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

Physical Sufferings Entailed On Their Children By Ignorance And

Awkwardness; And That While Bearing These Evil Consequences They Visited

On Their Children Certain Other Evil Consequences, With The   View Of

Teaching Them The   Impropriety Of    Their Conduct. Suppose That When A

Child, Who Had Been Forbidden To Meddle With The   Kettle, Spilt Boiling

Water On Its Foot, The   Mother Vicariously Assumed The   Scald And Gave A

Blow In Place Of    It; And Similarly In All Other Cases. Would Not The

Daily Mishaps Be Sources Of    Far More Anger Than Now? Would There Not Be

Chronic Ill-Temper On Both Sides? Yet An Exactly Parallel Policy Is

Pursued In After-Years. A Father Who Beats His Boy For Carelessly Or

Wilfully Breaking A Sister's Toy, And Then Himself Pays For A New Toy,

Does Substantially This Same Thing--Inflicts An Artificial Penalty On

The Transgressor, And Takes The   Natural Penalty On Himself: His Own

Feelings And Those Of    The   Transgressor Being Alike Needlessly Irritated.

Did He Simply Require Restitution To Be Made, He Would Produce Far Less

Heart-Burning. If He Told The   Boy That A New Toy Must Be Bought At His,

The Boy's, Cost; And That His Supply Of    Pocket-Money Must Be Withheld To

The Needful Extent; There Would Be Much Less Disturbance Of    Temper On

Either Side: While In The   Deprivation Afterwards Felt, The   Boy Would

Experience The   Equitable And Salutary Consequence. In Brief, The   System

Of Discipline By Natural Reactions Is Less Injurious To Temper, Both

Because It Is Perceived To Be Nothing More Than Pure Justice, And

Because It In Great Part Substitutes The   Impersonal Agency Of    Nature For

The Personal Agency Of    Parents.

Whence Also Follows The   Manifest Corollary, That Under This System The

Parental And Filial Relation, Being A More Friendly, Will Be A More

Influential One. Whether In Parent Or Child, Anger, However Caused, And

To Whomsoever Directed, Is Detrimental. But Anger In A Parent Towards A

Child, And In A Child Towards A Parent, Is Especially Detrimental;

Because It Weakens That Bond Of    Sympathy Which Is Essential To

Beneficent Control. From The   Law Of    Association Of    Ideas, It Inevitably

Results, Both In Young And Old, That Dislike Is Contracted Towards

Things Which In Experience Are Habitually Connected With Disagreeable

Feelings. Or Where Attachment Originally Existed, It Is Diminished, Or

Turned Into Repugnance, According To The   Quantity Of    Painful Impressions

Received. Parental Wrath, Venting Itself In Reprimands And Castigations,

Cannot Fail, If Often Repeated, To Produce Filial Alienation; While The

Resentment And Sulkiness Of    Children Cannot Fail To Weaken The   Affection

Felt For Them, And May Even End In Destroying It. Hence The   Numerous

Cases In Which Parents (And Especially Fathers, Who Are Commonly Deputed

To Inflict The   Punishment) Are Regarded With Indifference, If Not With

Aversion; And Hence The   Equally Numerous Cases In Which Children Are

Looked Upon As Inflictions. Seeing Then, As All Must Do, That

Estrangement Of    This Kind Is Fatal To A Salutary Moral Culture, It

Follows That Parents Cannot Be Too Solicitous In Avoiding Occasions Of

Direct Antagonism With Their Children. And Therefore They Cannot Too

Anxiously Avail Themselves Of    This Discipline Of    Natural Consequences;

Which, By Relieving Them From Penal Functions, Prevents Mutual

Exasperations And Estrangements.

The Method Of    Moral Culture By Experience Of    The   Normal Reactions, Which

Is The   Divinely-Ordained Method Alike For Infancy And For Adult Life, We

Thus Find To Be Equally Applicable During The   Intermediate Childhood And

Youth. Among The   Advantages Of    This Method We See:--First: That It Gives

That Rational Knowledge Of    Right And Wrong Conduct Which Results From

Personal Experience Of    Their Good And Bad Consequences. Second: That The

Child, Suffering Nothing More Than The   Painful Effects Of    Its Own Wrong

Actions, Must Recognise More Or Less Clearly The   Justice Of    The

Penalties. Third: That Recognising The   Justice Of    The   Penalties, And

Receiving Them Through The   Working Of    Things Rather Than At The   Hands

Of An Individual, Its Temper Is Less Disturbed; While The   Parent

Fulfilling The   Comparatively Passive Duty Of    Letting The   Natural

Penalties Be Felt, Preserves A Comparative Equanimity. Fourth: That

Mutual Exasperations Being Thus Prevented, A Much Happier, And A More

Influential Relation, Will Exist Between Parent And Child.

"But What Is To Be Done In Cases Of    More Serious Misconduct?" Some Will

Ask. "How Is This Plan To Be Carried Out When A Petty Theft Has Been

Committed? Or When A Lie Has Been Told? Or When Some Younger Brother Or

Sister Has Been Ill-Used?"

Before Replying To These Questions, Let Us Consider The   Bearings Of    A

Few Illustrative Facts.

Living In The   Family Of    His Brother-In-Law, A Friend Of    Ours Had

Undertaken The   Education Of    His Little Nephew And Niece. This He Had

Conducted, More Perhaps From Natural Sympathy Than From Reasoned-Out

Conclusions, In The   Spirit Of    The   Method Above Set Forth. The   Two

Children Were In Doors His Pupils And Out Of    Doors His Companions. They

Daily Joined Him In Walks And Botanising Excursions, Eagerly Sought

Plants For Him, Looked On While He Examined And Identified Them, And In

This And Other Ways Were Ever Gaining Pleasure And Instruction In His

Society. In Short, Morally Considered, He Stood To Them Much More In The

Position Of    Parent Than Either Their Father Or Mother Did. Describing To

Us The   Results Of    This Policy, He Gave, Among Other Instances, The

Following. One Evening, Having Need For Some Article Lying In Another

Part Of    The   House, He Asked His Nephew To Fetch It. Interested As The

Boy Was In Some Amusement Of    The   Moment, He, Contrary To His Wont,

Either Exhibited Great Reluctance Or Refused, We Forget Which. His

Uncle, Disapproving Of    A Coercive Course, Went Himself For That Which He

Wanted: Merely Exhibiting By His Manner The   Annoyance This Ill-Behaviour

Gave Him. And When, Later In The   Evening, The   Boy Made Overtures For The

Usual Play, They Were Gravely Repelled--The Uncle Manifested Just That

Coldness Naturally Produced In Him; And So Let The   Boy Feel The

Necessary Consequences Of    His Conduct. Next Morning At The   Usual Time

For Rising, Our Friend Heard A New Voice Outside The   Door, And In Walked

His Little Nephew With The   Hot Water. Peering About The   Room To See What

Else Could Be Done, The   Boy Then Exclaimed, "Oh! You Want Your Boots;"

And Forthwith Rushed Downstairs To Fetch Them. In This And Other Ways He

Showed A True Penitence For His Misconduct. He Endeavoured By Unusual

Services To Make Up For The   Service He Had Refused. His Better Feelings

Had Made A Real Conquest Over His Lower Ones; And Acquired Strength By

The Victory. And Having Felt What It Was To Be Without It, He Valued

More Than Before The   Friendship He Thus Regained.

This Gentleman Is Now Himself A Father; Acts On The   Same System; And

Finds It Answer Completely. He Makes Himself Thoroughly His Children's

Friend. The   Evening Is Longed For By Them Because He Will Be At Home;

And They Especially Enjoy Sunday Because He Is With Them All Day. Thus

Possessing Their Perfect Confidence And Affection, He Finds That The

Simple Display Of    His Approbation Or Disapprobation Gives Him Abundant

Power Of    Control. If, On His Return Home, He Hears That One Of    His Boys

Has Been Naughty, He Behaves Towards Him With That Coolness Which The

Consciousness Of    The   Boy's Misconduct Naturally Produces; And He Finds

This A Most Efficient Punishment. The   Mere Withholding Of    The   Usual

Caresses, Is A Source Of    Much Distress--Produces A More Prolonged Fit Of

Crying Than A Beating Would Do. And The   Dread Of    This Purely Moral

Penalty Is, He Says, Ever Present During His Absence: So Much So, That

Frequently During The   Day His Children Ask Their Mamma How They Have

Behaved, And Whether The   Report Will Be Good. Recently, The   Eldest, An

Active Urchin Of    Five, In One Of    Those Bursts Of    Animal Spirits Common

In Healthy Children, Committed Sundry Extravagances During His Mamma's

Absence--Cut Off Part Of    His Brother's Hair And Wounded Himself With A

Razor Taken From His Father's Dressing-Case. Hearing Of    These

Occurrences On His Return, The   Father Did Not Speak To The   Boy Either

That Night Or Next Morning. Besides The   Immediate Tribulation The   Effect

Was, That When, A Few Days After, The   Mamma Was About To Go Out, She Was

Entreated By The   Boy Not To Do So; And On Inquiry, It Appeared His Fear

Was That He Might Again Transgress In Her Absence.

We Have Introduced These Facts Before Replying To The   Question--"What Is

To Be Done With The   Graver Offences?" For The   Purpose Of    First

Exhibiting The   Relation That May And Ought To Be Established Between

Parents And Children; For On The   Existence Of    This Relation Depends The

Successful Treatment Of    These Graver Offences. And As A Further

Preliminary, We Must Now Point Out That The   Establishment Of    This

Relation Will Result From Adopting The   System Here Advocated. Already We

Have Shown That By Simply Letting A Child Experience The   Painful

Reactions Of    Its Own Wrong Actions, A Parent Avoids Antagonism And

Escapes Being Regarded As An Enemy; But It Remains To Be Shown That

Where This Course Has Been Consistently Pursued From The   Beginning, A

Feeling Of    Active Friendship Will Be Generated.

At Present, Mothers And Fathers Are Mostly Considered By Their Offspring

As Friend Enemies. Determined As The   Impressions Of    Children Inevitably

Are By The   Treatment They Receive; And Oscillating As That Treatment

Does Between Bribery And Thwarting, Between Petting And Scolding,

Between Gentleness And Castigation; They Necessarily Acquire Conflicting

Beliefs Respecting The   Parental Character. A Mother Commonly Thinks It

Sufficient To Tell Her Little Boy That She Is His Best Friend; And

Assuming That He Ought To Believe Her, Concludes That He Will Do So. "It

Is All For Your Good;" "I Know What Is Proper For You Better Than You Do

Yourself;" "You Are Not Old Enough To Understand It Now, But When You

Grow Up You Will Thank Me For Doing What I Do;"--These, And Like

Assertions, Are Daily Reiterated. Meanwhile The   Boy Is Daily Suffering

Positive Penalties; And Is Hourly Forbidden To Do This, That, And The

Other, Which He Wishes To Do. By Words He Hears That His Happiness Is

The End In View; But From The   Accompanying Deeds He Habitually Receives

More Or Less Pain. Incompetent As He Is To Understand That Future Which

His Mother Has In View, Or How This Treatment Conduces To The   Happiness

Of That Future, He Judges By The   Results He Feels; And Finding Such

Results Anything But Pleasurable, He Becomes Sceptical Respecting Her

Professions Of    Friendship. And Is It Not Folly To Expect Any Other

Issue? Must Not The   Child Reason From The   Evidence He Has Got? And Does

Not This Evidence Seem To Warrant His Conclusion? The   Mother Would

Reason In Just The   Same Way If Similarly Placed. If, Among Her

Acquaintance, She Found Some One Who Was Constantly Thwarting Her

Wishes, Uttering Sharp Reprimands, And Occasionally Inflicting Actual

Penalties On Her, She Would Pay Small Attention To Any Professions Of

Anxiety For Her Welfare Which Accompanied These Acts. Why, Then, Does

She Suppose That Her Boy Will Do Otherwise?

But Now Observe How Different Will Be The   Results If The   System We

Contend For Be Consistently Pursued--If The   Mother Not Only Avoids

Becoming The   Instrument Of    Punishment, But Plays The   Part Of    A Friend,

By Warning Her Boy Of    The