A Practical Enquiry into the Philosophy of Education

by James Gall

NOTES

Note A, pages 45 and 55.—It may perhaps be reasonably objected to this term of "Reiteration," that it is a new term for an act of the mind which has already received another name. The Author's excuse is two-fold. In the first place, he thinks, that any other term which he could have employed, might have been misunderstood, as writers are not as yet at one on the subject. But, secondly, no other term would have included so fully all that he intends to designate by the act of "Reiteration." In this he may be mistaken; but as it is of little consequence by what name an object may be called, provided the thing so named be properly defined, he thought it safest to apply the term he best understood, and which, in his opinion, most correctly describes the act itself.

The same thing may be said of the terms, "Individuation," "Grouping," and "Classification," which may perhaps be nothing more than "Abstraction," "Combination," and "Generalization." His misconception of those latter terms, and of what is included in them, may have led him to think that the mental operations which he has perceived in the young are different. If so, there can be little harm in using the terms here adopted; but if, on the contrary, they do really include more, it would have been hurtful to use a term which had been previously defined, and which did not include the whole that was intended.

Note B, p. 56.—It may be a question, but one certainly of little practical consequence, whether we ought to place the principle of "Individuation," or this of "Reiteration," first in order. The child, no doubt, fixes upon the individual object before he can reiterate it; but it is still this act of reiteration that first impresses the idea on the mind, and constitutes it a part of his knowledge.

Note C, p. 58.—It may be proper here to explain once for all, that it is not the intention of the Author, as indeed he has not the ability, to define scientifically the mental processes which he thinks he has observed in the young. His object is simply to point them out, so that they may be successfully imitated by the teacher in the exercises of the school.

Note D, p. 60.—The fact, that children who learn to repeat words without understanding them, do sometimes acquire the meaning of them afterwards, is no valid objection to the accuracy of this statement. Repeated experiments, in various forms, and with different persons, have established the important fact, that when children at any future period master the ideas contained in the words which they had previously committed to memory, it is not because of that exercise, but in spite of it. They have attained them by another, and a perfectly different process. It is generally by reading the words from the memory,—thinking them over,—and in that way searching for, and reiterating the ideas they contain. This is much more difficult than when the person reads for the first time the same words from a book; and it has this serious disadvantage, that it has to be read from the memory every time the ideas are required, which is not the case when the ideas are reiterated in the natural way by hearing, or by reading.—On this subject see the Experiment made before the Clergy and Teachers of Stirling, in July 1833, with "Blind Alick" of that place, who could repeat the whole Bible;—and the Supplementary Experiment to ascertain the same principle, made in the House of Correction in Belfast, before the Teachers and Clergymen of that town, in December 1837.

Note E, p. 83.—Perhaps it may be found, that "Grouping," and "Classification," are only different manifestations of the same principle. But even if it were so, it would have been necessary here to treat of them separately, on account of the very different uses made of them by Nature. The present, be it observed, is not a metaphysical treatise, but a humble attempt to be popularly useful.—See Note C.

Note F, p. 105.—This principle may by some be considered as "instinct," and others may affirm that it is "reason." All that we require to do here is to point out the phenomenon,—not to define it. The name is of little consequence. It is the principle itself, as perceived in its manifestations, that we have to do with, for the purpose of successfully imitating it in our dealings with the young.

Note G, p. 132.—There needs scarcely any farther proof of this than the fact, that barristers, by constant practice, are usually the most fluent extemporaneous speakers. It is also strongly corroborative of the statement in the text, that clergymen generally, and especially those who are most accustomed to the use of extemporaneous prayers and sermons, find most ease in replying to an opponent on any subject that is familiar to them.

Note H, p. 160, & 201.—It is a very remarkable fact, to which the attention of the writer was lately called, that Mrs Wesley, the mother of the Rev. John Wesley, founder of the Wesleyan Methodists, appears to have acted upon the principles here developed. In Southey's Life of that great man, there occurs the following Note: