JOHANN GOTTLIEB FICHTE
(1762-1814)
Fichte considered himself the true interpreter and successor of the
Königsberg philosopher. This is by no means saying that he was the
best expositor of the latter’s theories. The Kantian philosophy worked
a total revolution in his conception of the universe and life; and
it was his determination to interpret to the world that philosophy
that inspired him to the career of a scholar. He received the Kantian
philosophy, so to speak, into his soul, and when he put it forth it
was transformed in turn into the cast of his own personality. Kant was
essentially a man of intellect, of thought, while Fichte was a man
of enthusiasm, of action. So, in Kant, reason forms the world out of
the chaos of impressions; in Fichte, everything, objective as well as
subjective, is the progressive creation of the ego. If philosophy was
in Kant the critical method of thought, it is in Fichte the setting
forth of a grand conception of the world and life: it really became a
preaching and prophecy. The transcendental idealism of Kant culminated
with Fichte in a sort of religion, which he proclaimed his whole life
through with the fire of a devoted missionary and the force of a mighty
army.
This vitalization of Kantian idealism through Fichte has also taken
place in the field of education. The perfection, and, above all, the
moralization of humanity, was in Kant a cosmopolitan ideal, which
was to be realized step by step, generation by generation, through a
cosmopolitan process. It was through Fichte that this somewhat far-off
and ethereal ideal was made an actual and immediate object of national
aspiration for the German people. He was probably the first philosopher
who gave us a broad and lofty conception of national education or the
nationalization of education.
This nationalization of education means the education of a nation by
the nation. Each individual is to participate in the work and enjoy
the benefit of education, by which Fichte understands the progressive
perfection of humanity through the advancement and propagation of
culture. The state is no longer to be merely a military, political,
and economic institution, but also a cultural one. To look after the
cultural interests of the community should be its most important
function. Fichte’s idea of national education is, therefore, very
different from the old classical ideal of state education, which aimed
chiefly at making efficient and faithful citizens for its political and
military prosperity. And Fichte believed, with patriotic faith, that
the Germans were the only people in the world who were able to grasp
and realize this grand ideal, and that through them alone could come
the elevation and ennoblement of mankind. Yet, what was the actual
condition of this chosen people?
The German federation went to pieces under the iron heel of the mighty
Napoleon; the last hope of the people fled with the capture of Jena;
the final crash came with the peace of Tilsit, “the most disgraceful
and bitterest treaty Germany ever made.” During this great national
crisis the cosmopolitan Goethe and Hegel were quietly engaged in their
writings, and most of the scholars of the land were simply trembling
before the invading force, while the people were weakly preparing to
bear the yoke of slavery. Into this wilderness of general depression
and humiliation there came a voice which thundered upon the ears of all
the citizens of Germany:
“Conquered now we are; yet, whether we are also going to be
disgraced--yes, disgraced with right, whether we would or not, in
addition to all other losses, even lose honor, this is still to be
decided by ourselves. The fight with arms is over, but now comes, let
us hope, the new fight of principles, of morals, of character” (3: p.
470).
Thus our philosopher prophet calls forth in his famous “Addresses to
the German Nation,” which flowed from his mouth with fiery eloquence,
such as Germany had not heard since Luther. The great aim of his speech
was to awaken the people and strengthen them for this new war of the
remaking of the whole nation, upon which the existence of Germany
depended. Yet, with what a wonderful conviction and with what a poetic
vision did he speak of his people’s victory in this coming war.
“The morning twilight of the new world has already dawned and gilded
the top of the hill, and foreshadows the day which is to come” (3: p.
279)
was the message he wanted to convey to the bruised and stricken land.
Characterizing his speeches says Barnard:
“Never were a people called upon to arouse themselves to a nobler
enterprise, and never was such a summons pealed forth in tones of more
manly and spirit-stirring energy” (1: p. 146).
If Luther awakened Germany to a sense of the dignity of individuality,
it was through Fichte that she came to the consciousness of her
national dignity and mission. Awakened by Luther, she led Europe in the
reformation of religion; awakened by Fichte, she has come to lead the
world in the advancement of culture and education.
Let us now proceed to the examination of his ideal of “new education,”
which alone, he thought, would save the country from degradation and
ruin. When we think of the particular circumstances of his time and the
fundamental characteristics of his personality, it is quite natural
that the first aim of the new education was to make, above all, an
independent ego, a self-active, self-determinate, creative personality,
the master of himself and environment. He writes in his “Aphorisms on
Education”:
“To educate a man means to give him opportunities to make himself the
complete master and ruler of his whole faculties.--The question is not
what he _learns_, but what he _is_. If one actually is a
reasonable and self-active being in every respect he will always with
facility make himself such, as under the circumstances he should be”
(4: p. 353).
How can such a stable, unchangeable, personality be produced, which
will always remain such, and can never be otherwise? Not by trusting to
chance, but through a necessary law which works surely and infallibly.
And what will this necessary law be? He answers: “Love, love of
self-activity, love of the ideal world, love of universal moral law.”
Will determines action, and love determines will. Love is, therefore,
the only unfailing motive of all life activities. So, in order to
produce a self-active being, the love of self-activity for its own
sake must be cultivated and established in the child. The initiative
activity on the part of the pupil should be cherished and promoted
by every possible means. This is the first and principal task of
educational art.
But we must always keep fresh the energy of this self-activity. How
can this be done? Not by a constant spur from outside, but only by its
own neverceasing, orderly progression or its inner evolution. This
progressive unfolding of self-activity is secured by the power of
aspiration toward an ever-progressive ideal. This ideal cannot be given
by others, but it should be the creation of the pupils’ own will. There
is, in everyone’s breast, an instinct toward perfection or a love of
the highest good. This instinct should be cultivated and strengthened
in the child. When it is strong, it necessarily drives him to create in
his mind a certain state of things which does not exist in actuality,
but which is the prototype of reality. Here lies the everlasting
fountain source for a new higher activity. And the child learns by his
immediate experience the evolution of the spiritual activity in him,
the universal and necessary law, by means of which the actual state of
things is eternally realized in the world. This is a higher kind of
knowledge than that of mere actuality or a dead record of the past. In
fact, soaring into the vast regions of ideals is better beloved by the
youth than memorizing mere names and dates.
Even from the standpoint of mere acquisition, the awakening of
self-activity is a more important thing than the imparting of
knowledge. For learning is simply a mode of activity, and by
establishing the love of activity for its own sake in the mind of the
child, we also establish the love of learning for learning’s sake.
This, and this alone, is the lifelong spring of all knowledge. By the
self-active learning which comes from pure love, one learns more, and
more securely than by being taught receptively. Mechanical and passive
learning destroys the very source of knowledge by killing the child’s
self-activity, and, moreover, by introducing alien motives for his
activity, implants the root of weakness and uncertainty of character.
Fichte was a great admirer of Pestalozzi. He was captivated by
the educational zeal and the pedagogic principles of the Swiss
reformer, and recommended them as the true foundation upon which the
new education of the German nation should be laid. Kant indorsed
Basedow’s experimental efforts in the philanthropic institute; but
Fichte preached the gospel of the Swiss “fanatic.” Historians are
inclined to count this as the most important merit of Fichte in the
history of education. For it contributed greatly to the influx of the
Pestalozzian tide into Germany, especially into Prussia, and thus led
to the most flourishing age of pedagogical writers, and to inscribing
the motto of universal education on the national flag of the country.
We might say that it is due largely to Fichte that the great Swiss
educator has become an adopted son of Prussia, and what he intended
for the elevation of the Helvetian poor has become the inspiration of
elementary education for all the nations on the globe.
But in a few points Fichte did not agree with Pestalozzi. One is in
regard to the position of reading and writing in the education of
the masses: Pestalozzi cherished, so thought Fichte, too innocent a
belief in the tradition of ages, in that he set up these two as though
they were the end and goal of instruction, when, in fact, they have
hitherto been the very instruments to enwrap men in the mist and the
shadow of learned ignorance, and to make them over-intelligent. They
take men away from the immediate perception to the mere symbol, from
the concentration of mind to its diffusion. Instruction in letters and
words, therefore, is not only unessential for the education of the
people at large, but even harmful.
In the second place, Fichte did not quite agree with Pestalozzi in the
method of sense-education. The Pestalozzian idea of the A. B. C. of
perception is a praiseworthy one, but it cannot be attained through
words. Fichte asks: “How can a child obtain the knowledge of his body
without having first learned to use it?” According to Fichte’s theory
of knowledge, self-activity precedes every content of consciousness,
and the vague feeling or sensation of this primordial, subjective
activity is the first beginning of our knowledge. Consequently,
“the true foundation of instruction and knowledge must be, to use
the Pestalozzian expression, the A. B. C. of sensation” (3: p.
407). The child is to learn to clearly perceive and distinguish the
various sensations which he experiences, and to express them, each in
distinction from others. Impressions at first produce a chaos in the
infant, but by learning to discriminate them he comes to perceive the
objects impressed upon him: thus from the A. B. C. of sensation he is
led to the A. B. C. of perception. Language should not be imparted
from outside as a mere symbol, but should develop in the child as
the progressively differentiating expression of his inner self or
subjective experience. In this way knowledge and speech become living
things and parts of the child’s own being.
Together with these there must be training in the A. B. C. of bodily
faculty--i. e., motor activity. Pestalozzi calls attention to this
training, but the plan for it has not yet been fundamentally and
systematically worked out. “To do this, it needs a man who is equally
well acquainted with the anatomy of the human body and scientific
mechanics, combining with these a high degree of philosophical insight”
(3: p. 410). By such a man alone, the complete method, not only of
maintaining, but also of strengthening and elevating health, the beauty
of body, and the vitality of mind can be devised. Fichte emphasizes
“the unnegligibility of this factor for an education that pretends
to form the whole man, and which is especially intended for a nation
whose independence is to be regained and maintained” (3: pp. 410-411).
His suggestion was taken up by Jahn and his followers, and the German
gymnastics arose in an endeavor to realize this hope, which has not
only played a not inconsiderable part in the independence and uplifting
of his people, but has been a great incentive to a world-wide movement
toward a systematic building up of the perfect physique which alone can
be the temple of the perfect soul.
Thus “the training of the child to clarify first his sensations, then
his perceptions, together with an orderly motor culture of his body,
are the first essentials of the new education of the German nation” (3:
p. 411). But the second yet more important factor is moral education.
Fichte, in his “Characteristics of the Present Age,” characterized the
spirit of the age as self-seeking, eudemonistic individualism, and
saw the root of its final depravity and sinfulness in this erroneous,
self-destructive principle of social life. Nay, the defeat and
subjugation of the German nation by a foreign power is due to this
egoistic individualism. Its independence will be lost forever unless
the moral principle of the people is fundamentally changed. In the
moral regeneration of the people alone lies the hope of Germany.
According to Fichte, the child naturally has respect for the right,
the good, and the true. “The basis of all moral education is to know
and firmly presume that there is such an instinct in the child, so
that its manifestation may be recognized and developed higher and
higher, through proper stimulation and the presentation of materials
to satisfy it” (3: p. 417). Express instruction, admonition, and
consciously directed and purposive discipline have no place; nay, such
a course will only “kill the inner moral sense and form the heartless
hypocrite” (4: p. 358). In the hidden depth of the child’s own heart,
without being self-conscious, must morality spring forth by itself
and gradually grow up and irradiate, as external relations increase
and become clearer to him. This should be so and will be so, without
any purposive interference from outside at all, so long as only pure,
good examples surround the child, and all the bad, mean, and low ones
are kept far from his eyes. “Beside this protective care, an educator
has only to set forth a few self-evident and easily observable positive
rules--such as, not to tell a lie, not speak or act voluntarily against
one’s own conscience.” Conscience, the inner voice of conscience--here
the universal laws of the moral world reveal themselves. Act always
according to your conscience--this is the golden rule of morality.
“According to all experience, this law takes hold upon the child’s
mind with a wonderful power; it elevates him, gives him an internal
stronghold, and becomes for him an inexhaustible fountain of inner
integrity, which is the mother of all virtues, and which, being once
acquired, one will never fall into a helpless depravity” (4: pp.
358-359).
Fichte follows his master in saying that we have to perform duty
simply because it is duty, and not from any calculation of personal
pleasure. But he would not exclude from morality all feeling elements,
as Kant did. For Kant, even liking or inclination of heart was a
motive extraneous and even antagonistic to true morality. Fichte, on
the contrary, thinks that we ought to advance in our morality so
as to love the good from our innermost, necessary inclination or
disposition. This alone will be the sure and stable basis of virtue
and character. Instinct had no place in Kantian ethics; all must have
come from reason--i. e., the enlightened will. But Fichte recognizes
the existence of the moral instinct, and wants simply to develop it.
Spontaneity and habituation were despised by Kant as mere mechanism
unworthy of a rational creature, but for Fichte these are the highest
goal of morality. Here, freedom and necessity are one; _ought_
is _must_. The aim of moral education is to establish firmly the
inner necessity of morality, in the depths of the ego, so that the will
wishes only the good and right, and cannot wish anything but the good
and right.
Considered in its social relation, “the root of all morality is
self-mastery, the conquering of the individual self, the subordination
of one’s self-seeking instincts under the idea of the whole” (3: p.
417). How can this social consciousness be cultivated? Not by precepts,
catechism, nor discipline, but by providing the child an environment
in which he will spontaneously live, learn, love, and accustom himself
to a perfect, organic mode of life. Consequently, Fichte proposes his
plan of an educational community. This man of will, who aimed, first of
all, to form a strong and noble will in the soul of the new generation,
unlike that man of heart, who wanted to cultivate a pure, simple, and
loving heart in degraded and neglected humanity, insisted on the entire
separation of children from their home. For, “the pressure and care
of daily occurrences, the parents’ petty exaction and eagerness for
gain which attach to the home, especially of the working classes, will
necessarily distract and hinder the child from making a free flight
into the world of thought” (3: pp. 406-407). He is, moreover, to be
separated from society at large, which is, at present, fundamentally
corrupted, and to reform which is the aim of the new education. So the
whole new generation is to be secluded in an independent institution or
community, entirely of their own and for themselves, therein to grow
up, under the sole sway of the new education, into the ideal citizens
of the coming ideal state. This community is to rest on the principles
of self-activity and cooperation, instead of passive slavishness and
egoistic individualism. Let us see more in detail what was the nature
of Fichte’s proposed institution.
It is in its general character more a sort of children’s communistic
colony than a school. It is to embody the ideal of a perfect social
organism.
“The organization must be so regulated that an individual shall not
be simply subordinated to the whole, but he shall be enabled to act
and work for the whole.--It should be a fundamental rule of the
organization that everyone who excels in any line should help in
teaching others, and share in various responsibilities; that everyone
who finds the way for any improvement, or understands first and most
clearly the things presented by the teacher, should carry them on with
his own labor; that everyone should satisfy these demands voluntarily
and not from compulsion; that he should expect no reward, for it
must be the ruling spirit of the community that each does simply his
own duty and enjoys purely the pleasure of doing and working for the
whole, and succeeding in the work which falls in his lot” (3: 294-295).
The organization is to be not only a cultural community, but also
an industrial and economic one. “Besides the mental development
in learning there should be bodily exercise, and mechanized yet
spiritualized labor of farming and varied manual work carried on” (3:
p. 294). “Learning and work should go together” was his motto (3: p.
423).
The institution is to be self-supporting; at least, should appear so to
the pupils.
“No article of food or clothing nor any implement, so far as possible,
should be used which is not produced or manufactured in it. If its
finance needs help from outside, it should be only in the form of
objects of Nature.... For this independence and self-sufficiency of
the whole each individual works with all his might, without settling
any account with the institution, and without making any claim for his
personal possession. Each is aware that he is entirely responsible to
the whole, and enjoys or suffers only with the whole. By this means
the honorable independence of state and family, of which he should one
day become a member, will be secured; by this means the relation of
the individual to these institutions will be comprehended in a living
manner, and take root in his very soul, never to effaced” (3: p. 425).
In this “Economic Education” the child acquires his vocational training
through his economic activities, and his vocational training under
these systematized and regulated conditions provides him, at the same
time, a mental and moral culture. He is equipped with the fundamental
knowledge of, and skill in, various branches of productive industry. In
him the love of self-activity, of work, of study are established. He
is habituated to the living laws of coöperative social life. “Such a
child alone will be the one whom the educator can safely send out into
society as its true citizen. Such will be the limit which an education
can demand from any child in the name of the world.”
Fichte stands for the coeducation of the sexes; since “the separation
of sexes in a special institution for each would be unreasonable, and
destroy many essentials of education for the complete man.” In his
proposed institution the subjects of instruction are to be the same for
both sexes, while the distinction is to be made as to the kind of work.
The most important thing is that “both should learn early to recognize
and love the common humanity in the other, and make friends among the
opposite sex as well as those of their own before attention is directed
to the sex difference.” Moreover, “the mutual relation of both sexes
in one whole will develop within the institution and in the mind of
children manly protection on the one hand, and loving assistance on the
other” (3: p. 422).
Here ends the education of the child as the future citizen of the
world. But there is still another and a higher thing, which can, in
special cases, be done by the educator of the people. He may lead the
child to a life higher than that of this visible world. This life in
religion is the deeply-seated source of true morality. “The child
of the new education is not only a member of human society in this
visible world, and for a short span of life, but he also is, and will
no doubt recognize himself to be, a link in the eternal chain of the
spiritual life in general. One who has penetrated the whole essence of
his being and recognized the ethical world which has never existed,
yet eternally should be, will also recognize or produce in his thought
the transcendental world-order, which eternally exists” (3: p. 297).
He shall come to seek such a world of ideas and ideals, and live in
it, as his only real life, light, and blessing, considering all else
as mere death, darkness, and misery. This life in the transcendental
world--namely, religion--is not a life beyond the grave, but is life
immanent in our earthly existence and extending to eternity.
“To find heaven right on this earth, and let it flow perpetually in
his daily work; to implant and to cultivate the immortal in the mortal
itself--not merely in the mystical and unintelligible way, but in the
visible way--this is a natural and ever-working instinct of man, which
is absent only under the pressure of necessity” (3: p. 376).
To develop this instinct in the child, and lead him to the ever higher
life of true religion, is the last task of the new education.
The above is a brief sketch of Fichte’s plan of the new education
for the people, by means of which he hoped to revive and regenerate
the sunken and ruined nation. Fichte, like Rousseau and Pestalozzi,
sanguinely had confidence in the power of a new form of education
to bring about an immediate reconstruction of the existing society,
against which they each raised the voice of protest. But while Rousseau
wanted to build a new society on the basis of his new _natural
man_, who is to be educated solely through the nature of his
individual self, and Pestalozzi of his new _home man_, who shall
essentially grow up in and through the normal home, for Fichte, the
foundation of the new nation rested on the new _social man_, who
is trained in, through, and to an ideal social life specially provided
to secure his best growth.
However, his hope for Germany was much larger than the mere restoration
of her independence and solidarity. It was his firm conviction that
his people, as the parent stock of the Teutonic race, with an original
language and a passionate idealism, should and will lead the whole
world in the progress of science and culture. And with this vision,
he conceived a new plan for a special scholarly education, which we
find as radical as his scheme for the common people’s education. He
presents to us two totally different forms of education--an extremely
anti-academic education for the common people and a highly academic
education for the intellectual classes.
The intellectual classes comprise those whose vocation is to be
the leaders of the race in its upward and forward march. They are
represented by the rulers, legislators, administrators, academic
teachers, scientific writers, artists, and preachers. We may divide
them into two categories: those who strive to elevate society into an
ideal condition which is realizable at the present time, and others who
always seek after a better, higher, and clearer ideal, and to impart
it to the contemporary and succeeding generations. The function of the
latter is the enrichment and enlargement of the domain of culture;
that of the former is the realization of the cultural ideals already
attained in the world of actuality, which can be fulfilled perfectly
only when one has acquired it in his own person. Therefore, according
to Fichte, rulers and statesmen must be scholars and must have received
thorough academic training. To see the scholar at the head of every
department of national activity was his dream. What kind of being,
then, should this glorified scholar be?
He is to inspire and guide an ever-progressing movement of mankind
toward freedom from the bondage of Nature, of ignorance, and of
barbarism, toward its ever-increasing self-activity and supremacy.
He must rouse men to the feeling of their true wants and make them
acquainted with the means of satisfying these. “He sees not merely the
present, he sees also the future; he sees not merely the point which
humanity now occupies, but also that to which it must next advance.”
He must endeavor to have the most widely extended survey of the
actual advancement of culture, and to extend its domain further. And
since “the ultimate purpose of each individual man, as well as of all
society, and consequently of all the labors of the scholar in society,
is the moral elevation of all men ... he ought to exhibit in himself
the highest grade of moral culture then possible” (5: pp. 191-193).
To make the university “the free nurse, in every sense and in its
widest meaning,” of such scholarship was the essential aim, for which
Fichte made the plan for the national university which was soon to be
established in Berlin.
This academic training was to be special and universal at the same
time. It is special in admitting “only those who show the special
endowment for learning, and conspicuous inclination to the world
of ideas,” yet is universal in taking in “everyone who shows the
qualifications, without making any exception or having any regard
to the distinctions of parentage.” It was to be supported and
conducted by the hand of the nation, “for scholarship is not for one’s
individual satisfaction, and every talent for it is an invaluable
property of a nation” (3: p. 426). The student should be freed from
every outside care by means of a sufficient support for the present,
and the guarantee of a proper position in the future. On the other
hand, he should be completely secluded from all other activities and
distractions of life in order to devote his whole soul to his purpose.
The child destined to be a scholar is, in his early years, to be
educated differently from others. Thus, in the general scheme of the
people’s education, the time which is spent by others in their economic
activities is to be devoted in his case to the intellectual work of
self-active learning and solitary thinking, although he shares with
the rest in bodily exercises and in acquiring a general knowledge of
various industries. For him the study of language and acquiring the
power of speech is necessary and important. The classics, especially
Greek, should come earlier than the modern languages, because Fichte
thought the former have more unity and harmony between the form and the
content than have the latter, thus favoring the development of vital
speech-power in the child.
A university is “the school for the art of scientific use of
intellect.” To implant the lofty sense of academic dignity, to
cultivate the unceasing love for higher culture, to train the power
of independent creative thinking, are the essential things aimed at.
Here the student educates himself, professors being nothing but his
assistants or else elder fellow-scholars. Lectures should be given,
both in spirit and content, as a form of answer to the questions
previously raised by the student, or as the presentation of a new
problem which shall be the topic of the next hour. Besides the lecture,
the following practices are recommended:
1. “_Examina._”--These are not given for testing how far the
student can reproduce what he has read or heard, but for inducing him
to make the questions presented by his learned master the premises from
which to deduce his own answers.
2. “_Conversatoria_,” in which the student asks questions freely,
and the master requestions upon them--a sort of Socratic dialogue.
3. Written research work assigned to the student on a certain problem.
The advanced student is encouraged to offer it to himself and also to
others. Then, since books constitute the main resource of accumulated
knowledge, the student should be taught and accustomed to use them
methodically and skilfully. Thus everything goes simply to arouse the
self-activity of the student, and to provide the materials for it.
On the part of the academic teacher the university is not to be looked
upon as the place for merely communicating book contents in a slightly
modified form; the university stands for the advancement of science and
the scientific spirit; not mere repetition nor a little trimming up of
the old and known, but the bringing forth of the new, and the extension
of the frontier of knowledge. The academic teacher must always be an
investigator and producer. Fichte advises that no one should stay in
that calling “in which the fountain of youth does not still flow on
with an unimpaired vigor.” “Let him,” he says, “faithfully intrust
himself to its current so long as it will bear him forward; when it
leaves him, then let him be content to retire from this ever-shifting
scene of onward movement--let him separate the dead from the living”
(5: p. 307). Readiness of communication, on the one hand, and
plasticity to foreign modes of thought and new ideas, on the other, is
required of him.
Fichte’s schemes both for popular education and the university were
too Utopian to be immediately adopted. Actual reforms were carried out
by those of more practical talents, and according to more practical
conceptions. But the world is now coming to realize the worth of the
vision embodied in his “economic” or “citizenship” education; and as to
his high academic ideal, it has gradually won the victory in the most
advanced universities of to-day.
REFERENCES
1. +Barnard, Henry.+ Pestalozzi and His Educational System.
Bardeen, Syracuse, N. Y., 1906. 751 pages.
2. +Duproix, Paul.+ Kant et Fichte et le Problème de
l’Education. Second edition. Alcan, Paris, 1897. 260 pages.
3. +Fichte, Johann Gottlieb.+ Reden an die deutsche Nation.
Sämtliche Werke. 8 vols. Veit, Berlin, 1845-1846. Vol. VII, pp.
259-499.
4. ---- Aphorismen über Erziehung aus dem Jahre, 1804. Sämtliche
Werke. Vol. VIII, pp. 353-360.
5. ---- Vocation of the Scholar. On the Nature of the Scholar. Popular
Works of J. G. Fichte. 2 vols. Trübner, London, 1889. Vol. I, pp.
149-317.
6. ---- Deducirter Plan zu Berlin zu errichtenden höheren Lehranstalt.
Sämtliche Werke. Vol. VIII, pp. 97-219.
7. +Gutmann, S. Hirsch.+ J. G. Fichte’s soziale Pädagogik.
Scheitlin, Bern, 1907. 100 pages.
8. +Heman, Friedrich.+ Geschichte der neueren Pädagogik.
Zickfeldt, Osterwieck, 1904. 436 pages.
9. +Keferstein, Horst.+ J. G. Fichte’s pädagogische Schriften
und Ideen. Richler, Wien, 1883. 238 pages.
10. +Rein, Georg Wilhelm+, editor. Encyklopädisches Handbuch
der Pädagogik. 8 vols. Beyer, Langensalza, 1895-1906. Vol. II.
11. +Scherer, Heinrich.+ Die Pädagogik in ihrer Entwicklung
im Zusammenhange mit dem Kultur- und Geistesleben und ihrem Einfluss
auf die Gestaltung des Erziehungs- und Bildungswesens. Vol. II. Die
Pädagogik als Wissenschaft von Pestalozzi bis zu Gegenwart. 3 parts.
Brandstetter, Leipzig, 1897-1908.
12. +Sieler, Albien.+ Darstellung der Volkschulpädagogik. J. G.
Fichte’s im Zusammenhange mit ihren individuellen, historischen und
philosophischen Voraussetzungen. Siegismund, Leipzig, 1895. 75 pages.
13. +Strümpell, Ludwig H.+ Die Pädagogik Kant’s und Fichte’s.
Pädagogische Abhandlungen. Diechert, Leipzig, 1894. Part II.
14. +Ziegler, Theobald.+ Geschichte der Pädagogik mit
besonderer Rücksicht auf das höhere Unterrichtswesen. Beck, München,
1895. 361 pages.