A CATECHISM OF EDUCATIONAL THEORY
Character and Disposition.
Origin of Conduct.—What is character?
The resultant of residuum of conduct.
That is to say, a man is what he has made himself by the thoughts which he has allowed himself, the words he has spoken, the deeds he has done.
How does conduct itself originate?
Commonly, in our habitual modes of thought. We think as we are accustomed to think, and, therefore, act as we are accustomed to act.
What, again, is the origin of these habits of thought and act?
Commonly, inherited disposition. The man who is generous, obstinate, hot-tempered, devout, is so, on the whole, because that strain of character runs in his family.
Means of Modifying Disposition.—Are there any means of modifying inherited dispositions?
Yes; marriage, for the race; education, for the individual.
Life-History of a Habit.
How may a bad habit which has its rise in an inherited disposition be corrected?
By the contrary good habit: as Thomas à Kempis has said, ‘One custom overcometh another.’
Genesis of a Habit.—Trace the genesis of a habit.
Every act proceeds from a thought. Every thought modifies somewhat the material structure of the brain. That is, the nerve substance of the brain forms itself to the manner of thoughts we think. The habit of act rises from the habit of thought. The person who thinks, ‘Oh, it will do’; ‘Oh, it doesn’t matter,’ forms a habit of negligent and imperfect work.
Correction of Bad Habit.—How may such habit be corrected?
By introducing the contrary line of thought, which will lead to contrary action. ‘This must be done well, because——’
Is it enough to think such thought once?
No, the stimulus of the new idea must be applied until it is, so to speak, at home in the brain, and arises involuntarily.
What do you mean by involuntary thought?
The brain is at work unceasingly, is always thinking, or rather is always being acted upon by thought, as the keys of an instrument by the fingers of a player.
Is the person aware of all the thoughts that the brain elaborates?
No; only of those which are new and ‘striking.’ The old familiar ‘way of thinking’ beats in the brain without the consciousness of the thinker.
Conduct depends on Unconscious Cerebration.—What name is given to this unconscious thought?
Unconscious (or involuntary) cerebration.
Why is it important to the educator?
Because most of our actions spring from thoughts of which we are not conscious, or, anyway, which are involuntary.
Is there any means of altering the trend of unconscious cerebration?
Yes, by diverting it into a new channel.
The ‘unconscious cerebration’ of the greedy child
runs upon cakes and sweetmeats: how may this be corrected?
By introducing a new idea—the pleasure of giving pleasure with these good things, for example.
Springs of Action.
Is the greedy child capable of receiving such new idea?
Most certainly; because benevolence, the desire of benefiting others, is one of those springs of action in every human being that need only to be touched to make them act.
Give an example of this fact.
Benevolence.—Mungo Park, dying of thirst, hunger, and weariness in an African desert, found himself in the vicinity of a cannibal tribe. He gave himself up for lost, but a woman of the tribe found him, took compassion on him, brought him milk, hid him, and nourished him until he was restored and could take care of himself.
Are there any other springs of action which may be touched with effect in every human being?
Yes, such as the desire of knowledge, of society, of distinction, of wealth; friendship, gratitude, and many more. Indeed, it is not possible to incite a human being to any sort of good and noble conduct but you touch a responsive spring.
How, then, can human beings do amiss?
Malevolence.—Because the good feelings have their opposite bad feelings, springs which also await a touch. Malevolence is opposed to benevolence. It is easy to imagine that the unstable savage woman might have been amongst the first to devour the man
she cherished, ban one of her tribe given an impulse to the springs of hatred within her.
In view of these internal impulses, what is the duty of the educator?
To make himself acquainted with the springs of action in a human being, and to touch them with such wisdom, tenderness and moderation that the child is insensibly led into the habits of the good life.
Habits of the Good Life
Habits of ‘Well-brought-up’ Persons.—Name some of these habits.
Diligence, reverence, gentleness, truthfulness, promptness, neatness, courtesy; in fact, the virtues and graces which belong to persons who have been ‘well brought up.’
Is it enough to stimulate a spring of action—say, curiosity, or the desire of knowledge, once, in order to secure a habit?
No; the stimulus must be repeated, and action upon it secured over and over many times before a habit is formed.
What common error do people make about the formation of habits?
They allow lapses; they train a child to ‘shut the door after him’ twenty times, and allow him to leave it open the twenty-first.
With what result?
That the work has to be done over again, because the growth of brain tissue to the new habit (the forming of cell-connections) has been disturbed. The result would appear to be much the same as when the
flesh-forming process which knits up a wound is disturbed.
Time should be given to the Forming of a Habit.—Then the educator should ‘time’ himself in forming habits? How long may it take to cure a bad habit, and form the contrary good one?
Perhaps a month or six weeks of careful incessant treatment may be enough.
But such treatment requires an impossible amount of care and watchfulness on the part of the educator?
Yes; but not more than is given to the cure of some bodily diseases—measles, or scarlet fever, for example.
Then the thoughts and actions of a human being may be regulated mechanically, so to speak, by setting up the right nerve currents in the brain?
This is true only so far as it is true to say that the keys of a piano produce music.
Thoughts Follow in Sequence.—But the thoughts, which may be represented by the fingers of the player, do they not also run their course without the consciousness of the thinker.
Would you illustrate this?
Mathematicians have been known to think out abstruse problems in their sleep; the bard improvise, authors ‘reel off’ without premeditation, without any deliberate intention to write such and such things. The thoughts follow each other according to the habit of thinking previously set up in the brain of the thinker.
Into new Developments.—Is it that the thoughts go round and round a subject like a horse in a mill?
No; the horse is rather drawing a carriage along the same high road, but into ever new developments of the landscape.
The Initial Thought.—In this light, the important thing is how you begin to think on any subject?
Precisely so; the initial thought or suggestion touches as it were the spring which sets in motion a possibly endless succession, or train, of ideas; thoughts which are, so to speak, elaborated in the brain almost without the consciousness of the thinker.
Are these thoughts, or successive ideas, random, or do they make for any conclusion?
They make for the logical conclusion which should follow the initial idea.
Then the reasoning power may be set to work involuntary?
Yes; the sole concern of this power is, apparently, to work out the rational conclusion from any idea presented to it.
‘Reason’ Acts without Volition.—Then is what is called ‘the reason’ innate in human beings?
Yes, it is innate, and is exercised without volition by all, but gains in power and precision in proportion as it is cultivated.
Not an Infallible Guide to Conduct.—If the reason, especially the trained reason, arrives at the right conclusion without any effort of volition on the part of the thinker, it is practically an infallible guide to conduct?
On the contrary, the reason is pledged to pursue a suggestion to its logical conclusion only. Much of the history of religious persecutions and of family and international feuds turns on the confusion which exists in most minds between that which is logically inevitable and that which is morally right.
But according to this doctrine any theory whatever may be shown to be logically inevitable?
Exactly so; the initial idea once received, the difficulty is, not to prove that it is tenable, but to restrain the mind from proving that it is so.
Can you illustrate this point?
The child who lets himself be jealous of his brother is almost startled by the flood of convincing proofs, that he does well to be angry, which rush in upon him. Beginning with a mere flash of suspicion in the morning, the little Cain finds himself in the evening possessed of irrefragable proofs that his brother is unjustly preferred to him; and,
‘All seems infected that the infected spy,
As all looks yellow to the jaundiced eye.’
But supposing it is true that the child has cause for jealousy?
Given the starting idea, and his reason is equally capable of proving a logical certainty, whether it is true or whether it is not true.
Is there any historical proof of this startling theory?
Confusion as to Logical and Moral Right.—Perhaps every failure in conduct, in individuals, and in nations, is due to the confusion which exists as to that which is logically right, as established by the reason, and that which is morally right, as established by external law.
Is any such distinction recognised in the Bible?
Distinctly so; the transgressors of the Bible are those who do that which is right in their own eyes—that is, that of which their reason approves. Modern thought considers, on the contrary, that all men are justified in doing that which is right in their own eyes, acting ‘up to their lights,’ ‘obeying the dictates of their reason.’
A mother whose cruel usage had caused the death of her child was morally exonerated some time ago in
a court of justice because she acted ‘from a mistaken sense of duty.’
Error from Mistaken Sense of Duty.—But is it not possible to err from a mistaken sense of duty?
Not only possible, but inevitable, if a man accept his ‘own reason’ as his lawgiver and judge. Take a test case, the case of the superlative crime that has been done upon the earth. There can be no doubt that the persons who caused the death of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ acted under a mistaken sense of duty. ‘It is expedient that one man die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not,’ said, most reasonably, those patriotic leaders of the Jews; and they relentlessly hunted to death this Man whose ascendency over the common people and whose whispered claims to kingship were full of elements of danger to the subject race. ‘They know not what they do,’ he said, who is the Truth.
Children should be taught Self-knowledge.
All this may be of importance to philosophers; but what has it to do with the bringing-up of children?
A Child should know what he is as a Human Being.—It is time we reverted to the teaching of Socrates. ‘Know thyself,’ exhorted the wise man, in season and out of season; and it will be well with us when we understand that to acquaint a child with himself—what he is as a human being—is a great part of education.
It is difficult to see why; surely much harm comes of morbid introspection?
Introspection is morbid or diseased when the person imagines that all which he finds within him is
peculiar to him as an individual. To know what is common to all men is a sound cure for unhealthy self-contemplation.
How does it work?
This Knowledge a Safeguard.—To recognise the limitations of the reason is a safeguard in all the duties and relations of life. The man who knows that loyalty is his first duty in every relation, and that if he admit doubting, grudging, unlovely thoughts, he cannot possibly be loyal, because such thoughts once admitted will prove themselves to be right and fill the whole field of thought, why, he is on his guard and writes up ‘no admittance’ to every manner of mistrustful fancy.
That rule of life should affect the Supreme relationship?
Truly, yes; if a man will admit no beginning of mistrustful surmise concerning his father and mother, his child and his wife, shall he do so of Him who is more than they, and more than all, the ‘Lord of his heart’? ‘Loyalty forbids’ is the answer to every questioning of His truth that would intrude.
Against ‘Honest Doubt.’—But when others whom you must needs revere, question and tell you of their ‘honest doubt’?
You know the history of their doubt, and can take it for what it is worth—its origin in the suggestion, which, once admitted, must needs reach a logical conclusion even to the bitter end. ‘Take heed that you enter not into temptation,’ He said, who needed not that any should tell Him, for He knew what was in men.
Man as Free Agent
If man is the creature of those habits he forms with care or allows in negligence, if his very thoughts are involuntary and his conclusions inevitable, he ceases to be a free agent. One might as well concede at once that ‘thought is a mode of motion,’ and cease to regard man as a spiritual being capable of self regulation. Is not this the case?
It is hardly possible to concede too wide a field to biological research, if we keep well to the front the fact that man is a spiritual being whose material organs act in obedience to non-material ideas; that, for example, as the hand writes, so the brain thinks, in obedience to stimulating ideas.
Life Sustained upon Ideas.—Is the idea self originated?
Probably not; it would appear that, as the material life is sustained upon its appropriate food from without, so the immaterial life is sustained upon its food,—ideas spiritually conveyed.
May the words ‘idea’ and ‘suggestion’ be used as synonymous terms?
Only in so far as that ideas convey suggestions to be effected in acts.
What part does the man himself play in the reception of this immaterial food?
It is as though one stood on the threshold to admit or reject the viands which should sustain the family.
Volition in the Reception of Ideas.—Is this free-will in the reception or rejection of ideas the limit of man’s responsibility in the conduct of his life?
Probably it is; for an idea once received must run its course, unless it be superseded by another idea, in the reception of which volition is again exercised.
Origin of Ideas.
How do ideas originate?
They appear to be spiritual emanations from spiritual beings; thus, one man conveys to another the idea which is a very part of himself.
How Ideas are Conveyed.—Is the intervention of a bodily presence necessary for the transmission of an idea?
By no means; ideas may be conveyed through picture or printed page; natural objects convey ideas, but, perhaps, the initial idea in this case may always be traced to another mind.
The Supreme Educator.—Then the spiritual sustenance of ideas is derived directly or indirectly from other human beings?
No; and here is the great recognition which the educator is called upon to make. God, the Holy Spirit, is Himself the supreme Educator of mankind.
He openeth man’s ear morning by morning, to hear so much of the best as the man is able to hear.
In things Natural and Spiritual.—Are the ideas suggested by the Holy Spirit confined to the sphere of the religious life?
No; Coleridge, speaking of Columbus and the discovery of America, ascribes the origin of great inventions and discoveries to the fact that ‘certain
ideas of the natural world are presented to minds already prepared to receive them by a higher Power than Nature herself.’
Is there any teaching in the Bible to support this view?
Yes; very much. Isaiah, for example, says that the ploughman knows how to carry on the successive operations of husbandry, ‘for his God doth instruct him and doth teach him.’
Are all ideas which have a purely spiritual origin ideas of good?
Unhappily, no; it is the sad experience of mankind that ideas of evil also are spiritually conveyed.
What is the part of the man?
To choose the good and refuse the evil.
This View throws Light on Christian Doctrine.—Does this doctrine of ideas as the spiritual food needful to sustain the immaterial life throw any light on the doctrines of the Christian religion?
Yes; the Bread of Life, the Water of Life, the Word by which man lives, the ‘meat to eat which ye know not of,’ and much more, cease to be figurative expressions, except that we must use the same words to name the corporeal and the incorporeal sustenance of man. We understand, moreover, how ideas emanating from our Lord and Saviour, which are of His essence, are the spiritual meat and drink of His believing people. We find it no longer a ‘hard saying,’ nor a dark saying, that we must sustain our spiritual selves upon Him, even as our bodies upon bread.
Divine Co-operation in Education.—What practical bearing upon the educator has this doctrine of ideas?
He knows that it is his part to place before the child daily nourishment of ideas; that he may give the child the right initial idea in every study, and respecting each relation and duty of life; above all, he recognises the divine co-operation in the direction, teaching, and training of the child.
The Functions of Education.
How would you summarise the functions of education?
Education is a discipline—that is, the discipline of the good habits in which the child is trained. Education is a life, nourished upon ideas; and education is an atmosphere—that is, the child breathes the atmosphere emanating from his parents; that of the ideas which rule their own lives.
Part of Lessons in Education.—What part do lessons and the general work of the schoolroom play in education thus regarded?
They should afford opportunity for the discipline of many good habits, and should convey to the child such initial ideas of interest in his various studies as to make the pursuit of knowledge of those lines an object in life and a delight to him.
A Curriculum.—Has a child any natural fitness for knowledge?
Yes; it would appear that he has a natural affinity for all knowledge, and has a right to a generous curriculum of studies.
What duty lies upon parents and others who regard education thus seriously, as a lever by means of which character may be elevated, almost indefinitely?
Perhaps it is incumbents upon them to make conscientious
endeavours to further all means used to spread the views they hold; believing that there is such ‘progress in character and virtue’ possible to the redeemed human race as has not yet been realised or even imagined. ‘Education is an atmosphere, a discipline, a life.’
 ‘The Parents’ National Educational Union.’
 From Thompson’s Laws of Thought.