The discipline of consequences has been much emphasized by Herbert Spencer in his “Education.” Its limited usefulness in moral training is pointed out in the foregoing section. Acting like a mechanical law, it tends to have the same effect upon the feelings that a physical law has. How could one’s moral sensibilities be impressed by the law of gravitation? Nature makes us prudent, but scarcely good.
[158.] Sometimes the question is how to set pupils on the right track again. They have grown listless, for instance, or pursue their tasks with reluctance. Here we may profitably resort to a sudden interruption by a change of employment. It happens occasionally that pupils, physically strong, are guilty of very bad behavior that persists in spite of admonitions and punishments, or reappears in another form, but which is, after all, at bottom, only the result of a state of ill humor that can easily be corrected. An unexpected, trifling present, an unusual act of attention, will very likely break down the pupil’s reserve, and when the cause of the trouble has once been ascertained, it will be possible to discover a remedy.
[159.] In the case of those that are weak physically, furtherance of health combined with persevering patience is the first and chief duty. But kindness should not degenerate into weak indulgence; on the other hand, close supervision must take the place of every form of harsh treatment.
[ CHAPTER VI
General Method of Training]
[160.] The distinctions relative to character and morality ([143]–[150]) furnish the thread of reflection on this subject. Concisely stated, the function of training is to support, to determine, and to regulate; to keep the pupil, on the whole, in a tranquil and serene frame of mind; to arouse him occasionally by approval and reproof; to remind at the proper moment, and to correct faults. A more definite significance will be imparted to this brief summary by a comparative study and application of the ideas analyzed in the preceding chapters.
While we may accept the statement that the function of training is to support, to determine, and to regulate, we must not forget to ask: To what end shall it do these things? The answer is, that though the means of moral training are always psychological, the ends are always social. Support must hold the pupil up to social standards, the directive power of the teacher must be exercised for social ends, while all regulation of the pupil’s activities must point to the same result. There is scarcely a virtue to be named that does not find its ultimate meaning in its application to conduct as affecting others. This is true even in primitive society. In modern urban society it is not only true, but vastly important. The discussion in Chapter VI is psychological throughout. It must be the purpose of the annotation to point out the social implications.
[161.] First, what is meant by the supporting activity of training becomes clearer if we recall the remarks made concerning memory of the will ([147]) as opposed to the thoughtlessness usually ascribed to youth. The thoughtless boy does not remember past acts of will. He stands in need of being supported by training. This, further analysis shows, is done in two ways: by holding him back from the wrong course, and by holding him up to the right course.
Training presupposes an efficient government and the obedience consequent to it. By implication, the pupil would not dare to disobey a command if given. But commands ought to be employed sparingly, and only when inevitable. Imposed too frequently, they would preclude self-development; if given to adolescents for any but obvious and urgent reasons, obedience would not long continue. In short, government acts at intervals. But the pupil cannot be permitted to live in a state of lawless liberty in the meantime. He must remain sensible, be it ever so little, of certain limits which he is not allowed to overstep. This result is the aim of the supporting function of training.
But the pupil, even though he be generally obedient, does not obey every one, nor under all circumstances, nor always fully, promptly, and without opposition; and when he once fails to comply with gentle words, he will be still less ready to yield to a severe manner toward himself. Of course, the teacher must know on what support he may depend; the father needs to have made up his mind how far he would be willing to go with coercive measures if necessary; the private tutor, to what extent he may count on the backing of parents; the teacher in a public institution, how far his course of action would be upheld by his superiors. But all this involves an appeal from training to government, a step to be avoided as much as possible. Most of the unpleasant cases of intractability, where recourse to government becomes unavoidable, are the gradual result of continued weak indulgence. Of such cases no account is taken here, and justly so, since, apart from all else, even defiant obstinacy, provided restraint has not been cast off utterly, soon breaks down and gives way to remorse when it is met by serious and deliberate firmness.