The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1916-1920, 1918-07-21

n tHo HItu hnnuhi cunuky oCfiVoi
~ Institute and summer meeting
held this month at Andover. N.
H.. under the joint auspices Of the New
Hampshire Unitarian Conference and the
department Of religious education Of the
American Unitarian Association q highly
interesting series Of lectures was given
by Prof. Luther A. weigle, Pm. D.. who
holds the Horace Bushnell chair OF
Christian nurture at Yale University.
In the Boston Transcript ]. e. d. gave
. digest of these lectures, which The
School Editor takes pleasure In present
ing herewith:
DR.. Weigle is unsurpassed as an au-
thority on this subject and intersperses
o good bit Of fun with the generous
measure Of practical information with
This course has made a general appeal
to guests at the conference, as the prob
lens considered have been those which
every parent rs called upon to face.
Speaking on tho relative value of RE
wards and Punishments" DR.. weig,e
brought out the strong and weak points
Of each. Punishment, he said, Is relied
on primarily in matters which involve
moral behavior. and reward In the pro-
duction Of mental and physical work.
Punishment Is the application of the law
Of habit by annexing a disagreeable re-
suit to a wrong deed. 20 that It will
not be repeated. 1t Is more effective
than reward because 1t does the work
better. Seeking a reward depends on
whether we want II or not, but We al
ways desire to avoid the UNPLEASANT
thing. We are not so fixed and con-
sfstent in what we want as in what we
do not want Punishment is more true
to the facts Of life. Wrong doing does
bring punishment. but It Is not 80 OBJ
vious that right doing brings reward.
We aim to train in goodness, love and
understanding OF the right. but II we
interjects a reward II defects our course,
Is apt to get in the way OF our purpose.
Punishment was early looked upon as
retribution, then as a deterrent, and
later as reforming agency. While the
last Is nearer its purpose. this cannot be
applied to the child. Through punish
ment the child 10 educated and led to
understand the laws Of life and the
great. eternal. moral truths. It is a
foreshortening and materializ!og for
him Of the inevitable consequence Of
wrong doing. We cannot await the
natural working out OF events. but
must make the consequences obvious.
Dr. Weigle's characteristics OF a good
punishment are that It should have a
sting. disa greeable result II should be
associated as directly as possible with
The act and have q reasonable connec-
ton with the thing done: It should be
certain. invariable. and consistent: It
should be administered calmly In the
light Of all the facts obtainable; II
should be proportionate to the offence
rather than to the magnitude of the
consequence: and. lastly. 1t ought al
ways to be followed by talking 1t over
and making 1t up. Corporal punish
ment as an impending possibility. con-
fnement. satiation. the depriving Of
with the offence, were commended:
while scolding, social ostracism and
added work were condemned as poor
types of punishment DIR. Weigle be-
ueves that rewards should beget initia-
tive and enthusiasm. The right type OF
reward Is one which Is socially sharable,
or intrinsically related more or less TO
the task itself. Poor types are those
which are simply for consumption, or
leau 10 rivalry anu eInuldtloH
An Analysis Of Lies.
Discussing the problem OF Truth and
Falsehood." DR.. Weigle deprecated the
use OF soft and ambiguous terms like
"fb" or STORY" for the fault which only
the direct. clearcut word Tie" properly
describes. Sincerity Is natural for q
child, but he has no natural instinct
for knowing the truth or telling 1t. He
must be educated in the difference be-
tween fact and fancy, and taught the
ideal and habit OF truth telling. The
difference between fact and non-fact
has to be learned as matter OF ex-
perience. through training. Lies may
be classified into those which the child
believes himself. and those which he
does not In the former class are lies
due to faulty observation; imaginative
ones. the result of inability to draw
the line between fact and fancy. since
there has been no body Of experience
on which to base such a devotion. TO
the child there Is no intrinbic difference
between sensation and the mental images
which reproduce 1t, so that to him
fancied bear behind the door Is as fear
some as the real dog in the front yard.
In the same class are the lies of exag-
geration in which the child tends to tell
in stronger colors. and tries to make an
impressive story.
The lies which the child does not be-
lieve himself are those INDUCED In in
. playful spirit, including" the whole
realm OF the dramatic. the make-be-
lieves and those designed to shock or
tease; the lies OF self-interest, self-pro-
lection, or self-defence. are mora seri-
Gus. II the parent does not have suffi-
cient understanding to grasp his point
of view the child Is often driven to this
kind of lie. There is the lie of rivalry
or boasting. the desire ito put up
good 'front.': the privileged lies. told
because the child feels obligation to be
truthful! only TO his immediate circle of
friends but not to outsiders: the lies to
do good. to save some other child from
blame, which are fostered by elders who
cast indiscriminate opprobrum upon
tale bearing. We cannot hope for a ohild's
full confidence II we call him a "tattle
tale" The habit OF truth telling must
be developed by presenting unambigu-
Gus ideals OF truth and falsehood in the
most direct fashion possible. and by
practising the Ideal ourselves sincerely
and consistently. We must help to
draw the line between the real and the