for he knows that truth may be labeled as a falsehood, and falsehood may strut about garbed as the goddess of truth, and so, unheeding the clamor he unswervingly pursues his course. His is not the lightning progress down the greased pole of Ignorance to the depths which destroy, but a tortuous and torturing climb up the rugged sides of the Mountain of Knowledge in a determined attempt to reach the peak where he finds wisdom and assurance. His progress is slow, for from one solid ledge alone can he hope to gain firm footing for the next step of intellectual progress, and his past experience has convinced him that here above all else haste may lead to inevitable folly. Therefore he stands alone and apart from the masses; therefore he may be in a crowd but is not of it, with its vacillating fluctuations which, over night, reverses entirely the complexion of its opinion. But the man who does not think is flighty, easily swayed by any impulse and ready to follow any suggestion regardless of whence it comes or whither is may lead. And, unfortunately, this wavering instability is characteristic of masses. History proves the preceding statement to be true, and when we study the individual's reaction to mob psychology and look closely into our daily experiences, we find it undeniably substantiated. Let a fiery orator appeal to the emotional and prejudicial impulses of the people and he quickly gathers a nucleus, which gains in volume as it progresses to work its regrettable destruction-and this because the passions have crowded the mind into the background of consciousness and paralyzed its power to think. This thinking blight is due to improper educational development. The intellect should be developed in its every capacity. Fact, knowledge of history, the fundamental principles of exact and experimental sciences, should be firmly fixed and thoroughly digested, but the active power of the mind to think straight must be developed to the utmost extreme so that the result of our pedagogical labors will be an all-around, solid man. Such a man is unaffected by the unreasonable, emotional frenzy of the excited mob; he is like the granite boulder, which abides in its position regardless of the fury wherewith the swollen torrent beats upon its surface. In addition we find among the psychic elements of man certain other powers, or faculties, which we variably term impulses or emotions. A close study of these primitive elements which seem to be "built in" factors of our very nature, will show them capable of exercising a forceful influence for good, or of leading to banefully noxious results. And these results are entirely dependent upon whether they are permitted to run riot, like an engine under full pressure with the governor out of commission. Wherefore in our development we must have due regard that these emotions are given dexterity and responsiveness in the hour of need, but they must not be permitted to vaunt themselves in unbridled freedom if we desire to avoid psychic and moral anarchy in the kingdom of individual life. But it is precisely the higher functions of man's psychic forces which should exercise this control, if prudence, foresight and wisdom are to be the characteristic distinguishing marks of an individual man. It is the man who impulsively rushes into things who makes the most regrettable mistakes; the man who really thinks before he acts usually produces well balanced results, and he avoids the pitfalls which engulf the less wary, over-enthusiastic victim of impulse and caprice. When, however, the question of the best system or the most comprehensive method of education is brought forward we at once encounter a veritable babel of tongues and heated clash of opinions which mutually thunder their fulminations from extreme points of view until the atmosphere has become redolent with the din of a discord which has proved fecund mother of conflict rang ing from dignified philosophical discussion down to common brawls and bar-room fights. A close study of the points of disagreement will again confirm the old saying "One extreme follows another," for here, too, as in most vitriolic antagonism, we find the opponents arrayed along the opposite extremes of the topic in question, each espouses his view with commendable zeal, each has a partial element of the truth to inspire enthusiasm, each sees one side of the subject, but neither seems able to lift himself high enough to survey the whole question in an all-embracing understanding and so the entire truth which is found in the golden mean remains neglected because it remains unrecognized. It is due to this narrow range of vision that many sincere en thusiasts, because they saw some particular defect, which their persistent concentration has exaggerated out of all proportion, advocated remedies which perhaps covered defects but failed as radical, reconstructive panaceas. And the instances of this patchwork multiplied rapidly until our whole educational system was barnacled with successive layers of fads, each of which lived its day, to be buried with ridicule on the morrow beneath another layer just as fanciful and capricious. Worst of all, amid the hue and cry of this conflict, in which all want to talk and no one wants to listen, the very fundamental idea of education seems to be entombed beneath the wreck and ruin left in the wake of the strife. We hear much about systems in educational conventions, yet the pivotal points of interest, the child, with its many inherent complexities, receives, at best, a cursory attention only. Since I have compared education with the growth of a rose, we may say that our attitude towards human development must be similar to that which we take in relation to the flower. If we wish to produce a healthy, fully developed blossom, we do not begin by bruising or tampering with the spore or the root. We handle it gently, plant it in the ground, cultivate the soil, cut the weeds, prune the wild shoots and protect the fibre, so that is may develop through the innate powers until the stalk can help itself, combat unfavorable circumstances and burgeon forth in all its glory, thereby repaying our patience and care with a prolific production of beautiful blossoms to feast the eye and gladden the soul. Now note well, we did not put those blossoms into the branches; they were already there in embryo form. All we did was to help the plant in its tender age to develop its latent possibilities. The parallels hold graphically in regard to education. "As no man by taking thought can add one inch to his stature, so no man by effort or taking counsel can add one faculty to himself or fellowmen." We can be developers of the existing, but not creators of the non-existing. John Stuart Mill is very much to the point when he says, "Human nature is not a machine to be built after a model and set to do work prescribed for it, but a tree which requires to grow and develop itself on all sides, according to ten dencies of the inward forces which make it a living thing." Hence in relation to education our attitude must compare to that which we assume toward a growing plant. We must provide proper and favorable environment, remove obstacles which hinder, and apply conditions which stimulate healthy development, so that every inherent power in the child will be brought out and come to its fruition in the fully developed man. But from the very beginning we must keep in mind that our ultimate object is to produce not a social weather-vane but a self-sustaining man, who is capable of looking after himself without bolstering assistance from others. And this self-reliance should be achieved at the earliest possible time, hence the significance of the French proverb: "He is the best teacher who makes himself unnecessary at the earliest moment." This then is the correct method of education, that it serve to help develop the living forces within the child, but not attempt to drive something in from without. The pupil, for his part, must respond freely and generously to educational endeavors and take kindly to the task, otherwise all energy will in truth become love's labor lost. We may painstakingly show the child what is good and how to attain it, and teach what is evil and how to avoid it, but if he rejects the former and selects the latter of his own volition, our attempts will prove a failure and our most cherished expectations will wilt away into blighted hope and withered promises. The educator may familiarize the pupil with the material at hand and explain its purposes, he may teach how to manipulate the tools furnished by nature, but if the pupil will not himself construct the building the whole matter becomes hopeless. In a word, the educator may teach the pupil, but no mortal can learn for him. To sum up then we may say that man is endowed with body and soul, each has its own proper faculties, each of these should be fully developed; none should be permitted to step out of its bounds to domineer where it should obey; all should be well poised and form a part of a complete well rounded unit. It follows then that our educational development must fundamentally hold this object as its ultimate end and all teaching, secular and religious, must conspire to establish a sound soul in a sound body. The Case Against Myths, Folk-Lore and W. P. CLARK, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR OF MODERN LANGUAGES, A READER of current magazines will readily understand the profession of the ancient sophists. You will recall that they offered to teach those who would come to them how to make the worse appear the better cause, which being interpreted, means that one can plausibly defend either side of any proposition. Articles appearing in our magazines, both popular and technical, give abundant proof, if any is needed, of the truth of this assertion. For instance, I read a few days ago, in the Atlantic Monthly1 a delightful article under the wistful title of "Hobby Fodder" in which the author makes out, with charming humor, a perfect case for unscientific science. Let us feed the hobby-horse, he argues, and ride him at fancy's free will. Let us debate with moral fervor whether the anatomy of Israfel, whose heart's strings were a lute, bore any resemblance to an Aeolian harp. What matters it that Israfel,— and all other angels, cannot be proven to have any existence or ever to have had any? I read2 too, an eloquent attack upon our present day schools because the training there given serves only to kill the poetic instinct in our children. And the voice of the poet is the voice of authority, the voice of one who has followed fancy as well as reason, who has felt as well learned. And now I have just read an article in Education3 in which it is shown quite plausibly that Myths, Folk-lore and Fairy stories, while not forbidden absolutely to children, should not constitute the basis of the reading materials used in the schools. It happens 1 October, 1920 2 Atlantic, July, 1921. Education for Authority. |