Educating according to nature
What if the whole aim of teaching a child were to keep the world from spoiling him before he can meet it? Rousseau builds an education that seems to teach nothing and shapes everything.
Following an imaginary pupil from infancy to marriage, Rousseau argues that children are not small adults to be filled with lessons but growing creatures whose faculties ripen in an order a tutor must respect, not rush. His method is famously negative: the tutor arranges the whole environment so the boy learns from things and consequences rather than from books and commands, and seems to master nothing from anyone. Against the drilling and catechism of his age, Rousseau makes childhood a stage with its own worth. Pestalozzi and a century of child-centred teaching descend from the wager that nature, given room, does the real work.
- education
- pedagogy
- nature
- development
- childhood
- experience
- habit
- perception
- judgment
- mentorship
- child development
Enter a dialogue
- A parent fears every hour not spent teaching is lost. Why should the first years, you say, only shield a child from vice and error?
- Children laugh at the crow in the fable of the flattering fox but they all love the fox. What does such a fable really teach a child?
- The philosopher Locke urged reasoning with children from the start. You say those children turn out silly and argumentative. Why does explaining everything backfire?
- Your pupil Emile reads Robinson Crusoe first, and for long almost nothing else. Why is a shipwrecked castaway the best teacher for an education by nature?
- You and Emile get lost in a forest at noon, hungry, and only then does he find north by the shadows. Why trust hunger over a lesson?