no political theory is adequate unless it is applicable to children as well as to men and women. theorists are mostly childless, or, if they have children, they are carefully screened from the disturbances which would be caused by youthful turmoil. some of them have written books on education, but without, as a rule, having any actual children present to their minds while they wrote. those educational theorists who have had a knowledge of children, such as the inventors of kindergarten and the montessori system,14 have not always had enough realization of the ultimate goal of education to be able to deal successfully with advanced instruction. i have not the knowledge either of children or of education which would enable me to supply whatever defects there may be in the writings of others. but154 some questions, concerning education as a political institution, are involved in any hope of social reconstruction, and are not usually considered by writers on educational theory. it is these questions that i wish to discuss.

the power of education in forming character and opinion is very great and very generally recognized. the genuine beliefs, though not usually the professed precepts, of parents and teachers are almost unconsciously acquired by most children; and even if they depart from these beliefs in later life, something of them remains deeply implanted, ready to emerge in a time of stress or crisis. education is, as a rule, the strongest force on the side of what exists and against fundamental change: threatened institutions, while they are still powerful, possess themselves of the educational machine, and instil a respect for their own excellence into the malleable minds of the young. reformers retort by trying to oust their opponents from their position of vantage. the children themselves are not considered by either party; they are merely so much material, to be recruited into one army or the other. if the children themselves were considered, education would not aim at making them belong to this party155 or that, but at enabling them to choose intelligently between the parties; it would aim at making them able to think, not at making them think what their teachers think. education as a political weapon could not exist if we respected the rights of children. if we respected the rights of children, we should educate them so as to give them the knowledge and the mental habits required for forming independent opinions; but education as a political institution endeavors to form habits and to circumscribe knowledge in such a way as to make one set of opinions inevitable.

the two principles of justice and liberty, which cover a very great deal of the social reconstruction required, are not by themselves sufficient where education is concerned. justice, in the literal sense of equal rights, is obviously not wholly possible as regards children. and as for liberty, it is, to begin with, essentially negative: it condemns all avoidable interference with freedom, without giving a positive principle of construction. but education is essentially constructive, and requires some positive conception of what constitutes a good life. and although liberty is to be respected in education as much as is compatible with instruction,156 and although a very great deal more liberty than is customary can be allowed without loss to instruction, yet it is clear that some departure from complete liberty is unavoidable if children are to be taught anything, except in the case of unusually intelligent children who are kept isolated from more normal companions. this is one reason for the great responsibility which rests upon teachers: the children must, necessarily, be more or less at the mercy of their elders, and cannot make themselves the guardians of their own interests. authority in education is to some extent unavoidable, and those who educate have to find a way of exercising authority in accordance with the spirit of liberty.

where authority is unavoidable, what is needed is reverence. a man who is to educate really well, and is to make the young grow and develop into their full stature, must be filled through and through with the spirit of reverence. it is reverence towards others that is lacking in those who advocate machine-made cast-iron systems: militarism, capitalism, fabian scientific organization, and all the other prisons into which reformers and reactionaries try to force the human spirit. in education,157 with its codes of rules emanating from a government office, its large classes and fixed curriculum and overworked teachers, its determination to produce a dead level of glib mediocrity, the lack of reverence for the child is all but universal. reverence requires imagination and vital warmth; it requires most imagination in respect of those who have least actual achievement or power. the child is weak and superficially foolish, the teacher is strong, and in an every-day sense wiser than the child. the teacher without reverence, or the bureaucrat without reverence, easily despises the child for these outward inferiorities. he thinks it is his duty to “mold” the child: in imagination he is the potter with the clay. and so he gives to the child some unnatural shape, which hardens with age, producing strains and spiritual dissatisfactions, out of which grow cruelty and envy, and the belief that others must be compelled to undergo the same distortions.

tho man who has reverence will not think it his duty to “mold” the young. he feels in all that lives, but especially in human beings, and most of all in children, something sacred, indefinable, unlimited, something individual and strangely precious, the growing principle158 of life, an embodied fragment of the dumb striving of the world. in the presence of a child he feels an unaccountable humility—a humility not easily defensible on any rational ground, and yet somehow nearer to wisdom than the easy self-confidence of many parents and teachers. the outward helplessness of the child and the appeal of dependence make him conscious of the responsibility of a trust. his imagination shows him what the child may become, for good or evil, how its impulses may be developed or thwarted, how its hopes must be dimmed and the life in it grow less living, how its trust will be bruised and its quick desires replaced by brooding will. all this gives him a longing to help the child in its own battle; he would equip and strengthen it, not for some outside end proposed by the state or by any other impersonal authority, but for the ends which the child’s own spirit is obscurely seeking. the man who feels this can wield the authority of an educator without infringing the principle of liberty.

it is not in a spirit of reverence that education is conducted by states and churches and the great institutions that are subservient to them. what is considered in education is159 hardly ever the boy or girl, the young man or young woman, but almost always, in some form, the maintenance of the existing order. when the individual is considered, it is almost exclusively with a view to worldly success—making money or achieving a good position. to be ordinary, and to acquire the art of getting on, is the ideal which is set before the youthful mind, except by a few rare teachers who have enough energy of belief to break through the system within which they are expected to work. almost all education has a political motive: it aims at strengthening some group, national or religious or even social, in the competition with other groups. it is this motive, in the main, which determines the subjects taught, the knowledge offered and the knowledge withheld, and also decides what mental habits the pupils are expected to acquire. hardly anything is done to foster the inward growth of mind and spirit; in fact, those who have had most education are very often atrophied in their mental and spiritual life, devoid of impulse, and possessing only certain mechanical aptitudes which take the place of living thought.

some of the things which education achieves at present must continue to be achieved by education160 in any civilized country. all children must continue to be taught how to read and write, and some must continue to acquire the knowledge needed for such professions as medicine or law or engineering. the higher education required for the sciences and the arts is necessary for those to whom it is suited. except in history and religion and kindred matters, the actual instruction is only inadequate, not positively harmful. the instruction might be given in a more liberal spirit, with more attempt to show its ultimate uses; and of course much of it is traditional and dead. but in the main it is necessary, and would have to form a part of any educational system.

it is in history and religion and other controversial subjects that the actual instruction is positively harmful. these subjects touch the interests by which schools are maintained; and the interests maintain the schools in order that certain views on these subjects may be instilled. history, in every country, is so taught as to magnify that country: children learn to believe that their own country has always been in the right and almost always victorious, that it has produced almost all the great men, and that it is in all respects superior to all other countries.161 since these beliefs are flattering, they are easily absorbed, and hardly ever dislodged from instinct by later knowledge.

to take a simple and almost trivial example: the facts about the battle of waterloo are known in great detail and with minute accuracy; but the facts as taught in elementary schools will be widely different in england, france, and germany. the ordinary english boy imagines that the prussians played hardly any part; the ordinary german boy imagines that wellington was practically defeated when the day was retrieved by blücher’s gallantry. if the facts were taught accurately in both countries, national pride would not be fostered to the same extent, neither nation would feel so certain of victory in the event of war, and the willingness to fight would be diminished. it is this result which has to be prevented. every state wishes to promote national pride, and is conscious that this cannot be done by unbiased history. the defenseless children are taught by distortions and suppressions and suggestions. the false ideas as to the history of the world which are taught in the various countries are of a kind which encourages strife and serves to keep alive a bigoted nationalism. if good162 relations between states were desired, one of the first steps ought to be to submit all teaching of history to an international commission, which should produce neutral textbooks free from the patriotic bias which is now demanded everywhere.15

exactly the same thing applies to religion. elementary schools are practically always in the hands either of some religious body or of a state which has a certain attitude towards religion. a religious body exists through the fact that its members all have certain definite beliefs on subjects as to which the truth is not ascertainable. schools conducted by religious bodies have to prevent the young, who are often inquiring by nature, from discovering that163 these definite beliefs are opposed by others which are no more unreasonable, and that many of the men best qualified to judge think that there is no good evidence in favor of any definite belief. when the state is militantly secular, as in france, state schools become as dogmatic as those that are in the hands of the churches (i understand that the word “god” must not be mentioned in a french elementary school). the result in all these cases is the same: free inquiry is checked, and on the most important matter in the world the child is met with dogma or with stony silence.

it is not only in elementary education that these evils exist. in more advanced education they take subtler forms, and there is more attempt to conceal them, but they are still present. eton and oxford set a certain stamp upon a man’s mind, just as a jesuit college does. it can hardly be said that eton and oxford have a conscious purpose, but they have a purpose which is none the less strong and effective for not being formulated. in almost all who have been through them they produce a worship of “good form,” which is as destructive to life and thought as the medieval church. “good form” is quite compatible164 with a superficial open-mindedness, a readiness to hear all sides, and a certain urbanity towards opponents. but it is not compatible with fundamental open-mindedness, or with any inward readiness to give weight to the other side. its essence is the assumption that what is most important is a certain kind of behavior, a behavior which minimizes friction between equals and delicately impresses inferiors with a conviction of their own crudity. as a political weapon for preserving the privileges of the rich in a snobbish democracy it is unsurpassable. as a means of producing an agreeable social milieu for those who have money with no strong beliefs or unusual desires it has some merit. in every other respect it is abominable.

the evils of “good form” arise from two sources: its perfect assurance of its own rightness, and its belief that correct manners are more to be desired than intellect, or artistic creation, or vital energy, or any of the other sources of progress in the world. perfect assurance, by itself, is enough to destroy all mental progress in those who have it. and when it is combined with contempt for the angularities and awkwardnesses that are almost invariably associated with great mental power, it165 becomes a source of destruction to all who come in contact with it. “good form” is itself dead and incapable of growth; and by its attitude to those who are without it it spreads its own death to many who might otherwise have life. the harm which it has done to well-to-do englishmen, and to men whose abilities have led the well-to-do to notice them, is incalculable.

the prevention of free inquiry is unavoidable so long as the purpose of education is to produce belief rather than thought, to compel the young to hold positive opinions on doubtful matters rather than to let them see the doubtfulness and be encouraged to independence of mind. education ought to foster the wish for truth, not the conviction that some particular creed is the truth. but it is creeds that hold men together in fighting organizations: churches, states, political parties. it is intensity of belief in a creed that produces efficiency in fighting: victory comes to those who feel the strongest certainty about matters on which doubt is the only rational attitude. to produce this intensity of belief and this efficiency in fighting, the child’s nature is warped, and its free outlook is cramped, by cultivating inhibitions as a check to the growth of new166 ideas. in those whose minds are not very active the result is the omnipotence of prejudice; while the few whose thought cannot be wholly killed become cynical, intellectually hopeless, destructively critical, able to make all that is living seem foolish, unable themselves to supply the creative impulses which they destroy in others.

the success in fighting which is achieved by suppressing freedom of thought is brief and very worthless. in the long run mental vigor is as essential to success as it is to a good life. the conception of education as a form of drill, a means of producing unanimity through slavishness, is very common, and is defended chiefly on the ground that it leads to victory. those who enjoy parallels from ancient history will point to the victory of sparta over athens to enforce their moral. but it is athens that has had power over men’s thoughts and imaginations, not sparta: any one of us, if we could be born again into some past epoch, would rather be born an athenian than a spartan. and in the modern world so much intellect is required in practical affairs that even the external victory is more likely to be won by intelligence167 than by docility. education in credulity leads by quick stages to mental decay; it is only by keeping alive the spirit of free inquiry that the indispensable minimum of progress can be achieved.

certain mental habits are commonly instilled by those who are engaged in educating: obedience and discipline, ruthlessness in the struggle for worldly success, contempt towards opposing groups, and an unquestioning credulity, a passive acceptance of the teacher’s wisdom. all these habits are against life. instead of obedience and discipline, we ought to aim at preserving independence and impulse. instead of ruthlessness, education should try to develop justice in thought. instead of contempt, it ought to instil reverence, and the attempt at understanding; towards the opinions of others it ought to produce, not necessarily acquiescence, but only such opposition as is combined with imaginative apprehension and a clear realization of the grounds for opposition. instead of credulity, the object should be to stimulate constructive doubt, the love of mental adventure, the sense of worlds to conquer by enterprise and boldness in thought.168 contentment with the status quo, and subordination of the individual pupil to political aims, owing to the indifference to the things of the mind, are the immediate causes of these evils; but beneath these causes there is one more fundamental, the fact that education is treated as a means of acquiring power over the pupil, not as a means of nourishing his own growth. it is in this that lack of reverence shows itself; and it is only by more reverence that a fundamental reform can be effected.

obedience and discipline are supposed to be indispensable if order is to be kept in a class, and if any instruction is to be given. to some extent this is true; but the extent is much less than it is thought to be by those who regard obedience and discipline as in themselves desirable. obedience, the yielding of one’s will to outside direction, is the counterpart of authority. both may be necessary in certain cases. refractory children, lunatics, and criminals may require authority, and may need to be forced to obey. but in so far as this is necessary it is a misfortune: what is to be desired is the free choice of ends with which it is not necessary to interfere. and educational reformers have shown that this is far more possible169 than our fathers would ever have believed.16

what makes obedience seem necessary in schools is the large classes and overworked teachers demanded by a false economy. those who have no experience of teaching are incapable of imagining the expense of spirit entailed by any really living instruction. they think that teachers can reasonably be expected to work as many hours as bank clerks. intense fatigue and irritable nerves are the result, and an absolute necessity of performing the day’s task mechanically. but the task cannot be performed mechanically except by exacting obedience.

if we took education seriously, and thought it as important to keep alive the minds of children as to secure victory in war, we should conduct education quite differently: we should make sure of achieving the end, even if the expense were a hundredfold greater than it is. to many men and women a small amount of teaching is a delight, and can be done with a fresh zest and life which keeps most pupils interested170 without any need of discipline. the few who do not become interested might be separated from the rest, and given a different kind of instruction. a teacher ought to have only as much teaching as can be done, on most days, with actual pleasure in the work, and with an awareness of the pupil’s mental needs. the result would be a relation of friendliness instead of hostility between teacher and pupil, a realization on the part of most pupils that education serves to develop their own lives and is not merely an outside imposition, interfering with play and demanding many hours of sitting still. all that is necessary to this end is a (greater expenditure of money), to secure teachers with more leisure and with a natural love of teaching.

discipline, as it exists in schools, is very largely an evil. there is a kind of discipline which is necessary to almost all achievement, and which perhaps is not sufficiently valued by those who react against the purely external discipline of traditional methods. the desirable kind of discipline is the kind that comes from within, which consists in the power of pursuing a distant object steadily, foregoing and suffering many things on the way. this involves the171 subordination of impulse to will, the power of a directing action by large creative desires even at moments when they are not vividly alive. without this, no serious ambition, good or bad, can be realized, no consistent purpose can dominate. this kind of discipline is very necessary, but can only result from strong desires for ends not immediately attainable, and can only be produced by education if education fosters such desires, which it seldom does at present. such discipline springs from one’s own will, not from outside authority. it is not this kind which is sought in most schools, and it is not this kind which seems to me an evil.

although elementary education encourages the undesirable discipline that consists in passive obedience, and although hardly any existing education encourages the moral discipline of consistent self-direction, there is a certain kind of purely mental discipline which is produced by the traditional higher education. the kind i mean is that which enables a man to concentrate his thoughts at will upon any matter that he has occasion to consider, regardless of preoccupations or boredom or intellectual difficulty. this quality, though it has no important intrinsic excellence, greatly enhances the172 efficiency of the mind as an instrument. it is this that enables a lawyer to master the scientific details of a patent case which he forgets as soon as judgment has been given, or a civil servant to deal quickly with many different administrative questions in succession. it is this that enables men to forget private cares during business hours. in a complicated world it is a very necessary faculty for those whose work requires mental concentration.

success in producing mental discipline is the chief merit of traditional higher education. i doubt whether it can be achieved except by compelling or persuading active attention to a prescribed task. it is for this reason chiefly that i do not believe methods such as madame montessori’s applicable when the age of childhood has been passed. the essence of her method consists in giving a choice of occupations, any one of which is interesting to most children, and all of which are instructive. the child’s attention is wholly spontaneous, as in play; it enjoys acquiring knowledge in this way, and does not acquire any knowledge which it does not desire. i am convinced that this is the best method of education with young children: the actual results make it almost impossible to think173 otherwise. but it is difficult to see how this method can lead to control of attention by the will. many things which must be thought about are uninteresting, and even those that are interesting at first often become very wearisome before they have been considered as long as is necessary. the power of giving prolonged attention is very important, and it is hardly to be widely acquired except as a habit induced originally by outside pressure. some few boys, it is true, have sufficiently strong intellectual desires to be willing to undergo all that is necessary by their own initiative and free will; but for all others an external inducement is required in order to make them learn any subject thoroughly. there is among educational reformers a certain fear of demanding great efforts, and in the world at large a growing unwillingness to be bored. both these tendencies have their good sides, but both also have their dangers. the mental discipline which is jeopardized can be preserved by mere advice without external compulsion whenever a boy’s intellectual interest and ambition can be sufficiently stimulated. a good teacher ought to be able to do this for any boy who is capable of much mental achievement; and for many of174 the others the present purely bookish education is probably not the best. in this way, so long as the importance of mental discipline is realized, it can probably be attained, whenever it is attainable, by appealing to the pupil’s consciousness of his own needs. so long as teachers are not expected to succeed by this method, it is easy for them to slip into a slothful dullness, and blame their pupils when the fault is really their own.

ruthlessness in the economic struggle will almost unavoidably be taught in schools so long as the economic structure of society remains unchanged. this must be particularly the case in middle-class schools, which depend for their numbers upon the good opinion of parents, and secure the good opinion of parents by advertising the successes of pupils. this is one of many ways in which the competitive organization of the state is harmful. spontaneous and disinterested desire for knowledge is not at all uncommon in the young, and might be easily aroused in many in whom it remains latent. but it is remorselessly checked by teachers who think only of examinations, diplomas, and degrees. for the abler boys there is no time for thought, no time for the indulgence of intellectual175 taste, from the moment of first going to school until the moment of leaving the university. from first to last there is nothing but one long drudgery of examination tips and textbook facts. the most intelligent, at the end, are disgusted with learning, longing only to forget it and to escape into a life of action. yet there, as before, the economic machine holds them prisoners, and all their spontaneous desires are bruised and thwarted.

the examination system, and the fact that instruction is treated mainly as training for a livelihood, leads the young to regard knowledge, from a purely utilitarian point of view, as the road to money, not as the gateway to wisdom. this would not matter so much if it affected only those who have no genuine intellectual interests. but unfortunately it affects most those whose intellectual interests are strongest, since it is upon them that the pressure of examinations falls with most severity. to them most, but to all in some degree, education appears as a means of acquiring superiority over others; it is infected through and through with ruthlessness and glorification of social inequality. any free, disinterested consideration shows that, whatever inequalities might remain176 in a utopia, the actual inequalities are almost all contrary to justice. but our educational system tends to conceal this from all except the failures, since those who succeed are on the way to profit by the inequalities, with every encouragement from the men who have directed their education.

passive acceptance of the teacher’s wisdom is easy to most boys and girls. it involves no effort of independent thought, and seems rational because the teacher knows more than his pupils; it is moreover the way to win the favor of the teacher unless he is a very exceptional man. yet the habit of passive acceptance is a disastrous one in later life. it causes men to seek a leader, and to accept as a leader whoever is established in that position. it makes the power of churches, governments, party caucuses, and all the other organizations by which plain men are misled into supporting old systems which are harmful to the nation and to themselves. it is possible that there would not be much independence of thought even if education did everything to promote it; but there would certainly be more than there is at present. if the object were to make pupils think, rather than to make them accept certain conclusions,177 education would be conducted quite differently: there would be less rapidity of instruction and more discussion, more occasions when pupils were encouraged to express themselves, more attempt to make education concern itself with matters in which the pupils felt some interest.

above all, there would be an endeavor to rouse and stimulate the love of mental adventure. the world in which we live is various and astonishing: some of the things that seem plainest grow more and more difficult the more they are considered; other things, which might have been thought quite impossible to discover, have nevertheless been laid bare by genius and industry. the powers of thought, the vast regions which it can master, the much more vast regions which it can only dimly suggest to imagination, give to those whose minds have traveled beyond the daily round an amazing richness of material, an escape from the triviality and wearisomeness of familiar routine, by which the whole of life is filled with interest, and the prison walls of the commonplace are broken down. the same love of adventure which takes men to the south pole, the same passion for a conclusive trial of strength which178 leads some men to welcome war, can find in creative thought an outlet which is neither wasteful nor cruel, but increases the dignity of man by incarnating in life some of that shining splendor which the human spirit is bringing down out of the unknown. to give this joy, in a greater or less measure, to all who are capable of it, is the supreme end for which the education of the mind is to be valued.

it will be said that the joy of mental adventure must be rare, that there are few who can appreciate it, and that ordinary education can take no account of so aristocratic a good. i do not believe this. the joy of mental adventure is far commoner in the young than in grown men and women. among children it is very common, and grows naturally out of the period of make-believe and fancy. it is rare in later life because everything is done to kill it during education. men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth—more than ruin, more even than death. thought is subversive and revolutionary, destructive and terrible; thought is merciless to privilege, established institutions, and comfortable habits; thought is anarchic and lawless, indifferent to authority, careless of the well-tried wisdom of the ages. thought looks179 into the pit of hell and is not afraid. it sees man, a feeble speck, surrounded by unfathomable depths of silence; yet it bears itself proudly, as unmoved as if it were lord of the universe. thought is great and swift and free, the light of the world, and the chief glory of man.

but if thought is to become the possession of many, not the privilege of the few, we must have done with fear. it is fear that holds men back—fear lest their cherished beliefs should prove delusions, fear lest the institutions by which they live should prove harmful, fear lest they themselves should prove less worthy of respect than they have supposed themselves to be. “should the working man think freely about property? then what will become of us, the rich? should young men and young women think freely about sex? then what will become of morality? should soldiers think freely about war? then what will become of military discipline? away with thought! back into the shades of prejudice, lest property, morals, and war should be endangered! better men should be stupid, slothful, and oppressive than that their thoughts should be free. for if their thoughts were free they might not think180 as we do. and at all costs this disaster must be averted.” so the opponents of thought argue in the unconscious depths of their souls. and so they act in their churches, their schools, and their universities.

no institution inspired by fear can further life. hope, not fear, is the creative principle in human affairs. all that has made man great has sprung from the attempt to secure what is good, not from the struggle to avert what was thought evil. it is because modern education is so seldom inspired by a great hope that it so seldom achieves a great result. the wish to preserve the past rather than the hope of creating the future dominates the minds of those who control the teaching of the young. education should not aim at a passive awareness of dead facts, but at an activity directed towards the world that our efforts are to create. it should be inspired, not by a regretful hankering after the extinct beauties of greece and the renaissance, but by a shining vision of the society that is to be, of the triumphs that thought will achieve in the time to come, and of the ever-widening horizon of man’s survey over the universe. those who are taught in this spirit will181 be filled with life and hope and joy, able to bear their part in bringing to mankind a future less somber than the past, with faith in the glory that human effort can create.