Hello Students,
Here are the questions for next Monday's class. Be sure to answer each question in complete sentences, and use your own words as much as possible.
1. What are "the three masters" of education? Explain what is meant by each one?
2. Why does Rousseau think that "civilization" corrupts an individual?
3. Why does Rousseau say that the surest way to make a child miserable is to give him everything that he wants?
4. How does Rousseau's views reflect the pragmatic view that a person's education is an open-ended process?
Wednesday, March 27, 2019
Rousseau, Emile, or On Education 1762
You are responsible for reading the following excerpts from Book One and Two of Jean-Jacques Rousseau's Emile, or On Education published in 1762.
Also here is a link to the entire book if you are interested in reading more of it https://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/rousseau-emile-or-education
BOOK I
God
makes all things good; man meddles with them and they become evil. He
forces one soil to yield the products of another, one tree to bear
another’s fruit. He confuses and confounds time, place, and natural
conditions. He mutilates his dog, his horse, and his slave. He destroys
and defaces all things; he loves all that is deformed and monstrous; he
will have nothing as nature made it, not even man himself, who must
learn his paces like a saddle-horse, and be shaped to his master’s taste
like the trees in his garden.
...Plants are
fashioned by cultivation, man by education. If a man were born tall and
strong, his size and strength would be of no good to him till he had
learnt to use them; they would even harm him by preventing others from
coming to his aid;
left to himself he would die of want before he knew his needs. We
lament the helplessness of infancy; we fail to perceive that the race
would have perished had not man begun by being a child.
We are born weak,
we need strength; helpless, we need aid; foolish, we need reason. All
that we lack at birth, all that we need when we come to man’s estate, is
the gift of education.
This education
comes to us from nature, from men, or from things. The inner growth of
our organs and faculties is the education of nature, the use we learn to
make of this growth is the education of men, what we gain by our
experience of our surroundings is the education of things.
Thus we are each
taught by three masters. If their teaching conflicts, the scholar is
ill-educated and will never be at peace with himself; if their teaching
agrees, he goes straight to his goal, he lives at peace with himself, he
is well-educated.
Now of these three
factors in education nature is wholly beyond our control, things are
only partly in our power; the education of men is the only one
controlled by us; and even here our power is largely illusory, for who
can hope to direct every word and deed of all with whom the child has to
do.
Viewed as an art,
the success of education is almost impossible, since the essential
conditions of success are beyond our control. Our efforts may bring us
within sight of the goal, but fortune must favour us if we are to reach
it.
What is this goal?
As we have just shown, it is the goal of nature. Since all three modes
of education must work together, the two that we can control must follow
the lead of that which is beyond our control. Perhaps this word Nature
has too vague a meaning. Let us try to define it.
Nature, we are
told, is merely habit. What does that mean? Are there not habits formed
under compulsion, habits which never stifle nature? Such, for example,
are the habits of plants trained horizontally. The plant keeps its
artificial shape, but the sap has not changed its course, and any new
growth the plant may make will be vertical. It is the same with a man’s
disposition; while the conditions remain the same, habits, even the
least natural of them, hold good; but change the conditions, habits
vanish, nature reasserts
herself. Education itself is but habit, for are there not people who
forget or lose their education and others who keep it? Whence comes this
difference? If the term nature is to be restricted to habits
conformable to nature we need say no more.
We are born
sensitive and from our birth onwards we are affected in various ways by
our environment. As soon as we become conscious of our sensations we
tend to seek or shun the things that cause them, at first because they
are pleasant or unpleasant, then because they suit us or not, and at
last because of judgments formed by means of the ideas of happiness and
goodness which reason gives us. These tendencies gain strength and
permanence with the growth of reason, but hindered by our habits they
are more or less warped by our prejudices. Before this change they are
what I call Nature within us.
BOOK II
Do you know the
surest way to make your child miserable? Let him have everything he
wants; for as his wants increase in proportion to the ease with which
they are satisfied, you will be compelled, sooner or later, to refuse
his demands, and this unlooked-for refusal will hurt him more than the
lack of what he wants. He will want your stick first, then your watch,
the bird that flies, or the star that shines above him. He will want all
he sets eyes on, and unless you were God himself, how could you satisfy
him?
Man naturally
considers all that he can get as his own. In this sense Hobbes’ theory
is true to a certain extent: Multiply both our wishes and the means of
satisfying them, and each will be master of all. Thus the child, who has
only to ask and have, thinks himself the master of the universe; he
considers all men as his slaves; and when you are at last compelled to
refuse, he takes your refusal as an act of rebellion, for he thinks he
has only to command. All the reasons you give him, while he is still too
young to reason, are so many pretences in his eyes; they seem to him
only unkindness; the sense of injustice embitters his disposition; he
hates every one. Though he has never felt grateful for kindness, he
resents all opposition.
How should I
suppose that such a child can ever be happy? He is the slave of anger, a
prey to the fiercest passions. Happy! He is a tyrant, at once the
basest of slaves and the most wretched of creatures. I have known
children brought up like this who expected you to knock the house down,
to give them the weather-cock on the steeple, to stop a regiment on the
march so that they might listen to the band; when they could not get their way they screamed and
cried and would pay no attention to any one. In vain everybody strove
to please them; as their desires were stimulated by the ease with which
they got their own way, they set their hearts on impossibilities, and
found themselves face to face with opposition and difficulty, pain and
grief. Scolding, sulking, or in a rage, they wept and cried all day.
Were they really so greatly favoured? Weakness, combined with love of
power, produces nothing but folly and suffering. One spoilt child beats
the table; another whips the sea. They may beat and whip long enough
before they find contentment.
...... Treat your pupil according to his age. Put him in his place from the first, and keep him there so well that he does not try to leave it. Then before he knows what wisdom is, he will be practising its most important lesson. Never command him to do anything, whatever in the world it may be. Do not let him even imagine that you claim to have any authority over him. He must know only that he is weak and you are strong, that his condition and yours put him at your mercy.
Let him know this, let him learn it, let him feel it. At an early age let his haughty head feel the heavy yoke which nature imposes upon man, the heavy yoke of necessity under which every finite being must bow. Let him see this necessity in things, not in the whims of man. Let the curb that restrains him be force, not authority. If there is something he should not do, do not forbid him, but prevent him without explanation or reasoning. What you grant him, grant it at his first word without sollicitations or pleading, above all without conditions. Grant with pleasure, refuse only with repugnance; but let your refusal be irrevocable so that no entreaties move you. Let your "No," once uttered, be a wall of bronze against which the child may have to exhaust his strength five or six times in order not to be tempted again to overthrow it....
.....The first education ought thus to be purely negative. It consists not at all in teaching virtue or truth, but in preserving the heart from vice and the mind from error. If you could do nothing and let nothing be done, if you could bring your pupil healthy and robust to the age of twelve without knowing how to distinguish his right hand from his left, the eyes of his understanding would be open to reason as soon as you began to teach him. Without prejudice and without habits, there would be nothing in him to counteract the effects of your labours. In your hands he would soon become the wisest of men; by doing nothing to begin with, you would end with a prodigy of education....
....Since they want their child to be a doctor instead of a child, fathers and teachers think it never too soon to scold, correct, reprimand, flatter, threaten, promise, instruct, and reason. Do better than they; be reasonable and do not reason with your pupil. More especially do not try to make him approve of what he dislikes; for if reason is always connected with disagreeable matters, you make it distasteful to him. . . . Exercise his body, his limbs, his senses, his strength, but keep his mind idle as long as you can. . . . To prevent the birth of evil do not hasten to do good, for goodness is only possible when enlightened by reason. . . . Let childhood to ripen in children. . . .
Tuesday, March 26, 2019
Discussion Questions for 27 March Class
Hello Students,
Here are the two discussion questions that we will start tomorrow's class with:
1. Imagine you are an 8th grade English teacher preparing a lesson on irregular verbs. What pragmatic methods could you use in your preparation?
2. Pragmatists tend to favor a broad education rather than a specialized one. They endorse a more general education and do not believe that "training" is the same things as "education." Do you agree with these views? Why or why not?
Here are the two discussion questions that we will start tomorrow's class with:
1. Imagine you are an 8th grade English teacher preparing a lesson on irregular verbs. What pragmatic methods could you use in your preparation?
2. Pragmatists tend to favor a broad education rather than a specialized one. They endorse a more general education and do not believe that "training" is the same things as "education." Do you agree with these views? Why or why not?
Tuesday, March 12, 2019
Thomas Aquinas; Religious Realism and the Nature of a Teacher
Hello students,
Aristotle famously explains that a good student is a well-balanced student, and a good instructor places value on fostering a well-balanced student. As your instructor, I want to make sure that we as a class are well-balanced. In that light, allow me to place some of the notes on our discussion of Religious Realism below. As we approach our midterm examination next week, I want to make sure that we have concluded our discussion on Realism and Education. And next week, we will have to discuss Modern Realism (as this relates to your reading assignment). Please examine the notes below and we will quickly review them on Monday's class before we proceed into our discussion on Modern Realism and education.
Religious Realism
Thomas Aquinas is sometimes referred to as the "Angelic Doctor." Let's look at some of what has made Thomas Aquinas such an important figure in the field of education and how he represents what is called "Religious Realism." Aquinas was very much concerned with the question, "What is a teacher?" As a member of the religious order, the Dominican Friars, he was a devout Christian who believed that the source of all knowledge is God. He maintained that through faith is ultimately how one comes to truth and embodied the theological maxim, "I believe, so that I may understand. Aquinas argued that only God could be called "Teacher" in the ultimate sense, but if a person teaches it is accomplished only by and through symbols. One human mind cannot directly communicate with the mind of the other, but it can communicate indirectly. We talked in class about how a doctor doesn't heal a broken bone. Nature heals it from the inside. Doctors apply external treatments and inducements but does not really heal it. As with teaching, Aquinas argued only God can touch the inside--the soul--directly. All the teacher can do is attempt to motivate and direct the learner through signs, symbols, and techniques. A teacher can only point the learner to knowledge and understanding with signs and symbols. But Aquinas argued that leading students from ignorance to enlightenment is a way to sere humankind and is part of God's work.
However, what separated Aquinas from Augustine, and where he demonstrates his religious realism, is by arguing that, although yes, the major goal of education is the perfection of the human being and the reunion of the soul with God, in order to accomplish this, we must develop the capacity to reason and exercise intelligence. Human reality is not only spiritual or mental, but also physical and natural. For the human teacher, the path to the soul lies through physical senses and education must use this part to accomplish learning. And, like with Aristotle, this means progressing from a lower to a higher form.
Aquinas maintained that knowledge can be gained through sense data and it can lead one to God and disagreed with Augustine that we could know God only through faith. Aquinas believed that the proper education is one that fully recognizes both the material and the spiritual natures of the individual. For Aquinas, the primary agencies of education are the family and the church, while the state or the government are a distant third. The mother is the child's first teacher. Since a child is easily molded, it's the mother's role to set the child's moral tone. The church sets the ground for understanding God's law. Aristotle and Aquinas both agreed on a dualistic nature of reality, but like with Aristotle, Aquinas that there are material and spiritual sides of humankind or in Aristotelian terms, matter and form.
Aristotle famously explains that a good student is a well-balanced student, and a good instructor places value on fostering a well-balanced student. As your instructor, I want to make sure that we as a class are well-balanced. In that light, allow me to place some of the notes on our discussion of Religious Realism below. As we approach our midterm examination next week, I want to make sure that we have concluded our discussion on Realism and Education. And next week, we will have to discuss Modern Realism (as this relates to your reading assignment). Please examine the notes below and we will quickly review them on Monday's class before we proceed into our discussion on Modern Realism and education.
Religious Realism
Thomas Aquinas is sometimes referred to as the "Angelic Doctor." Let's look at some of what has made Thomas Aquinas such an important figure in the field of education and how he represents what is called "Religious Realism." Aquinas was very much concerned with the question, "What is a teacher?" As a member of the religious order, the Dominican Friars, he was a devout Christian who believed that the source of all knowledge is God. He maintained that through faith is ultimately how one comes to truth and embodied the theological maxim, "I believe, so that I may understand. Aquinas argued that only God could be called "Teacher" in the ultimate sense, but if a person teaches it is accomplished only by and through symbols. One human mind cannot directly communicate with the mind of the other, but it can communicate indirectly. We talked in class about how a doctor doesn't heal a broken bone. Nature heals it from the inside. Doctors apply external treatments and inducements but does not really heal it. As with teaching, Aquinas argued only God can touch the inside--the soul--directly. All the teacher can do is attempt to motivate and direct the learner through signs, symbols, and techniques. A teacher can only point the learner to knowledge and understanding with signs and symbols. But Aquinas argued that leading students from ignorance to enlightenment is a way to sere humankind and is part of God's work.
However, what separated Aquinas from Augustine, and where he demonstrates his religious realism, is by arguing that, although yes, the major goal of education is the perfection of the human being and the reunion of the soul with God, in order to accomplish this, we must develop the capacity to reason and exercise intelligence. Human reality is not only spiritual or mental, but also physical and natural. For the human teacher, the path to the soul lies through physical senses and education must use this part to accomplish learning. And, like with Aristotle, this means progressing from a lower to a higher form.
Aquinas maintained that knowledge can be gained through sense data and it can lead one to God and disagreed with Augustine that we could know God only through faith. Aquinas believed that the proper education is one that fully recognizes both the material and the spiritual natures of the individual. For Aquinas, the primary agencies of education are the family and the church, while the state or the government are a distant third. The mother is the child's first teacher. Since a child is easily molded, it's the mother's role to set the child's moral tone. The church sets the ground for understanding God's law. Aristotle and Aquinas both agreed on a dualistic nature of reality, but like with Aristotle, Aquinas that there are material and spiritual sides of humankind or in Aristotelian terms, matter and form.
Questions for March 18 Class
Hello students,
Here are the three questions that you must answer for Monday's class on March 18.
1. In your own words, what problem does Bacon have with the slow pace of education? For him, what is the best method that a teacher can use to encourage learning?
2. What are Locke's main points in the reading? Do you think he offers a valid criticism of the education process? Why or why not?
3. That types of students are described in Aldous Huxley's Brave New World?
Here are the three questions that you must answer for Monday's class on March 18.
1. In your own words, what problem does Bacon have with the slow pace of education? For him, what is the best method that a teacher can use to encourage learning?
2. What are Locke's main points in the reading? Do you think he offers a valid criticism of the education process? Why or why not?
3. That types of students are described in Aldous Huxley's Brave New World?
Monday, March 11, 2019
Locke On Education
Excerpts from Some Thoughts concerning Education
(1693)
by John Locke
I
think I may say, that, of all the men we meet with, nine parts of ten [i.e.,
90%] are what they are, good or evil, useful or not, by their education. It is that which makes the great difference
in mankind . . .
It
seems plain to me, that the principle of all virtue and excellency lies in a
power of denying ourselves the satisfaction of our own desires, where reason
does not authorize them. This power is
to be got and improved by custom, made easy and familiar by an early
practice. If therefore I might be heard,
I would advise, that, contrary to the ordinary way, children should be used to
submit their desires, and go without their longings, even from their very
cradles. The very first thing they
should learn to know, should be, that they were not to have any thing, because
it pleased them, but because it was thought fit for them. If things suitable to their wants were
supplied to them, so that they were never suffered to have what they once cried
for, they would learn to be content without it; would never with bawling and
peevishness contend for mastery; nor be half so uneasy to themselves and others
as they are, because from the first beginning they are not thus handled. If they were never suffered to obtain their
desire by the impatience they expressed for it, they would no more cry for
other things than they do for the moon.
I
say not this as if children were not to be indulged in any thing, or that I
expected they should . . . have the reason and conduct of counsellors. I consider them as children, who must be
tenderly used, who must play, and have play things. That which I mean is, that whenever they
craved what was not fit for them to have, or do, they should not be permitted
it, because they were little and desired it: nay, whatever they were
importunate for, they should be sure, for that very reason, to be denied.
Those
therefore that intend ever to govern their children, should begin it whilst
they are very little; and look that they perfectly comply with the will of
their parents. Would you have your son
obedient to you, when past a child? Be
sure then to establish the authority of a father, as soon as he is capable of
submission, and can understand in whose power he is. . . . [They] mightily
misplace the treatment due to their children, who are indulgent and familiar
when they are little, but severe to them, and keep them at a distance, when
they are grown up. For liberty and indulgence
can do no good to children: their want [i.e., lack] of judgment makes them
stand in need of restraint and discipline.
And, on the contrary, imperiousness and severity is but an ill way of
treating men, who have reason to their own to guide them, unless you have a
mind to make your children, when grown up, weary of you . . .
I
imagine every one will judge it reasonable, that their children, when little,
should look upon their parents as their lords, their absolute governors; and,
as such, stand in awe of them: and that, when they come to riper years, they
should look on them as their best, as their only sure friends: and, as such,
love and reverence them. . . .
[To]
avoid the danger that is on either hand is the great art: and he that has found
a way how to keep up a child's spirit, easy, active, and free; and yet, at the
same time, to restrain him from many things he has a mind to do, and to draw
him to things that are uneasy to him; he, I say, that knows how to reconcile
these seeming contradictions, has, in my opinion, got the true secret of
education.
The
usual lazy and short way by chastisement, and the rod which is the only
instrument of government that tutors generally know, or ever think of, is the
most unfit of any to be used in education. . . .
Beating
then, and all other sorts of slavish and corporal punishments, are not the
discipline fit to be used in the education of those who would have wise, good,
and ingenuous men; and therefore very rarely to be applied, and that only on
great occasions, and cases of extremity.
On the other side, to flatter children by rewards of things that are
pleasant to them, is as carefully to be avoided. He that will give to his son apples, or
sugar-plums, or what else of this kind he is most delighted with, to make him
learn his book, does but authorise his love of pleasure, and cocker up [i.e.,
encourage] that dangerous propensity, which he ought by all means to subdue and
stifle in him. You can never hope to
teach him to master it, whilst you compound for the check you give his
inclination in one place, by the satisfaction you propose to it in
another. To make a good, a wise, and a
virtuous man, it is fit he should learn to cross his appetite, and deny his
inclination to riches, finery, or pleasing his palate, &c. whenever his
reason advises the contrary, and his duty requires it. But when you draw him to do any thing that is
fit, by the offer of money; or reward the pains of learning his book, by the
pleasure of a luscious morsel; when you promise him a lace-cravat, or a fine
new suit, upon performance of some of his little tasks; what do you, by
proposing these as rewards, but allow them to be the good things he should aim
at, and thereby encourage his longing for them, and accustom him to place his
happiness in them? . . .
First,
children (earlier perhaps than we think) are very sensible of praise and
commendation. They find a pleasure in
being esteemed and valued, especially by their parents, and those whom they
depend on. If therefore the father
caress and commend them, when they do well; show a cold and neglectful
countenance to them upon doing ill; and this accompanied by a like carriage of
the mother, and all others that are about them; it will in a little time make
them sensible of the difference: and this, if constantly observed, I doubt not
but will of itself work more than threats or blows, which lose their force,
when once grown common, and are of no use when shame does not attend them; and
therefore are to be forborn, and never to be used . . . [excepting extreme
cases]
[Let]
your rules to your son be as few as is possible . . . For if you burden him
with many rules, one of these two things must necessarily follow, that either
he must be very often punished, which will be of ill consequence, by making
punishment too frequent and familiar; or else you must let the transgressions
of some of your rules go unpunished, whereby they will of course grow
contemptible, and your authority become cheap to him. Make but few laws, but see they be well observed,
when once made. . . .
He
therefore, that is about children, should well study their natures and
aptitudes, and see, by often trials, what turn they easily take, and what
becomes them: observe what their native stock is, how it may be improved, and
what it is fit for: he should consider what they want, whether they be capable
of having it wrought into them by industry and incorporated there by practice;
and whether it be worth while to endeavour it.
For, in may cases, all that we can do, or should aim at, is, to make the
best of what nature has given, to prevent the vices and faults to which such a
constitution is inclined, and give it all the advantages it is capable of. . .
.
It
will perhaps be wondered, that I mention reasoning with children: and yet I
cannot but think that the true way of dealing with them. They understand it [i.e., reason] as early as
they do language; and, if I misobserve not, they love to be treated as rational
creatures sooner than is imagined. It is
a pride should be cherished in them, and, as much as can be, made the greatest
instrument to turn them by.
Novum Organum Francis Bacon
https://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/bacon-novum-organum/simple#lf0415_label_002
NOVUM ORGANUM
OR
TRUE SUGGESTIONS FOR THE INTERPRETATION OF NATURE
PREFACE
They who have presumed to
dogmatize on nature, as on some well investigated subject, either from
self-conceit or arrogance, and in the professorial style, have inflicted
the greatest injury on philosophy and learning. For they have tended to
stifle and interrupt inquiry exactly in proportion as they have
prevailed in bringing others to their opinion: and their own activity
has not counterbalanced the mischief they have occasioned by corrupting
and destroying that of others. They again who have entered upon a
contrary course, and asserted that nothing whatever can be known,
whether they have fallen into this opinion from their hatred of the
ancient sophists, or from the hesitation of their minds, or from an
exuberance of learning, have certainly adduced reasons for it which are
by no means contemptible. They have not, however, derived their opinion
from true sources, and, hurried on by their zeal and some affectation,
have certainly exceeded due moderation. But the more ancient Greeks
(whose writings have perished), held a more prudent mean, between the
arrogance of dogmatism, and the despair of scepticism; and though too
frequently intermingling complaints and indignation [6]
at the difficulty of inquiry, and the obscurity of things, and
champing, as it were, the bit, have still persisted in pressing their
point, and pursuing their intercourse with nature; thinking, as it
seems, that the better method was not to dispute upon the very point of
the possibility of anything being known, but to put it to the test of
experience. Yet they themselves, by only employing the power of the
understanding, have not adopted a fixed rule, but have laid their whole
stress upon intense meditation, and a continual exercise and perpetual
agitation of the mind.
Our method, though difficult in its operation, is
easily explained. It consists in determining the degrees of certainty,
while we, as it were, restore the senses to their former rank, but
generally reject that operation of the mind which follows close upon the
senses, and open and establish a new and certain course for the mind
from the first actual perceptions of the senses themselves. This, no
doubt, was the view taken by those who have assigned so much to logic;
showing clearly thereby that they sought some support for the mind, and
suspected its natural and spontaneous mode of action. But this is now
employed too late as a remedy, when all is clearly lost, and after the
mind, by the daily habit and intercourse of life, has come prepossessed
with corrupted doctrines, and filled with the vainest idols. The art of
logic therefore being (as we have mentioned), too late a precaution,1 and in no way remedying [7]
the matter, has tended more to confirm errors, than to disclose truth.
Our only remaining hope and salvation is to begin the whole labor of the
mind again; not leaving it to itself, but directing it perpetually from
the very first, and attaining our end as it were by mechanical aid. If
men, for instance, had attempted mechanical labors with their hands
alone, and without the power and aid of instruments, as they have not
hesitated to carry on the labors of their understanding with the unaided
efforts of their mind, they would have been able to move and overcome
but little, though they had exerted their utmost and united powers. And
just to pause awhile on this comparison, and look into it as a mirror;
let us ask, if any obelisk of a remarkable size were perchance required
to be moved, for the purpose of gracing a triumph or any similar
pageant, and men were to attempt it with their bare hands, would not any
sober spectator avow it to be an act of the greatest madness? And if
they should increase the number of workmen, and imagine that they could
thus succeed, would he not think so still more? But if they chose to
make a selection, and to remove the weak, and only employ the strong and
vigorous, thinking by this means, at any rate, to achieve their object,
would he not say that they were more fondly deranged? Nay, if not
content with this, they were to determine on consulting the athletic
art, and were to give orders for all to appear with their hands, arms,
and muscles regularly oiled and prepared, would he not exclaim that they
were taking pains to rave by method and design? Yet men are hurried on
with the same senseless energy and useless combination in intellectual
matters, as long as they expect great results either from the number and
agreement, or the excellence and acuteness of their wits; or even [8]
strengthen their minds with logic, which may be considered as an
athletic preparation, but yet do not desist (if we rightly consider the
matter) from applying their own understandings merely with all this zeal
and effort. While nothing is more clear, than that in every great work
executed by the hand of man without machines or implements, it is
impossible for the strength of individuals to be increased, or for that
of the multitude to combine.
Having premised so much, we lay down two points on
which we would admonish mankind, lest they should fail to see or to
observe them. The first of these is, that it is our good fortune (as we
consider it), for the sake of extinguishing and removing contradiction
and irritation of mind, to leave the honor and reverence due to the
ancients untouched and undiminished, so that we can perform our intended
work, and yet enjoy the benefit of our respectful moderation. For if we
should profess to offer something better than the ancients, and yet
should pursue the same course as they have done, we could never, by any
artifice, contrive to avoid the imputation of having engaged in a
contest or rivalry as to our respective wits, excellences, or talents;
which, though neither inadmissible nor new (for why should we not blame
and point out anything that is imperfectly discovered or laid down by
them, of our own right, a right common to all?), yet however just and
allowable, would perhaps be scarcely an equal match, on account of the
disproportion of our strength. But since our present plan leads up to
open an entirely different course to the understanding, and one
unattempted and unknown to them, the case is altered. There is an end to
party zeal, and we only take upon ourselves the character of a guide,
which requires a moderate share of authority and good fortune, [9] rather than talents and excellence. The first admonition relates to persons, the next to things.
We make no attempt to disturb the system of
philosophy that now prevails, or any other which may or will exist,
either more correct or more complete. For we deny not that the received
system of philosophy, and others of a similar nature, encourage
discussion, embellish harangues, are employed, and are of service in the
duties of the professor, and the affairs of civil life. Nay, we openly
express and declare that the philosophy we offer will not be very useful
in such respects. It is not obvious, nor to be understood in a cursory
view, nor does it flatter the mind in its preconceived notions, nor will
it descend to the level of the generality of mankind unless by its
advantages and effects.
Let there exist then (and may it be of advantage to
both), two sources, and two distributions of learning, and in like
manner two tribes, and as it were kindred families of contemplators or
philosophers, without any hostility or alienation between them; but
rather allied and united by mutual assistance. Let there be in short one
method of cultivating the sciences, and another of discovering them.
And as for those who prefer and more readily receive the former, on
account of their haste or from motives arising from their ordinary life,
or because they are unable from weakness of mind to comprehend and
embrace the other (which must necessarily be the case with by far the
greater number), let us wish that they may prosper as they desire in
their undertaking, and attain what they pursue. But if any individual
desire, and is anxious not merely to adhere to, and make use of present
discoveries, but to penetrate still further, and not to overcome his
adversaries in disputes, but nature by labor, not in short to give
elegant [10]
and specious opinions, but to know to a certainty and demonstration,
let him, as a true son of science (if such be his wish), join with us;
that when he has left the antechambers of nature trodden by the
multitude, an entrance may at last be discovered to her inner
apartments. And in order to be better understood, and to render our
meaning more familiar by assigning determinate names, we have accustomed
ourselves to call the one method the anticipation of the mind, and the
other the interpretation of nature.
We have still one request left. We have at least
reflected and taken pains in order to render our propositions not only
true, but of easy and familiar access to men’s minds, however
wonderfully prepossessed and limited. Yet it is but just that we should
obtain this favor from mankind (especially in so great a restoration of
learning and the sciences), that whosoever may be desirous of forming
any determination upon an opinion of this our work either from his own
perceptions, or the crowd of authorities, or the forms of
demonstrations, he will not expect to be able to do so in a cursory
manner, and while attending to other matters; but in order to have a
thorough knowledge of the subject, will himself by degrees attempt the
course which we describe and maintain; will be accustomed to the
subtilty of things which is manifested by experience; and will correct
the depraved and deeply rooted habits of his mind by a seasonable, and,
as it were, just hesitation: and then, finally (if he will), use his
judgment when he has begun to be master of himself.
A Brave New World by Aldous Huxley
Hello Students,
I posted the first two chapters of Aldous Huxley's brilliant novel Brave New World. You are responsible for reading the first two chapters and answering any questions that may be assigned to this reading. However, if you are interested in reading the entire novel you can do so at this website:
https://www.huxley.net/bnw/one.html
I posted the first two chapters of Aldous Huxley's brilliant novel Brave New World. You are responsible for reading the first two chapters and answering any questions that may be assigned to this reading. However, if you are interested in reading the entire novel you can do so at this website:
https://www.huxley.net/bnw/one.html
Brave New World
A SQUAT grey building of only thirty-four stories. Over the main entrance the words, CENTRAL LONDON HATCHERY AND CONDITIONING CENTRE, and, in a shield, the World State's motto, COMMUNITY, IDENTITY, STABILITY.
Mr. Foster was disappointed. "At least one glance at the Decanting Room," he pleaded. "Very well then." The Director smiled indulgently. "Just one glance."
Chapter Two
MR. FOSTER was left in the Decanting Room. The D.H.C. and his students stepped into the nearest lift and were carried up to the fifth floor.A noise made him turn round. "Oh, Ford!" he said in another tone, "I've gone and woken the children."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)