Essays On Education And Kindred Subjects (Fiscle Part- 11) by Herbert Spencer (best fiction novels to read TXT) 📕

     Like That Harlequin Who Came On To The   Stage With A Bundle Of

     Papers Under Each Arm, And Answered To The   Inquiry, What He Had

     Under His Right Arm, 'Orders,' And To What He Had Under His Left

     Arm, 'Counter-Orders.' But The   Mother Might Be Much Better Compared

     To A Giant Briareus, Who Had A Hundred Arms, And A Bundle Of    Papers

     Under Each."

This State Of    Things Is Not To Be Readily Changed. Generations Must

Pass Before A Great Amelioration Of    It Can Be Expected. Like Political

Constitutions, Educational Systems Are Not Made, But Grow; And Within

Brief Periods Growth Is Insensible. Slow, However, As Must Be Any

Improvement, Even That Improvement Implies The   Use Of    Means; And Among

The Means Is Discussion. 

We Are Not Among Those Who Believe In Lord Palmerston's Dogma, That "All

Children Are Born Good." On The   Whole, The   Opposite Dogma, Untenable As

It Is, Seems To Us Less Wide Of    The   Truth. Nor Do We Agree With Those

Who Think That, By Skilful Discipline, Children May Be Made Altogether

What They Should Be. Contrariwise, We Are Satisfied That Though

Imperfections Of    Nature May Be Diminished By Wise Management, They

Cannot Be Removed By It. The   Notion That An Ideal Humanity Might Be

Forthwith Produced By A Perfect System Of    Education, Is Near Akin To

That Implied In The   Poems Of    Shelley, That Would Mankind Give Up Their

Old Institutions And Prejudices, All The   Evils In The   World Would At

Once Disappear: Neither Notion Being Acceptable To Such As Have

Dispassionately Studied Human Affairs.

Nevertheless, We May Fitly Sympathise With Those Who Entertain These Too

Sanguine Hopes. Enthusiasm, Pushed Even To Fanaticism, Is A Useful

Motive-Power--Perhaps An Indispensable One. It Is Clear That The   Ardent

Politician Would Never Undergo The   Labours And Make The   Sacrifices He

Does, Did He Not Believe That The   Reform He Fights For Is The   One Thing

Needful. But For His Conviction That Drunkenness Is The   Root Of    All

Social Evils, The   Teetotaler Would Agitate Far Less Energetically. In

Philanthropy, As In Other Things, Great Advantage Results From Division

Of Labour; And That There May Be Division Of    Labour, Each Class Of

Philanthropists Must Be More Or Less Subordinated To Its Function--Must

Have An Exaggerated Faith In Its Work. Hence, Of    Those Who Regard

Education, Intellectual Or Moral, As The   Panacea, We May Say That Their

Undue Expectations Are Not Without Use; And That Perhaps It Is Part Of

The Beneficent Order Of    Things That Their Confidence Cannot Be Shaken.

Even Were It True, However, That By Some Possible System Of    Moral

Control, Children Could Be Moulded Into The   Desired Form; And Even Could

Every Parent Be Indoctrinated With This System, We Should Still Be Far

From Achieving The   Object In View. It Is Forgotten That The   Carrying Out

Of Any Such System Presupposes, On The   Part Of    Adults, A Degree Of

Intelligence, Of    Goodness, Of    Self-Control, Possessed By No One. The

Error Made By Those Who Discuss Questions Of    Domestic Discipline, Lies

In Ascribing All The   Faults And Difficulties To The   Children, And None

To The   Parents. The   Current Assumption Respecting Family Government, As

Respecting National Government, Is, That The   Virtues Are With The   Rulers

And The   Vices With The   Ruled. Judging By Educational Theories, Men And

Women Are Entirely Transfigured In Their Relations To Offspring. The

Citizens We Do Business With, The   People We Meet In The   World, We Know

To Be Very Imperfect Creatures. In The   Daily Scandals, In The   Quarrels

Of Friends, In Bankruptcy Disclosures, In Lawsuits, In Police Reports,

We Have Constantly Thrust Before Us The   Pervading Selfishness,

Dishonesty, Brutality. Yet When We Criticise Nursery-Management And

Canvass The   Misbehaviour Of    Juveniles, We Habitually Take For Granted

That These Culpable Persons Are Free From Moral Delinquency In The

Treatment Of    Their Boys And Girls! So Far Is This From The   Truth, That

We Do Not Hesitate To Blame Parental Misconduct For A Great Part Of    The

Domestic Disorder Commonly Ascribed To The   Perversity Of    Children. We Do

Not Assert This Of    The   More Sympathetic And Self-Restrained, Among Whom

We Hope Most Of    Our Readers May Be Classed; But We Assert It Of    The

Mass. What Kind Of    Moral Culture Is To Be Expected From A Mother Who,

Time After Time, Angrily Shakes Her Infant Because It Will Not Suck;

Which We Once Saw A Mother Do? How Much Sense Of    Justice Is Likely To Be

Instilled By A Father Who, On Having His Attention Drawn By A Scream To

The Fact That His Child's Finger Is Jammed Between The   Window-Sash And

Sill, Begins To Beat The   Child Instead Of    Releasing It? Yet That There

Are Such Fathers Is Testified To Us By An Eye-Witness. Or, To Take A

Still Stronger Case, Also Vouched For By Direct Testimony--What Are The

Educational Prospects Of    The   Boy Who, On Being Taken Home With A

Dislocated Thigh, Is Saluted With A Castigation? It Is True That These

Are Extreme Instances--Instances Exhibiting In Human Beings That Blind

Instinct Which Impels Brutes To Destroy The   Weakly And Injured Of    Their

Own Race. But Extreme Though They Are, They Typify Feelings And Conduct

Daily Observable In Many Families. Who Has Not Repeatedly Seen A Child

Slapped By Nurse Or Parent For A Fretfulness Probably Resulting From

Bodily Derangement? Who, When Watching A Mother Snatch Up A Fallen

Little One, Has Not Often Traced, Both In The   Rough Manner And In The

Sharply-Uttered Exclamation--"You Stupid Little Thing!"--An Irascibility

Foretelling Endless Future Squabbles? Is There Not In The   Harsh Tones In

Which A Father Bids His Children Be Quiet, Evidence Of    A Deficient

Fellow-Feeling With Them? Are Not The   Constant, And Often Quite

Needless, Thwartings That The   Young Experience--The Injunctions To Sit

Still, Which An Active Child Cannot Obey Without Suffering Great Nervous

Irritation, The   Commands Not To Look Out Of    The   Window When Travelling

By Railway, Which On A Child Of    Any Intelligence Entails Serious

Deprivation--Are Not These Thwartings, We Ask, Signs Of    A Terrible Lack

Of Sympathy? The   Truth Is, That The   Difficulties Of    Moral Education Are

Necessarily Of    Dual Origin--Necessarily Result From The   Combined Faults

Of Parents And Children. If Hereditary Transmission Is A Law Of    Nature,

As Every Naturalist Knows It To Be, And As Our Daily Remarks And Current

Proverbs Admit It To Be; Then, On The   Average Of    Cases, The   Defects Of

Children Mirror The   Defects Of    Their Parents;--On The   Average Of    Cases,

We Say, Because, Complicated As The   Results Are By The   Transmitted

Traits Of    Remoter Ancestors, The   Correspondence Is Not Special But Only

General. And If, On The   Average Of    Cases, This Inheritance Of    Defects

Exists, Then The   Evil Passions Which Parents Have To Check In Their

Children, Imply Like Evil Passions In Themselves: Hidden, It May Be,

From The   Public Eye, Or Perhaps Obscured By Other Feelings, But Still

There. Evidently, Therefore, The   General Practice Of    Any Ideal System Of

Discipline Is Hopeless: Parents Are Not Good Enough.

Moreover, Even Were There Methods By Which The   Desired End Could Be At

Once Effected; And Even Had Fathers And Mothers Sufficient Insight,

Sympathy, And Self-Command To Employ These Methods Consistently; It

Might Still Be Contended That It Would Be Of    No Use To Reform

Family-Government Faster Than Other Things Are Reformed. What Is It That

We Aim To Do? Is It Not That Education Of    Whatever Kind Has For Its

Proximate End To Prepare A Child For The   Business Of    Life--To Produce A

Citizen Who, While He Is Well Conducted, Is Also Able To Make His Way In

The World? And Does Not Making His Way In The   World (By Which We Mean,

Not The   Acquirement Of    Wealth, But Of    The   Funds Requisite For Bringing

Up A Family)--Does Not This Imply A Certain Fitness For The   World As It

Now Is? And If By Any System Of    Culture An Ideal Human Being Could Be

Produced, Is It Not Doubtful Whether He Would Be Fit For The   World As It

Now Is? May We Not, On The   Contrary, Suspect That His Too Keen Sense Of

Rectitude, And Too Elevated Standard Of    Conduct, Would Make Life

Intolerable Or Even Impossible? And However Admirable The   Result Might

Be, Considered Individually, Would It Not Be Self-Defeating In So Far As

Society And Posterity Are Concerned? There Is Much Reason For Thinking

That As In A Nation So In A Family, The   Kind Of    Government Is, On The

Whole, About As Good As The   General State Of    Human Nature Permits It To

Be. We May Argue That In The   One Case, As In The   Other, The   Average

Character Of    The   People Determines The   Quality Of    The   Control Exercised.

In Both Cases It May Be Inferred That Amelioration Of    The   Average

Character Leads To An Amelioration Of    System; And Further, That Were It

Possible To Ameliorate The   System Without The   Average Character Being

First Ameliorated, Evil Rather Than Good Would Follow. Such Degree Of

Harshness As Children Now Experience From Their Parents And Teachers,

May Be Regarded As But A Preparation For That Greater Harshness Which

They Will Meet On Entering The   World. And It May Be Urged That Were It

Possible For Parents And Teachers To Treat Them With Perfect Equity And

Entire Sympathy, It Would But Intensify The   Sufferings Which The

Selfishness Of    Men Must, In After Life, Inflict On Them.[1]

"But Does Not This Prove Too Much?" Some One Will Ask. "If No System Of

Moral Training Can Forthwith Make Children What They Should Be; If, Even

Were There A System That Would Do This, Existing Parents Are Too

Imperfect To Carry It Out; And If Even Could Such A System Be

Successfully Carried Out, Its Results Would Be Disastrously Incongruous

With The   Present State Of    Society; Does It Not Follow That To Reform The

System Now In Use Is Neither Practicable Nor Desirable?" No. It Merely

Follows That Reform In Domestic Government Must Go On, _Pari Passu_,

With Other Reforms. It Merely Follows That Methods Of    Discipline Neither

Can Be Nor Should Be Ameliorated, Except By Instalments. It Merely

Follows That The   Dictates Of    Abstract Rectitude Will, In Practice,

Inevitably Be Subordinated By The   Present State Of    Human Nature--By The

Imperfections Alike Of    Children, Of    Parents, And Of    Society; And Can

Only Be Better Fulfilled As The   General Character Becomes Better.

"At Any Rate, Then," May Rejoin Our Critic, "It Is Clearly Useless To

Set Up Any Ideal Standard Of    Family Discipline. There Can Be No

Advantage In Elaborating And Recommending Methods That Are In Advance Of

The Time." Again We Contend For The   Contrary. Just As In The   Case Of

Political Government, Though Pure Rectitude May Be At Present

Impracticable, It Is Requisite To Know Where The   Right Lies, In Order

That The   Changes We Make May Be _Towards_ The   Right Instead Of    _Away_

From It; So, In The   Case Of    Domestic Government, An Ideal Must Be

Upheld, That There May Be Gradual Approximations To It. We Need Fear No

Evil Consequences From The   Maintenance Of    Such An Ideal. On The   Average

The Constitutional Conservatism Of    Mankind Is Strong Enough To Prevent

Too Rapid A Change. Things Are So Organised That Until Men Have Grown Up

To The   Level Of    A Higher Belief, They Cannot Receive It: Nominally, They

May Hold It, But Not Virtually. And