MODERN EDUCATORS
=Literature.=--_Davidson_, Rousseau; _Graham_, Rousseau; _Morley_, Life
of Rousseau; _Rousseau_, Emile; _Munroe_, Educational Ideal; _Vogel_,
Geschichte der Paedagogik; _Quick_, Educational Reformers; _Weir_, The
Key to Rousseau's Emile (article in _Educational Review_, Vol. XVI, p.
61); _Compayre_, History of Pedagogy.
ROUSSEAU (1712-1778)
Jean Jacques Rousseau was born in Geneva, Switzerland. His father was a
watchmaker, and upon him devolved the education of the boy, as the
mother died in childbirth. Rousseau's father was a man of dissipated
habits, careless of responsibility, and of very violent temper. He
interested himself in his son far enough to teach him to read, and
supplied him with the worthless novels which he himself was fond of
reading. This unwise course doubtless had much to do in shaping the
character of the boy. Probably it was the evil effects of this early
literature that led Rousseau later in life to oppose teaching young
children to read. Quick says, "Rousseau professed a hatred of books,
which he said kept the student so long engaged upon the thoughts of
other people as to have no time to make a store of his own."
Abandoned by his father at the age of ten, he was taken into the family
of his uncle, who apprenticed him, first to a notary, and afterward to
an engraver. At the age of sixteen he ran away, and began a life of
vagabondage. While yet a young man, he became involved in intrigues,
which, according to his own account in his "Confessions," were no credit
to him. Madame de Warens, a young widow with whom he lived for some
years, sent him to school at St. Lazare, where he studied the classics
and music; but he soon lapsed again into vagabondage. He picked up a
little music, and attempted to give lessons in it, but with small
success. He also took a position as private tutor, but he had no talent
for teaching. Later in life he married Therese le Vasseur, a woman from
the common ranks of life. She bore him five children, all of whom he
committed to foundling hospitals without means of identification. He did
this because he was not willing that his own comfort or plans should be
disturbed by the presence of children. Rousseau had reason to regret
this heartless and unnatural course when, in later years, he sought in
vain to find some trace of his children. Compayre says, "If he loved to
observe children, he observed, alas, only the children of others. There
is nothing sadder than that page of the 'Confessions,' in which he
relates how he often placed himself at the window to observe the
dismission of a school, in order to listen to the conversations of
children as a furtive and unseen observer!"[122]
In 1749 Rousseau successfully competed for a prize offered by the
Academy of Dijon on the subject, "Has the restoration of the sciences
contributed to purify or to corrupt manners?" Rousseau entered this
contest quite accidentally. He saw the notice of the contest in a
newspaper, and decided at once to compete. Of this event he says, "If
ever anything resembled a sudden inspiration, it was the movement which
began in me as I read this. All at once I felt myself dazzled by a
thousand sparkling lights; crowds of vivid ideas thronged into my mind
with a force and confusion which threw me into unspeakable agitation; I
felt my head whirling in a giddiness like that of intoxication. A
violent palpitation oppressed me; unable to walk for difficulty of
breathing, I sank under one of the trees of the avenue, and passed half
an hour there in such a condition of excitement that when I rose I saw
that the front of my waistcoat was all wet with tears, though I was
wholly unconscious of shedding them. Ah, if I could have written the
quarter of what I saw and felt under that tree, with what clearness
should I have brought out all the contradictions of our social system;
with what simplicity should I have demonstrated that man is good
naturally, and that by institution only is he made bad."
This essay made him famous, and its publication was the beginning of a
remarkable literary career. His principal literary works are his
"Confessions," in which he declares that he conceals nothing concerning
himself; the "Social Contract," an anti-monarchic work, which many
believe incited the French Revolution; "Heloise," a novel over-strained
in sentiment and immoral in its teachings, but "full of pathos and
knowledge of the human heart"; and "Emile," his greatest work, which
contains his educational theories. The "Emile"[123] was an epoch-making
book, which excited great interest throughout Europe. It is said that
the philosopher Emanuel Kant became so absorbed in reading it that he
forgot to take his daily walk.
=Pedagogy.=--(_a_) Rousseau's first principle is, "Everything is good as
it comes from the hands of the Author of nature; everything degenerates
in the hands of man." It follows, then, that education has only to
prevent the entrance of evil, and let nature continue the work begun.
It is to be a negative, as well as a natural, process. The fallacy of
this principle is very forcibly shown by Vogel[124] as follows: "The
very first sentence of 'Emile,' that man by nature is good, is a
fundamental error; for by nature, that is, from birth, man is neither
good nor bad, but morally indifferent. Only when the individual
possesses mature self-consciousness does he have a correct idea of good
and evil. If man by nature is good, it is inexplicable how evil can
originate within him. External things may, indeed, furnish motives to
evil, but are never in themselves evil; the evil arises rather from the
conduct of the individual toward outside objects. If, then, evil does
not come from without, and is not by nature already within the heart, it
is impossible that there shall be such a thing as evil."
(_b_) The first education is physical and it begins at birth. As the
physical wants of the child are natural they should be satisfied, but
the clothing should be of such character as not to interfere with the
perfect freedom of the body. Great care must be taken to distinguish
between the real wants of the child and its passing whims. To gratify
the latter because of the crying of the child will tend to form bad
habits. In this connection may be taught the first moral lessons. It
thus becomes important that the speech, gestures, and expressions of the
young child shall be carefully studied. This is the first suggestion of
the necessity for child study. The idea was later developed by
Pestalozzi and Froebel, and is one of the most important features of
recent pedagogical activity.
(_c_) The child's second period begins with his ability to speak and
continues till the twelfth year. No attempt must be made to educate the
child for his future, but he must be allowed to get the full enjoyment
of childhood by freedom to play as he will. Let him run, jump, and test
his strength, thereby acquiring judgment of the material forces about
him, and learning how to take care of himself. Leave him free to do what
he will, let him have what he wishes, but, as far as possible, he should
be led to depend upon himself to satisfy his wants. Give him perfect
freedom, for freedom is the fundamental law of education. If he
disobeys, do not punish him,--disobedience works its own punishment;
therefore, do not command him. The training of the senses is the
important work of this period; therefore, there should be as little
moral training as possible, and absolutely no religious training. The
only moral idea for the child to learn is that of ownership. He is to be
prevented from vice in a negative manner, that is, by never being
allowed to meet it. "The only habit that a child should be allowed to
form is to contract no habit."
He is to have a preceptor devoted entirely to him, not to instruct or
control him, but to lead him to discover and experience for himself. In
regard to his intellectual instruction, Rousseau says of _Emile_ at
twelve years of age, "that he has not learned to distinguish his right
hand from his left." Books are entirely proscribed, and, indeed, they
are useless to him as he cannot read; the only intellectual knowledge
the child receives is that which comes from things through his own
experience.
This is a brief outline of the erratic, impossible, and inconsistent
training that Rousseau provides for _Emile_ during this period when the
foundation of character in the child must be laid. Greard says,
"Rousseau goes beyond progressive education to recommend an education
in fragments, so to speak, which isolates the faculties in order to
develop them one after another, which establishes an absolute line of
demarkation between the different ages, and which ends in distinguishing
three stages of progress in the soul. Rousseau's error on this point is
in forgetting that the education of the child ought to prepare for the
education of the young man."
(_d_) The third period extends from the twelfth to the fifteenth year.
It is the period of intellectual development. With no habits of thought
or study, being little else than a robust animal, in three years _Emile_
is to obtain all needed intellectual training. True, Rousseau excludes
everything that is not useful, and places limitations even on that. For
example, he naturally lays great stress upon the physical sciences which
are to be taught in connection with things themselves,--out of doors, by
travel, and in actual life; but he allows no history, or grammar, or
ancient languages. No books are permitted save "Robinson Crusoe," which
Rousseau finds entirely suitable for _Emile_. A trade is to be learned
during this period.
While in general we condemn Rousseau's scheme of education, there is
much in his methods that is most excellent. On this point Compayre
comments as follows: "At least in the general method which he commends,
Rousseau makes amends for the errors in his plan of study: 'Do not treat
the child to discourses which he cannot understand. No descriptions, no
eloquence, no figures of speech. Be content to present to him
appropriate objects. Let us transform our sensations into ideas. But let
us not jump at once from sensible to intellectual objects. Let us always
proceed slowly from one sensible notion to another. In general, let us
never substitute the sign for the thing, except when it is impossible
for us to show the thing.'"[125]
(_e_) The fourth period of education begins at fifteen, the period of
adolescence. At this time, "_Emile_ will know nothing of history,
nothing of humanity, nothing of art and literature, nothing of God; but
he will know a manual trade." Rousseau himself says, "_Emile_ has but
little knowledge, but that which he has is really his own; he knows
nothing by halves." He has a mind which, "if not instructed, is at least
capable of being instructed." The remaining work to be done in the
education of _Emile_ consists in training the sentiments of affection,
the moral and the religious sentiments. The feeling of love for his
fellow-beings is now to be cultivated. The error of this is shown by
Compayre, who says, "For fifteen years Rousseau leaves the heart of
_Emile_ unoccupied.... Rousseau made the mistake of thinking that a
child can be taught to love as he is taught to read and write, and that
lessons could be given to _Emile_ in feeling just as lessons are given
to him in geometry."
In morals Rousseau taught that the first duty of every one is to take
care of himself; we must love ourselves first of all, and find our
greatest interest in those things that best serve us. We must seek that
which is useful to us and avoid what harms us, instead of loving our
enemies and doing good to those that hate us, as taught by Christ. We
must love those who love us, while we must avoid and hate those who hate
us.
As to religion, _Emile_ does not yet know at fifteen that he has a soul,
and Rousseau thinks that perhaps the eighteenth year is still too early
for him to learn that fact; for, if he tries to learn it before the
proper time, he runs the risk of never really knowing that he possesses
an immortal soul. But as religion furnishes a check upon the passions,
it should be taught to the boy when eighteen years of age. He is not to
be instructed in the doctrines of any particular sect, but should be
allowed to select that religious belief which most strongly appeals to
his reason. Modern investigation has proven the utter fallacy of
Rousseau's teachings in this respect. Indeed, it seems to be established
that the most orthodox period of the child's life occurs before the
fifteenth year, the time when Rousseau would begin his religious
training. Conformable to this truth, many sects confirm children and
receive them into the church at or before the fifteenth year.[126]
(_f_) Having brought _Emile_ to the period of life at which he is to
marry, Rousseau proceeds to create in Sophie the ideal wife. It is not
the education of women as such that Rousseau discusses, but their
education with reference to man. He says, "The whole education of women
should be relative to men; to please them, to be useful to them, to make
themselves honored and loved by them, to educate the young, to care for
the older, to advise them, to console them, to make life agreeable and
sweet to them,--these are the duties of women in every age."
Consequently the sole instruction woman needs is in household duties, in
care of children, in ways to add to the happiness of her husband. Her
own happiness or development does not enter into Rousseau's scheme. This
is the weakest part of his educational theory. The world is gradually
awakening to the fact that woman's intellectual capacity is not
inferior to that of man, and the prejudices of ages are slowly
disappearing.
Rousseau's pedagogical theories made a profound impression throughout
Europe, and though often inconsistent, extravagant, and visionary, they
set the world to thinking of the child and his psychological
development. A new direction was thus given to educational theory and
practice, and upon this basis Pestalozzi, Froebel, and other modern
educators have built. Rousseau must, therefore, be reckoned among the
greatest pedagogical writers of modern times. Karl Schmidt pronounces
the "Emile" "a Platonic republic of education,--nevertheless, Rousseau's
work is a great universal achievement, the importance of which Goethe
recognizes when he calls the book the _nature-gospel_ of education."[127]
FOOTNOTES:
[122] "History of Pedagogy," p. 286.
[123] "Schoolmaster in Literature," pp. 40-63.
[124] "Geschichte der Paedagogik," p. 127. See also Compayre, "History of
Pedagogy," p. 286.
[125] "History of Pedagogy," p. 298.
[126] See address of Professor Earl Barnes, Proceedings of the National
Educational Association for 1893, p. 765. Also article by Dr. G. Stanley
Hall in _Pedagogical Seminary_, Vol. I, p. 196. Note also the religious
development of Laura Bridgman.
[127] "Geschichte der Paedagogik," Vol. III, p. 559.