The University men, on their part, have, in this century, acted rather than speculated. They have been intent rather on making good pupils than on composing theories. There would, however, be valuable truths to cull from the works of Cournot,[274] of Bersot,[275] and especially of Michel Bréal.[276]
[628. Analytical Summary.—1. One of the main characteristics of the educational thought of this century is doubtless the effort to deduce the rules of practice from certain first principles. The principles of instruction are to be found, for the most part, in the science of psychology, and the principles of education, in part, in social science and even in jurisprudence.
2. The purpose of Napoleon to secure the perpetuity of his dynasty through the influence of his Imperial University, is a striking proof of the belief in the potency of ideas, and of the belief in the potency of popular instruction as a means of national strength.
3. The history of mutual instruction exhibits three important facts: 1. the effect of agitation in arousing public interest in educational questions; 2. the manner in which peculiar circumstances suggest an expedient which can be justified on no absolute grounds; 3. the danger of converting such an expedient into a “system” for universal adoption.
4. Comenius, Pestalozzi, and Jacotot, attempted to make instruction universal by simplifying its processes to such a degree that every mother might be a teacher and every household a school.
5. In Comte we see the re-appearance of Condillac’s doctrine, that the historic education of the race is the type of individual education. The same hypothesis will re-appear in Mr. Spencer’s Education.]
FOOTNOTES:
[255] Fourcroy (1755-1809), a celebrated chemist, was director-general of public instruction in 1801. He prepared, in the following years, the decrees relative to the establishment of the University.
[256] Fontanes (1757-1821), first Grand Master of the University.
[257] Mémoire politique of Joseph de Maistre, Paris, 1858, p. 30.