How Nature stUdV should be taught 77 



Nature study is not the study of a science, as of botany, 

 entomology, geology, and the like. That is, it takes the 

 things at hand and endeavors to understand them, without 

 reference to the systematic order or relationships of the ob- 

 jects. It is wholly informal and unsystematic, the same as 

 the objects are which one sees. It is entirely divorced from 

 definitions, or from explanations in books. It is therefore 

 supremely natural. It simply trains the eye and the rnind 

 to see andJto_comprehend the things of life ; and the result 

 is^not directly the acquirement of science, but the establish- 

 ing of a living sympathy with everything that is. 



Thoreau in " Spring " draws the distinction in 

 his characteristic style as follows : — 



As it is important to consider nature from the point of 

 view of science, remembering the nomenclature and systems 

 of men, and so, if possible, go a step further in that direc- 

 tion, so it is equally important often to ignore or forget all 

 that men presume that they know, and take an original and 

 unprejudiced view of Nature, letting her make what impres- 

 sion she will on you, as the first men, and all children, and 

 natural men do. For our science, so called, is always more 

 barren and mixed with error than our sympathies are. 



It has been seen in the two introductory par- 

 agraphs of this chapter, that both denounce 

 schedules or definite method. "Why is this?" 

 asks many a teacher. " Isn't it a good thing to 

 have your work assigned in advance ? " Yes, but 

 nature study is not your work. It is from the 

 standpoint of the loves and interests of the child, 

 not from that of your knowledge. You will make 



