1. GENERATING FAVOURABLE CONDITIONS FOR A NEW CHILD

The Boyhood of Raleigh

A large print of the painting "The Boyhood of Raleigh" was the centrepiece on our dining room wall. It exemplified the romantic notions of my father with respect to the sea, as it did for me, and in a greater sense today is a significant symbol of the correct and natural "bringing up" of a child by making central to his education the freedom of spirit and the zest for life.

It represented for me all the great men of Plymouth: Raleigh, Frobisher, Hawkins and Drake and even the spirit of the Pilgrim Fathers who set sail from the Mayflower steps. I was brought up with a zest-filled romantic notion of the world.

But bringing up any child with favourable circumstances takes a natural appreciation of what the natural attributes of each child are. We can, however, present a ten point system.

The ten-point formula really is quite simple, but sometimes difficult to accomplish without real personal introspection into parental behavior.

1. Complete family harmony and generation of the concept of sharing, without conflict from any source (including grandparents)

2. A culturally rich environment

3.  An absence of any acquisitiveness

4. Complete and total personal liberty of choice

5  No criticism or punishment for error

6. No praise or rewards, except quiet acknowledgement of the correct

7. Freedom from educational expectations

8. Modeling of educational and cultural appreciation in the household

9. Freedom from the necessity of conformity

10. The development of a ZEST for life that is not curtailed by social convention

Let us examine the ideas of Jean Jacques Rousseau

 with respect to education.

 Rousseau's point of view was well expressed by the following phrase: "Everything comes out perfectly in the hands of the creator of Nature; in the hands of man all degenerates."

The natural and correct education for Rousseau had three forms:

1. Natural responses of the system with respect to its attributes and faculties that have the potential to develop a frame of reference for natural comportment.

2. The educational experiences in the interface with all living forms.

3.  The learning obtained in particular experiences with everything and particularly the impressions generated about the surrounding environment.

How did Rousseau explain this?

“We are sensitive creatures: the things which surround us produce impressions. When we become conscious beings, we approach or avoid the objects which move us, first for the pleasure or disagreement which accompanies them and afterward with the judgment of reason with the idea of happiness.

These dispositions of sympathy and antipathy strengthen us and augment our sensibility and intelligence, but then the presence of habits more or less alters our opinions.

Before they are altered, we constitute what can be said to be our nature.

Clearly the problem today is to choose between the education of a man (who is correct and natural) and a creature that is a slave of society.

Actually, the beauty of Rousseau's utopia is not that it presents a final state, but that it presents the means to acquire that utopia without preconceived ideas, except of human liberty, and without the constrictions or designs which are academic, moral, political or social.

The means of transition is to move from any given situation of civilization which is corrupt, to a natural state by means of changes in the way education is dealt with. The key is to generate and evolve the natural tendencies, not to do what is unfortunately done today, which is to work agaist the natural tendencies to produce a robot-like human who becomes a perfect pawn in a society with false compassion and benevolence.

In Rousseau's sistem there are no ultimate goals. Education does not look for the seeds of bankers, scientists, doctors, lawers, gardeners, farmers and the like. There is no structure into which the true nature must be moulded. The mind is the servant of the true nature, not the puppet master whose cords are manipulated by a consumer society.

What needs to be taught is how to live, not how to die rich or famous.

It is this false idea which has been taught for over ten thousand years. The true path of education, Thoreau's quaint meandering stream, must not consist of political or academic reason. True natural education does not consist of social precepts, laws and discipline. Nor is it to be chained by ritual and superstition.

The only technique that a master should teach is how to open the door so that the true nature which is dormant inside can emerge.

RELIGION

Rousseau is clear that it is simply public opinion (not natural of course) that imposes its will upon the social system and builds its norms by foolish common consent. We are in agreement that things have not changed today.

In questions of religion these opinions are tyrannical.

Perfect masters fight against that dominion and tyranny and never consent to the authoritative approach in education. The idea must by now be evident. In “education”, paradoxically, do not educate, do not teach. The task of a master is to set the conditions and scenario so that the student can use his own natural unimpeded reason.

The student must say, "I exist, therefore I have sense doors through which I am able to be moved”.

We can see then that a student well exposed to his own nature would not be easily captured by the external illusions of Samsara. Both desire and clinging would then be difficult to maintain, because the internal psychological processes would then work by “function” not “form”.

A person is then free of external pressure and finds himself  "animated by an internal immaterial substance that is his own true nature, his pure mind."

His acts are not attributable to providence, consequently, it will be seen that "moral evil, without doubt, is our own handiwork”.

But God does not rule externally. He has, according to Rousseau, generated man with his particular natural role and the rules for the attainment of correctness in that role are within him, written indelibly in his pure mind by Nature.

If he follows his natural conscience, not the induced or conditioned conscience of reason, he will never make mistakes in his judgement of himself and others.

In the teachings of religion (or the spiritual) it is always a mistake to introduce the ideas as a task. Nothing can be associated internally if it becomes merely rote repetition stored in memory. Spiritual ideas should only be taught that promote a natural human wisdom.

That is why we say repeatedly in the Pure Land, that there should be no pointless superstition, rites, ceremonies and dogma to cling to. Everything, as Rousseau declares, must be designed and function as a liberator of natural internal wisdom. The true religion then is the natural religion which develops from a natural system.

EMILE

In his work Emile his central character follows a sistem of education which maintains the compassion and benevolence of natural virtue that is always in harmony with an intelligent innocence in the midst of a society of cannibals.

THE NATURAL MAN AND THE STATE

We have no great interest here in expounding Rousseau’s final modelling of Emile to the State in which he lived. It  suffices to say that he is converted into spouse and then father and then a member of the State.

For those interested, certainly his work The Social Contract might make worthwhile reading.

The abiding question is, however, how can a person so liberated live in a corrupt society? How? Because it is natural for him to live within injustice, affirming his vocation as a just and natural man.

BOYS WILL BE BOYS

THE GOOD NEWS AND THE BAD NEWS

The phrase "boys will be boys " is a statement which means that it is the nature of a boy to be the way he is and he should therefore be forgiven his boyish faults.

This is the attitude of parents and children in most families in which the standards for girls are much higher.

The good news is, of course, that boys are then free from many of the behaviour restrictions of society as they are growing up. Their behaviour may be considered unruly and incorrect, but they are, after all boys, who are expected to be unruly and incorrect.

The bad news is that boys grow up as "men" with an exaggerated idea of  their own intelligence and a lack of responsibility for their actions. That attitude is not natural and weakens his character and stifles his better attributes. What is more, it makes for a society that carries those same weaknesses.

The fault is clearly in education.

Rousseau presents an education that overcomes these debilities if they are present and prevents their arousal in a young child who has not yet recieved the first social "injuries" of a traditional education.

The first step

This first step of Emile follows the path of uninhibited developing nature. 

Rousseau believed that children should be allowed to use all of their natural potential and augment those potentials that are weak.

The help given must be real, not frivolous, and the one teaching must act sparingly, allowing the child maximum liberty, and permitting the child to move for himself without setting standards for him to follow or physically restricting his natural way.  

The second step

When the child starts talking is when the crying and weeping of frustration is reduced and he can now use words to express experiences and requirements.

Rousseau believed that it is here that the child experiences suffering, but any suffering comes from an incorrectly developed identity that it may have picked up from the corrupted environment. Rousseau also believed that desire is part of the human process, but that desire, when it is natural, is not the desire of Identity. It is the desire to learn, to know and to experience.

The first task then in education (which is to develop a natural non-suffering human creature) is to eliminate any frustration and residual conditioning, because these conditioned wants appear to be insatiable.

Education, therefore, must teach that natural drives or natural needs are normal, but that a correct balance must be understood and maintained between what is needed and what can be attained. In other words, the needs must be allowed to develop consciously, but not the expectations.

Any social "desires" that may have crept in must be reigned in and recognition of what is natural and what is not natural taught well.

The true natural drives (desires) would not be generated if they were not required for the child's protection and natural growth. It is that which must be the criteria for correct education with respect to these drives. The natural must be developed, the social filtered and rejected.

 Without expectations there is no frustrtion, and without a social Identity certainly little suffering.

 We must agree with Rousseau then when he declares:

"The early educational system is then  to allow liberty before any mental laws and opinions can enter and modify the natural inclination."

DEPENDENCE

Rousseau makes a clear distintion between a natural dependence upon personal internal and external factors and dependence upon other human creatures. The second he declares is the fountain of all human suffering.

We find ourselves once more in agreement with Rousseau.

We can say then that suffering is a consequence of a learned dependency. One might consider this psychologically to be a learned helplessness, with less extreme consequences than the normal paradigm. If one can teach the child to maintain auto-dependency then one has secured a return to the natural order of a progressive education.

The error is in the form of reinforcement which depends upon an external agent from which are derived all negative and positive experiences.

Until the child's natural reason evolves, it is better that the child follow the natural development of his system and not the social norm of reasoning imposed upon the child.

It is then imperative not to teach either the apparent virtue now prevelant in society nor the apparent truths of society but to preserve the natural experiences of the heart (the true unspoiled mind).

MORALITY

When the child is twelve, according to Rousseau, that is the time to introduce the abstract idea of a cognitive morality. The introduction must be local and relative only to the child's imediate needs. The child cannot at this age really understand the concept of obligation and duty. It is the child who must learn and nurture these ideas with minimal prompting. Specifically, he will learn naturally the utility of complying with his promises.

Rousseau believed that the child, since he has no complex vocabulary, works with images so that it is folly to begin to charge his memory and thinking with ideas that it is imposible for him to profoundly understand except by shallow intellect.

Rousseau sustains, "In any study that exists, representative signs are worth nothing without an idea of the things they  respresent".

But Rousseau was not only concerned with the child's mental development, for he considered that a healthy mind must be developed in a healthy body. Exercise and the correct development of his body is to be tended to with diligence. Naturally this means without external discipline as, given the correct rich environment, the child will achieve all natural objectives.

Now Rousseau makes another interesting point. When one begins actually teaching the child which subjects are correct, Science must be taught, but not History, which he declares is dull and uninteresting and simply provokes rote learning, which has little utility. But the most interesting is his idea that spiritual concepts should not at this time be taught.

          The third step

          When the child is between twelve and thirteen years old he reaches a state in which he can accomplish more than the system demands without undue harm.

Curiosity is developed at this stage to a point where new ideas can be introduced. But one must beware of books. The child must not be exposed to the phenomena of nature broader than his immediate environment.

Rousseau warns, "He does not know anything because you have told him so, but because he has understood it himself.".

He must then invent science for himself and learn by direct experience, not by learning stock phrases. It is important to realize that "authority" is to be eliminated. This is a most important recommendation of Rousseau.

Another important factor now arises in the education of human comportment and morality. Traditional systems are not valid. There is, Rousseau argues, no better way to develop correct comportment and morality than to study the lives of noble human creatures. It is they who become the models of correct living and livelihood.

THE ARTS

With respect to art and artisan work, students must, according to Rousseau, be allowed to visit workshops and studios and be encouraged to develop manual dexterity and eye- hand coordination in creative forms. In this way he can develop an appreciation for both the utility of what is made and the techniques used.

When reaching fifteen, the student, no longer a mere child, reaches a new important stage in which he can use all that has been developed naturally.

He begins to develop mentally and physically with adult characteristics. There is an arousal of natural "passions". This is a natural passion which has no relation to tha learned passions of society, which could easily divert him from a natural path.

Educational errors at this moment can result in tragic mental and physical conflicts and tensions.

The natural child, evolving from his childhood cocoon, will have developed kindness, because that is a natural human attribute. At this point that kindness becomes a powerful affect.

Here, according to Rousseau, arises a tragic error if the social norms, customs and likes and dislikes are imposed upon the young person. The alliances he might choose by his nature will invariable then be in conflict with what society may choose for him. Acceptable standards of beauty, qualities and attributes are notoriously bad guides to affect. Only what is natural will be beneficial. External standards are not beneficial.

How can we put the passions in order?

 How can we provide guidance if everything stimulates the young person's imagination?

The first experience which the child encounters is friendship. It is not an intimate affect, and it certainly is not the love romanticized in popular lore, which is the root of much suffering.

"The first "affect"  the youngster who is  brought up in this way is capable of feeling is not love; it is friendship." His imagination will show him that there are others like him and that he forms part of a species."

It is this kindness and friendship that come before the first seeds of sexuality. They can give him the motivation to use his natural resources adequately in order to place in his nascent sensibility the roots of more complex sentiments.

When do these arise? When he actually perceives human weaknesses. Then he can see suffering in others and imagine the weight of that suffering. This is the base of what we can call mundane compassion. 

It is a prime sentiment of human nature and is seldom developed in a society bound by mental compassion and the ritual which it entails.

Then, to obtain this balance between knowing differences and avoiding dependency in oneself and on others, one must know the nature of the human creature. One must know the nature of the true and natural mind.

How can he avoid being tainted? We have said before that Rousseau did not approve of History, but of knowing individual lives of great men. It is here that the young person's knowledge of the noble human creature can be shown. He must get to understand the noble men of other places and times. At this time he will be about eighteen.

Compared with his apparent innocence, a young person of today would appear knowledgable and superior, but the young person educated through the development of his own nature is able to judge most things impartially and avoids the traps that modern youth fall into. He will feel compassion for the wealthy and famous and those who enjoy the so-called "pleasures"of life.

But at this point he must be sure not to to fall into the error of smug superiority himself. He must realize that he is not immune to the same debilities as others. We may say that Mara is sitting there waiting for such an error.

"THANK HEAVEN FOR LITTLE GIRLS"

Sugar and spice and all things nice, 

that's what little girls are made of

THEY GROW UP IN THE MOST DELIGHTFUL WAY

Maurice Chevalier in his song declares, "thank heaven for little girls, they grow up in the most delightful way."

But do they? According to Rousseau they do not.

WOMEN

A man, according to Rousseau, was not born to live alone and so the “fair gender” enters the picture, and when he is about twenty, the young man will be impulsed by nature to find a mate.

In his book, Emile encounters Sofia.

The question then which arises for Rousseau is, how does one educate a woman?

He does declare that he is not in accord with the idea that women should be only educated for housework and kept in ignorance. That, Rousseau declares firmly, is not in accord with a woman’s nature. She must cultivate her body and mind and learn how to make judgments.

We are with him so far, but lest those in favor of woman’s liberation begin to stand and cheer, let us declare that Rousseau saw the education of a woman as being always in relation to that of the male figure.

Originally, her formation depends upon the requirements of the mother. When she is a adult, her agreeable life depends upon the council, service and care of her spouse. Around these are built her obligations.

Rousseau declares, "The destiny of women is to please and to be submissive." That, according to Rousseau, is the law of nature and her education must be in conformity with it. 

These three following paragraphs from a university discussion of Rousseau's ideas explain perfectly what he believes should be her education and role in life.

“Due to her dependency, her natural condition inclines her towards obedience. Destined to obey, she must have as her primary quality a softness of spirit. However, because of the natural inequality that she must endure in relation to men, she has on her side her skill and ingenuity. This is a special astuteness whose cultivation adds great joy to the marriage.

As her education has to do with the cultivation of the feminine spirit, women hold a special place in the arts, since their objective is to please. With the arts, she is taught good taste and, through that, she begins to acquire notions of beauty. Also, since women speak before men and surpass them in this facility, this is an art to which they must primarily attend: the art of speaking.

In their early childhood, when they do not yet distinguish good from bad, they should stick to the rule that when speaking, they must avoid saying anything that may seem disagreeable to those who are listening, as long as they do not lie. We then understand that these well-directed chats can serve as their first lessons of morality."

Rousseau states that when there begins a liberation of the woman’s personal judgement, it is time to change her educational programme. He held that the beliefs of a women normally depend upon her mother or husband, but that women should depend upon personal resolution. The problem was that personal resolution was usually in conflict with most women’s (and men's in a lesser degree) personal resolution when standing in the face of public opinion.

She must then, Rousseau says, resist mere opinions, either external or internal, which only serve to form women who are indecent and deceitful.

She must be taught how to reason. But in Emile this reason is not the same reason which a man might use. It is, according to Rousseau,

To inculcate the obedience and loyalty she owes to her husband and the gentleness and care she owes to her children. How?

She must learn how to compare her internal spiritual vision with the external pressures to conform and see that the correct path is with the former.

He believed, as all did at that time, that because the study of the truth of science and its principles and axioms are inappropriate for woman because they are encountered out of her reach and beyond her capacity, she must reflect upon her natural obligations (in relation to men).

Apart from this understanding of her internal spirit, her studies must be oriented towards understanding men and what is agreeable in life.

Clearly Rousseau’s view here is based on the common practice of his times, but he does not show the same depth of understanding of women, or for that matter female children, as he does for males.

But can we be sure that he was altogether wrong?

The male reader must decide for himself. The female reader may ask her husband... or not.