Year: 1874

There can hardly be a greater mis-
take than to confound learning Will
education. 4 man may be very
thoroughly educated who has never
read more than fifty books, while he
may be a walking thesaurus of the
facts and principles Of all the arts and
sciences yet not be half educated. II


We wish to inquire into the extent Of a
mans learning, we ask, What does
he know? If we desire to know how
far he has been educated, the question
is. What can he do? Learning has
reference to the material which the
mind employs, educated relates to the
power to use it. The possession of
great store of material does not ncces-
sarily imply very great vigor Of intel
lect. Learning supplies the tools with
which the intellectual man works.


Education not only provides the
skill and strength with which he uses
them, 1t also determines the end to be
accomplished. The mere man of lear
ming is the hod-carrier in the section
of the great temple of human progress.
The man of education is both tie ar
chitect and the builder on the walls.


1t must, however, be admitted that in
process Of acquiring knowledge the
mind is to some extent educated, and
it is hardly possible that the mode of
acquisition can be so absolutely vicious
as to fail altogether of producing some
salutary effect upon the mind itself.
This may account for the fact that
mankind have generally failed to dis
tinguish between learning and educa-
ton, perceiving that those who have
made the largest acquisitions are gen.
orally the strongest men. They draw
the erroneous inference that in order
to be strong we have only to acquire
1t is strange that the fallacy of this in
ference is hardly ever suspected when
the world has presented so many in
stances in which the men of the schools
have been found wanting is the great
conflict of life.-Their learning and
education, for the two are regarded
as one and the same thing, seem to
disqualiiy them for the active pursuits
of men, and they are distanced in the
race for wealth, power and fame by
competitors who have no advantage
of training, and who are ignorant of
the first principles which regulate
their own arts. When such cases oc-
cur, instead of doubling the correct
ness of their former inference, men now
conclude that learning, and education
are injurious, or ut least, impractical
If they do not reach this extreme con-
clusion they find fault with the instru-
ments of education, confounding them
again with education itself Then we
have batteries of ridicule erected,
which pour their volleys of sqbs and
crackers in the solid and time harden
ed ramparts of the tried and tested
curriculum. The chief point of attack
is the most impregnable part of the
whole line-the study of the dead Ian
guages, though fierce attack is often
made on the point where the meta
physics stand strongly intrencbed.


The mathematics, the physical and
especially these sciences as applied to
the useful arts are lauded as the only
subjects of study suited to this cmi-
nently practical age.


This all proceeds from the one er-
ror of mistaking these instruments of
education for education itself.


The first and most essential princi.
pie of the science of education is, that
the pursuit is everything, and the OBJ
ject of pursuit comparatively nothing.
The process is of far more importance
than the result. This great truth has
been more ably illustrated by Sir Will.
liam Hamilton, than by any other
modern writer, although his learning
in depth and extent was almost mira
culous.-While it is true that learning
is the means to a true education, it is
also true that none but the really edu.
Gated man can become the pOssessor
of vast, and at the same time, val
liable and useful crudition.


A DARKY gives the following reason