The progressive farmer. [volume] (Winston, N.C.) 1886-1904, 1891-03-03


Science"
Dilthey begins by observing that all
the prominent pedagogical systems,
such as those of Herbart. S ;hleier-
macher, Spencer, Balm, Beneke, Waltz,
agree in one respect, thai they pretend
to define the end If education, the
value of the various branches of study,
and the methods of instruction in a
universally valid fashion, and cOnse-
. duently for wholly different times and
peoples" And this pretense, says
Dilthey, is precisely parallel to that of
the Old-fashiOned theories of the State,
theories which, disregarding history
md the varieties of circumstances,
I undertook to fix for all humanity the
absolute forms of political life; and, IN
consequence, d I'VE men to revolt
against the whole historical order.
Pedagogy in the seventeenth
century, developed further in the
eighteenth with the ,'naturalistic -"
| theories, assumed a natural univer-
! salty of aim and method as at present,
under all human conditions for the
of natural theology, of the philosophy
of law and of abstract political econ
Omy." AS a fact, however, human
nature cOnnOt be adequately described,
through any ~abstractly universal for
mulati IN of it's traits. Human nature,
as a product of evolution, differs from
nation to nation, from century to
century.
And yet, with all this necessary
limitation, does there not remain a
field for pedagogical science? Yes,
answers Dilthey, in case, not the alb
Stract description of human nature and
of the end of living, but the truly
psych illogical study of the typical form
of human evolution, is pursued In the
fashi N which the histOricaland biOlOgi-
cal Investigations of mOdern times have
rendered possible. A child is a cOllec-
ton of impulses, of instincts, of feel
ings and of tendencies. The object Of
education is to organize these into con
duct. To the educator we in effect
say: Work against the chaos of i'm
pulses, by using the very impulse
themselves as the material for good
order. In q w nd Organize" Although
the actual content of any attempted
organization of life will be imperfect
and transient, relatively general ac-
counts a be given of processes that
do increase the OrderlinesS of the life
of the child. Such accounts will take
the form Of pedagogical rules, whose
number Dilthey, of course, caves in
definite. In short, scientific pedagogy,
far from telling the teacher finally and
completely just what human nature is,
and must be, and just what to do with
does, on the whole, tend towards good
order:and towards the organization of
impulses into character. This is the
whole province of pedagogy" as a
general science. It's applications 20
the conditions of a particular time,
nation, family and child, will be a
matter of art, not of science. And
therefore, no concrete educational
questions can be solved i'll terms of an
universally valid science. So far, in
substance, Dilthey. In one sen%, his
essay may re said to contain 1ittle
novel V.
If [ may presume to supplement his
views by anything of my own [ would
urge: Your own surroundings, say as
Fren .hman or American your position
as teacher of the sensitive child that
needs tenderness, or of the ruggid and
sluggish child that needs awakening;
your place as defender of this OF of
that worthy ideal, say of this religious
creed, or of that, of this social tt 4ditiOn
or of some other; your relation as
private tutor to the Individual child,
or as pu0lic teacher to the larger class
of many children; your experience Of
the accidental variation of just your
own pupils lives and destinies- I'll
these things will properly interfere
with anything like a truly scientific
application of your pedagogical prin-
ciples. You will degrade science-nOt
help your children-if you persist in
seeing only the scientific" as poets of
your pc tagogy. True pedagogy is
an art.
There is no "science of education -
that will not nee | constant and vast
adaptation t the needs of the teacher
or of that constant modification in the
supplementing by the divine skill of
the born teachers instincts. This being
true, there is, indeed, no "science of
education" whose formulas will not
need, at the right moment, to be for
gotten. Yet, on the other hand, it
makes great difference to you whether
or no you 10 possess the science, that
you can be wise enough, at the right
moment, to forget. IgnOr tnce is one
thing; the power voluntarily to ignore
is quite another thing. The former is
a weakness; the latter a high spiritual
power.
There is - universally valid science
of pedagogy, that is capable of any
complete formulation and of direct
Applicant IN to individual pupils and
teachers. Nor will there ever be. so
longas humanna.ure develops, through
crOss-breeding, in each new generation,
Individual types that were there
before; so long as history furnishes. in
every age, novel social environments,
new forms of faith, new ideals, a new
industrial organization and thus new
problems for the educator. So long as
these things go on, the educators