good discipline, and a stimulus to actions which grow out of the art impulse.

1

The Social Impulse and Language Training. The social impulse should be utilized in language training. If we remember that it is society that makes language possible and useful, that the same impulse lies at the foundation of both, it will be easy to get a criterion to test the value of language training. In language training only that method is wise which is based upon the social nature of the child. Dr. Dewey very aptly remarks that "there is all the dif ference in the world between having something to say and learning to say something." He who teaches the use of language by contriving that the child shall know something that he wishes to say conforms to the child's nature; he who compels the child to talk or write without having previously furnished a motive for saying something does violence to that nature. All that is needed to give the child an impulse to talk is to fill his mind with facts that interest him. You may indeed by discipline, or by appeals to emulation or to the child's desire to please, create an artificial motive. But discipline which does not strengthen a natural impulse to action, appeals to emulation or to the desire to please for the sake of making a pupil do what he has no inclination to do at all, are perverted. What a child does under such influences is always done in a halfhearted, perfunctory way.

This is the reason why teaching language without reference to the other work of the school is absurd. When that subject is taught apart, the child is compelled to talk for the sake of saying something; when taught in connec

1 Dewey, School and Society, p. 63.

tion with the child's work, the pupil is easily stimulated to talk about what he is interested in.

This kind of language teaching will react on the other work of the school. If the child does not want to talk about his lessons, it is because they are not adapted to the state of his development.

The Social Impulse and the Moral Nature. It goes without saying that the child's social impulse should be utilized in the development of his moral nature. It is hardly too much to say that without society, that relation of man to man which is the product of his social nature, the development of the moral nature would be impossible. That is the meaning of Aristotle's paradox: "The state is prior to the individual." In other words, apart from organized society the most distinctive and characteristic elements of human nature would remain for the most part mere unrealized possibilities. It is by contact with the minds of his fellows as manifest not only in art, literature, history, government, but by daily intercourse, that the individual gradually attains to a realization of himself.

Now it is the constant duty of parents first, and later of parents and teacher, to see that the child does not infringe upon the rights of others. Far wiser than Rousseau, Locke saw that the baby in its mother's arms could begin to acquire what he rightly regarded as the most precious wisdom of life, the ability to cross one's own inclinations and follow where reason directs even though appetite leads the other way. As has already been said, the whole object of education is to train the human being so that he will be governed by his reason. And the most important feature in elementary education consists in the adoption of such meas

ures as will result in the child's being guided by another's reason until he is capable of being governed by his own. This must not, of course, be construed as meaning that up to a certain point in his development the child will be controlled entirely by another's reason and then wholly by his own. The true meaning is that there must be a gradual transition from the one state to the other. Little by little he comes to see the object of the teacher's requirements, and in so far as he does he substitutes his reason for the teacher's. Now these requirements, growing out of his own nature and that of the world in which he lives, will relate to him not merely as a physical and an intellectual but also as a moral being. And the wise preceptor, whether parent or professional teacher, will not only see to it that the requirements are fulfilled, but also that the reason for them is understood as early as may be.

Rousseau and Pestalozzi on Moral Training. One of the cardinal blunders of that paradoxical but wonderfully suggestive book on education, Rousseau's Émile, consists in the doctrine that there can be no training of the moral nature until the adolescent period. And few things in the history of education are more interesting than that Pestalozzi, who received his inspiration from the erratic Frenchman, differed from him so fundamentally on this point. In his detailed account of his epoch-making experiment at Stanz, Pestalozzi shows us in the most vivid way how the child's social impulse can be utilized in the development of his moral nature in the early years of school life.

"Although," as John Morley says, "none can be vicariously wise, nor sage by proxy, yet is it not a puerile wastefulness to send forth the young all bare to the

ordeal, while the armor of old experience and tempered judgment hangs idle on the wall?" So Pestalozzi regarded it. In place of the cold, apathetic automaton that stands by the side of Rousseau's Émile, passionlessly manipulating the forces of nature in order to suggest or inhibit certain conduct, he puts an earnest, warm-hearted human being, kindling into flame the moral impulse of h's pupil through his own enthusiasm for goodness.

The Social Impulse and the Study of History. It is the child's social impulse, his interest in his fellows and society generally, and his relation to them, which justifies the important place which the study of history should occupy in the school. Not an anti-social being, as Rousseau crudely thought, but the heir of all the ages, the child should get, even in the elementary school, some glimpses of the road over which the race has so laboriously travelled, in order that he may get something of that enlargement of spirit, that insight into existing social conditions, that knowledge of what constitutes the real welfare of a people, and that sympathy with, and charity for, his fellows which are so essential to rational living.

Intellectual, Constructive, Art, and Social Impulses Contrasted with Imitation and Emulation. A study of the child's intellectual, constructive, art, and social impulses directly suggests lines of activity which lead to important educational results. Because he is curious, we

should teach him such facts about the world and about men as will at the same time gratify and stimulate curiosity; his disposition to make things should be encouraged because important educational results are thereby obtained;

his art impulse should be developed by directing his attention to beautiful things, because the appreciation of beauty is one of the things that make life significant; his social impulse should be utilized not only by teaching him to speak and write in such a way as to gain the power of effective speech, but in leading him to form habits that will make him a useful member of society.

But the other impulses of the child do not of themselves lead to any definite lines of activity. A child's imitative impulses tend to make him imitate any model that is put before him, good or bad; his love of superiority creates the desire to excel his fellows in anything they are doing ; his love of approbation occasions the desire to be commended by his companions whether or not his acts are commendable. What a child does in consequence of these impulses, then, depends not so much on what he is as on what his surroundings are.

It is of course true that the children by whom he is surrounded are giving expression to the various impulses of their nature in the activities in which they spontaneously engage. And inasmuch as he and they have a common nature, the impulses which stimulate them to activity are sure to be shared by him. But while children have a common nature in the sense that all of them have the same impulses, they do not have these impulses in the same degree. When, therefore, it is said that a child in consequence of certain impulses does what he does, not so much because of what he is as because of what his surroundings are, the meaning is that the impulse which, apart from his surroundings, would tend to express itself in those lines of activity is too weak to spur him to action,