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

Over Tables And Chairs. Or A Little Girl, Making Doll's-Clothes,

Disfigures The   Room With Shreds. In Most Cases The   Trouble Of    Rectifying

This Disorder Falls Anywhere But Where It Should. Occurring In The

Nursery, The   Nurse Herself, With Many Grumblings About "Tiresome Little

Things," Undertakes The   Task; If Below-Stairs, The   Task Usually Devolves

Either On One Of    The   Elder Children Or On The   Housemaid: The

Transgressor Being Visited With Nothing More Than A Scolding. In This

Very Simple Case, However, There Are Many Parents Wise Enough To Follow

Out, More Or Less Consistently, The   Normal Course--That Of    Making The

Child Itself Collect The   Toys Or Shreds. The   Labour Of    Putting Things In

Order Is The   True Consequence Of    Having Put Them In Disorder. Every

Trader In His Office, Every Wife In Her Household, Has Daily Experience

Of This Fact. And If Education Be A Preparation For The   Business Of

Life, Then Every Child Should Also, From The   Beginning, Have Daily

Experience Of    This Fact. If The   Natural Penalty Be Met By Refractory

Behaviour (Which It May Perhaps Be Where The   System Of    Moral Discipline

Previously Pursued Has Been Bad), Then The   Proper Course Is To Let The

Child Feel The   Ulterior Reaction Caused By Its Disobedience. Having

Refused Or Neglected To Pick Up And Put Away The   Things It Has Scattered

About, And Having Thereby Entailed The   Trouble Of    Doing This On Some One

Else, The   Child Should, On Subsequent Occasions, Be Denied The   Means Of

Giving This Trouble. When Next It Petitions For Its Toy-Box, The   Reply

Of Its Mamma Should Be--"The Last Time You Had Your Toys You Left Them

Lying On The   Floor, And Jane Had To Pick Them Up. Jane Is Too Busy To

Pick Up Every Day The   Things You Leave About; And I Cannot Do It Myself.

So That, As You Will Not Put Away Your Toys When You Have Done With

Them, I Cannot Let You Have Them." This Is Obviously A Natural

Consequence, Neither Increased Nor Lessened; And Must Be So Recognised

By A Child. The   Penalty Comes, Too, At The   Moment When It Is Most Keenly

Felt. A New-Born Desire Is Balked At The   Moment Of    Anticipated

Gratification; And The   Strong Impression So Produced Can Scarcely Fail

To Have An Effect On The   Future Conduct: An Effect Which, By Consistent

Repetition, Will Do Whatever Can Be Done In Curing The   Fault. Add To

Which, That, By This Method, A Child Is Early Taught The   Lesson Which

Cannot Be Learnt Too Soon, That In This World Of    Ours Pleasures Are

Rightly To Be Obtained Only By Labour.

Take Another Case. Not Long Since We Had Frequently To Hear The

Reprimands Visited On A Little Girl Who Was Scarcely Ever Ready In Time

For The   Daily Walk. Of    Eager Disposition, And Apt To Become Absorbed In

The Occupation Of    The   Moment, Constance Never Thought Of    Putting On Her

Things Till The   Rest Were Ready. The   Governess And The   Other Children

Had Almost Invariably To Wait; And From The   Mamma There Almost

Invariably Came The   Same Scolding. Utterly As This System Failed, It

Never Occurred To The   Mamma To Let Constance Experience The   Natural

Penalty. Nor, Indeed, Would She Try It When It Was Suggested To Her. In

The World, Unreadiness Entails The   Loss Of    Some Advantage That Would

Else Have Been Gained: The   Train Is Gone; Or The   Steam-Boat Is Just

Leaving Its Moorings; Or The   Best Things In The   Market Are Sold; Or All

The Good Seats In The   Concert-Room Are Filled. And Every One, In Cases

Perpetually Occurring, May See That It Is The   Prospective Deprivations

Which Prevent People From Being Too Late. Is Not The   Inference Obvious?

Should Not The   Prospective Deprivations Control A Child's Conduct Also?

If Constance Is Not Ready At The   Appointed Time, The   Natural Result Is

That Of    Being Left Behind, And Losing Her Walk. And After Having Once Or

Twice Remained At Home While The   Rest Were Enjoying Themselves In The

Fields--After Having Felt That This Loss Of    A Much-Prized Gratification

Was Solely Due To Want Of    Promptitude; Amendment Would In All

Probability Take Place. At Any Rate, The   Measure Would Be More Effective

Than That Perpetual Scolding Which Ends Only In Producing Callousness.

Again, When Children, With More Than Usual Carelessness, Break Or Lose

The Things Given To Them, The   Natural Penalty--The Penalty Which Makes

Grown-Up Persons More Careful--Is The   Consequent Inconvenience. The   Lack

Of The   Lost Or Damaged Article, And The   Cost Of    Replacing It, Are The

Experiences By Which Men And Women Are Disciplined In These Matters; And

The Experiences Of    Children Should Be As Much As Possible Assimilated To

Theirs. We Do Not Refer To That Early Period At Which Toys Are Pulled To

Pieces In The   Process Of    Learning Their Physical Properties, And At

Which The   Results Of    Carelessness Cannot Be Understood; But To A Later

Period, When The   Meaning And Advantages Of    Property Are Perceived. When

A Boy, Old Enough To Possess A Penknife, Uses It So Roughly As To Snap

The Blade, Or Leaves It In The   Grass By Some Hedge-Side Where He Was

Cutting A Stick, A Thoughtless Parent, Or Some Indulgent Relative, Will

Commonly Forthwith Buy Him Another, Not Seeing That, By Doing This, A

Valuable Lesson Is Prevented. In Such A Case, A Father May Properly

Explain That Penknives Cost Money, And That To Get Money Requires

Labour; That He Cannot Afford To Purchase New Penknives For One Who

Loses Or Breaks Them; And That Until He Sees Evidence Of    Greater

Carefulness He Must Decline To Make Good The   Loss. A Parallel Discipline

Will Serve To Check Extravagance.

These Few Familiar Instances, Here Chosen Because Of    The   Simplicity With

Which They Illustrate Our Point, Will Make Clear To Every One The

Distinction Between Those Natural Penalties Which We Contend Are The

Truly Efficient Ones, And Those Artificial Penalties Commonly

Substituted For Them. Before Going On To Exhibit The   Higher And Subtler

Applications Of    The   Principle Exemplified, Let Us Note Its Many And

Great Superiorities Over The   Principle, Or Rather The   Empirical

Practice, Which Prevails In Most Families.

One Superiority Is That The   Pursuance Of    It Generates Right Conceptions

Of Cause And Effect; Which By Frequent And Consistent Experience Are

Eventually Rendered Definite And Complete. Proper Conduct In Life Is

Much Better Guaranteed When The   Good And Evil Consequences Of    Actions

Are Understood, Than When They Are Merely Believed On Authority. A Child

Who Finds That Disorderliness Entails The   Trouble Of    Putting Things In

Order, Or Who Misses A Gratification From Dilatoriness, Or Whose

Carelessness Is Followed By The   Want Of    Some Much-Prized Possession, Not

Only Suffers A Keenly-Felt Consequence, But Gains A Knowledge Of

Causation: Both The   One And The   Other Being Just Like Those Which Adult

Life Will Bring. Whereas A Child Who In Such Cases Receives A Reprimand,

Or Some Factitious Penalty, Not Only Experiences A Consequence For Which

It Often Cares Very Little, But Misses That Instruction Respecting The

Essential Natures Of    Good And Evil Conduct, Which It Would Else Have

Gathered. It Is A Vice Of    The   Common System Of    Artificial Rewards And

Punishments, Long Since Noticed By The   Clear-Sighted, That By

Substituting For The   Natural Results Of    Misbehaviour Certain Tasks Or

Castigations, It Produces A Radically Wrong Moral Standard. Having

Throughout Infancy And Boyhood Always Regarded Parental Or Tutorial

Displeasure As The   Chief Result Of    A Forbidden Action, The   Youth Has

Gained An Established Association Of    Ideas Between Such Action And Such

Displeasure, As Cause And Effect. Hence When Parents And Tutors Have

Abdicated, And Their Displeasure Is Not To Be Feared, The   Restraints On

Forbidden Actions Are In Great Measure Removed: The   True Restraints, The

Natural Reactions, Having Yet To Be Learnt By Sad Experience. As Writes

One Who Has Had Personal Knowledge Of    This Short-Sighted System:--"Young

Men Let Loose From School, Particularly Those Whose Parents Have

Neglected To Exert Their Influence, Plunge Into Every Description Of

Extravagance; They Know No Rule Of    Action--They Are Ignorant Of    The

Reasons For Moral Conduct--They Have No Foundation To Rest Upon--And

Until They Have Been Severely Disciplined By The   World Are Extremely

Dangerous Members Of    Society."

Another Great Advantage Of    This Natural Discipline Is, That It Is A

Discipline Of    Pure Justice; And Will Be Recognised As Such By Every

Child. Whoso Suffers Nothing More Than The   Evil Which In The   Order Of

Nature Results From His Own Misbehaviour, Is Much Less Likely To Think

Himself Wrongly Treated Than If He Suffers An Artificially Inflicted

Evil; And This Will Hold Of    Children As Of    Men. Take The   Case Of    A Boy

Who Is Habitually Reckless Of    His Clothes--Scrambles Through Hedges

Without Caution, Or Is Utterly Regardless Of    Mud. If He Is Beaten, Or

Sent To Bed, He Is Apt To Consider Himself Ill-Used; And Is More Likely

To Brood Over His Injuries Than To Repent Of    His Transgressions. But

Suppose He Is Required To Rectify As Far As Possible The   Harm He Has

Done--To Clean Off The   Mud With Which He Has Covered Himself, Or To Mend

The Tear As Well As He Can. Will He Not Feel That The   Evil Is One Of    His

Own Producing? Will He Not While Paying This Penalty Be Continuously

Conscious Of    The   Connection Between It And Its Cause? And Will He Not,

Spite His Irritation, Recognise More Or Less Clearly The   Justice Of    The

Arrangement? If Several Lessons Of    This Kind Fail To Produce

Amendment--If Suits Of    Clothes Are Prematurely Spoiled--If The   Father,

Pursuing This Same System Of    Discipline, Declines To Spend Money For New

Ones Until The   Ordinary Time Has Elapsed--And If Meanwhile, There Occur

Occasions On Which, Having No Decent Clothes To Go In, The   Boy Is

Debarred From Joining The   Rest Of    The   Family On Holiday Excursions And

_Fête_ Days, It Is Manifest That While He Will Keenly Feel The

Punishment, He Can Scarcely Fail To Trace The   Chain Of    Causation, And To

Perceive That His Own Carelessness Is The   Origin Of    It. And Seeing This,

He Will Not Have Any Such Sense Of    Injustice As If There Were No Obvious

Connection Between The   Transgression And Its Penalty.

Again, The   Tempers Both Of    Parents And Children Are Much Less Liable To

Be Ruffled Under This System Than Under The   Ordinary System. When

Instead Of    Letting Children Experience The   Painful Results Which

Naturally Follow From Wrong Conduct, Parents Themselves Inflict Certain

Other Painful Results, They Produce Double Mischief. Making, As They Do,

Multiplied Family Laws; And Identifying Their Own Supremacy And Dignity

With The   Maintenance Of    These Laws; Every Transgression Is Regarded As

An Offence Against Themselves, And A Cause Of    Anger On Their Part. And

Then Come The   Further Vexations Which Result From Taking Upon

Themselves, In The   Shape Of    Extra Labour Or Cost, Those Evil

Consequences Which Should Have Been Allowed To Fall On The   Wrong-Doers.

Similarly With The   Children. Penalties Which The   Necessary Reaction Of

Things Brings Round Upon Them--Penalties Which Are Inflicted By

Impersonal Agency, Produce An Irritation That Is Comparatively Slight

And Transient; Whereas, Penalties Voluntarily Inflicted By A Parent, And

Afterwards Thought Of    As Caused By Him Or Her, Produce An Irritation

Both Greater And More Continued. Just Consider How Disastrous Would Be

The Result If This Empirical Method Were Pursued From The   Beginning.

Suppose It Were Possible For Parents To