2I6 



NATURE 



[October 22, 19 14 



set lessons and literary study by blocks of learners ; 

 the extra cost of the work is considerable, when the 

 expense of the special requirements is taken into 

 account ; more time and more individual effort are 

 demanded both from teacher and from taught ; free- 

 dom is hampered by the need of considering the 

 requirements of external examinations ; finally, the 

 universities have done but little to help, and though 

 the schools have more or less unwillingly recognised 

 that there is some value in scientific studies, in conse- 

 quence of the persistent demands men such as Huxley 

 have made, more especially because it is seen that 

 there is money in them, none the less there is still no 

 real demand for them on the part of the public. Of 

 this and, in fact, of nearly all the real problems of 

 education the public are too ignorant to be judges. 



Having been more than forty years not only a 

 teacher but also a student of students and of teachers, 

 of educational methods, and of the conditions under 

 which teaching is carried on, I have been led to form 

 very definite opinions, the more so as I have been 

 able to regard the problems not only from the peda- 

 gogic side, but also from that of the chemist and 

 biologist — with some knowledge of the mechanism. 



My view — and it is one that I desire to press to a 

 logical conclusion — is that we must recognise that 

 human ability is not merely a limited quantity but 

 that it varies enormously not only in quantity but also 

 in quality : the human orchestra contains a great 

 variety of instruments differing in tone and range, 

 but nature, like man, makes few instruments of super- 

 lative excellence, a Vast number of very poor quality 

 and only a moderate proportion of serviceable type. 

 If science can tell us anything, it is that the demo- 

 cratic and republican ideal of equality is the veriest 

 moonshine — a thing that never has been and never 

 will be. And education can do very little to alter the 

 state of affairs : it cannot change the instrument, at 

 most it can develop its potentialities, and it may 

 easily, by careless handling, do damage to the work- 

 ing parts. To take a special case, of interest at the 

 moment, no contention is less to be justified, I belfeve, 

 than that which has been put forward frequently, of 

 late years, on behalf of women — that their disabilities 

 are in no small measure due to the fact that we have 

 neglected their education : give them time to educate 

 themselves and they will be as men in all things. 

 Years ago, at our Stockport meeting, I ventured to 

 express the difference by saying that woman is not 

 merely female man but in many respects a different 

 animal : the two sexes have necessarily been evolved 

 to fulfil different purposes. Nothing is more instruc- 

 tive in the history of modern educational progress 

 than the fact that women have asked merely for what 

 men have : at the universities they have attended the 

 men's courses ; not one single course have they de- 

 manded on their own account. Higher teaching in 

 relation to domestic science so-called has only been 

 thought of very recently and mainly because men have 

 urged its importance. Most serious and, I believe, 

 irreparable injury is being done to women, in London 

 especially, by forcing them to undertake the same 

 studies and to pass the same university examinations 

 as the men : and the damage is done to the race, not 

 merely to individuals, as the effect of education, 

 whether direct or indirect, is clearly to diminish the 

 fertility of the intellectual. Some day, perhaps, when 

 the present wave of selfishness has passed over us, 

 a rational section of women will found a woman's 

 university where women can be taught in ways suit- 

 able to themselves without injury to themselves. In 

 saying thes6 things, of course, I am laying myself 

 open to the charge of narrowness — in deprecation I 

 can only say, that what we are pleased to call educa- 

 tion is, for the most part, so futile in substance and 

 NO. 2347, VOL. 94] 



in its results that I shall not mind in the least if I am 

 accused of decrying it : in my opinion, we shall all 

 be better without most of it, men and women alike. 

 So far as so-called intellectual education is concerned, 

 learning to read seems to me to be the one thing 

 worth doing : at present it is the thing most neglected 

 in schools. 



To develop a rational system, we need to take into 

 account man's past history and to apply evolutionary 

 and biological conceptions. Education, as we know it 

 and practise it, after all is a modern superstition — 

 something altogether foreign to the nature of the 

 majority of mankind ; it is based on the false assump- 

 tion that we can all be intellectual ; whereas most of 

 us can only use our hands. But the schools neglect 

 hands and attempt the impossible by trying to cultivate 

 non-existent wits. Man is doubtless pretty much what 

 he was, and it is useless trying to make of him what 

 he has never been. 



We are seeking to educate all. What does this 

 mean? Practically that we are seeking to teach all 

 to read. But when they have learnt, what are the 

 majority to read — what will they care to read? At 

 the schools for young gentlemen, the reading taught 

 hitherto has been mostly the reading of Latin and 

 Greek. We know the result — the number of persons 

 above school age who can and do read either language 

 is negligible. Some of us learn French, scarcely any 

 learn German, Spanish is all but neglected : when^ 

 therefore, we visit the Continent of Europe or South 

 America we can only mumble a few words of the 

 language of the country, and usually allow the 

 foreie^ner we visit to, speak broken English for us : 

 few of us read his literature. 



The vain attempt is made to put us in touch with 

 the past but no real effort is exerted to bring us into 

 contact with the present. We have not yet taught 

 English in our higher schools, but are beginning to 

 think of doing so — to this end, we are urging that 

 attention be paid to so-called classical literature, for- 

 getting, of course, that for the most part this was 

 written for grown-ups and not as food for babes of 

 school age. 



The difficulty is still greater in the case of those 

 who have only passed through the elementary schools 

 — the literature that will appeal to most of these will 

 be very limited in scope. Our newspapers show 

 pretty clearly what will go down : not much — but it 

 represents what is going on in life. In London, 

 when the theatres are under discussion, it is often 

 said that people want to be amused, not instructed; 

 to cudgel our dull brains is a dull business to most of 

 us. It seems to me that this doctrine should be 

 applied more than it is in the schools. At all events, 

 we shall do well to remember the words of the wise 

 pundit in Rudyard Kipling's "Kim": "Education- 

 greatest blessing when of best sorts — otherwise no 

 earthly use." 



To discover the best sort for each sort of student 

 is our difficulty — who will do it? Here comes my 

 point. Not the present race of schoolmaster or' of 

 educational authority. By placing classical scholars 

 in charge, we seem unconsciously to have selected 

 men of one particular type of mind for school service 

 - — men of the literary type ; and this type has been 

 preferred for nearly all school posts, mainly because 

 no other type has been available, this being the chief 

 product of our universities. Such men, for the most 

 part, have been indifferent to subjects and methods 

 other than literary — I verily believe not because they 

 have been positively antagonistic or lacking in sym- 

 pathy, but rather because of their negative 

 antagonism : of an innate ability to appreciate the 

 aims and methods of any other school of thought 

 than their own, especially on account of their entire 



