices with rational argument.
Warnock’s public career as a professional educationalist and ethical consultant was also reflected in the academic areas where her thought had most impact. Her abiding educational concern to communicate the value and purposes of philosophy to a wider public was also expressed in her extensive published output on the history of philosophy, especially on phenomenology and existentialism. Within the area of applied ethics, Warnock was at the very forefront of thought of how recent advances in modern medicine—such as in vitro fertilization and embryo research—might be normatively addressed with a view to the framing of public policy and legislation. She also made notable contributions to the philosophical study of ethics, aesthetics and imagination.
Warnock’s efforts to apply her ideas to the wider problems of policy and practice mark her out as a singular figure in contemporary philosophy. It is hard to think of any others who have similarly combined extraordinary academic fertility with a no less extraordinary extra-academic public and professional profile.
It was to be in the 1860s and 1870s that Ruskin began to focus directly on contemporary social and economic issues, and to formulate a distinctive political economy in opposition to that purveyed by J.S. Mill and the classical school.
Ruskin’s contributions to political economy were offered at a time when market capitalism had acquired a hegemonic status, delivering substantial and rapid economic progress. But Ruskin refused to accept the measures of economic success purveyed by contemporary economic orthodoxy. For Ruskin, success lay not in maximizing the rate of economic growth or amassing material possessions. It was about ‘the producing of as many as possible, full-breathed, bright-eyed and happy-hearted human creatures’.
In articulating such notions, in highlighting the manner in which Victorian Britain had failed, Ruskin’s work served to remind contemporaries of the great moral, social and aesthetic price that had been paid for what passed for economic progress.