« ForrigeFortsæt »
and its strength lies in the fact that it is a close organisation. It holds out a strong hand to the vacillating soul and offers a shelter to those who surrender themselves to her. Subject yourself to her authority and you will find salvation; you will rest in God. On the other hand we have the example of Luther. The Church does not and cannot give peace of mind to man; for it is the work of man. The Gospel together with man's freedom of conscience is the sheet-anchor of existence. But how are we to conceive the Gospel? In this question the whole subjectivity of the German soul is to be found. Every one does and must conceive it in his own way. But, how is the religious community to exist, if that is so? That is where the struggle comes in. The Protestant Church also has need of a formulary. But how is this to be reconciled with the religious conviction of the individual who lays claim to the freedom of a Christian, and constructs his own religious world? The struggle rages hither and thither. The Protestant Church from Schleiermacher to Ritschl loses in power and influence the more it insists on a formulary. But Christianity makes itself felt as an ethicising power in political life, creating great social legislation as a proof that the spirit of neighbourly love is not bound up with ecclesiastical forms and empty dogma.
Instruction also has participated in these movements. Music has been zealously cultivated in German schools since the time of Luther, who was himself a lover and promoter of music. But the question of religious instruction has affected the German schools even more. According to tradition, going back to Luther, religious instruction has been assigned to the school; only confirmation belongs to the Church, although the supervision of the religious instruction is allowed her. This accounts for the fact that the method of religious instruction has been worked out far more by laymen, the teachers, than by clergymen. The teachers, with their knowledge of the general laws of didactics, have attempted to adapt the religious instruction to the development of the child's mind, and to make it an
effective means for mental development. They maintain that instruction in religion is an important element in the education of the young and that it must therefore be assigned to the teacher, who is responsible for the development of the young.
6. The educational movement has also been very active during the nineteenth century. Herder, Schiller, Goethe, Fichte and Kant may be counted as belonging partly to this century, and they are important not only from a literaryphilosophical point of view, but especially from an educational. Human nature loves to cling to personalities which embody ideas. Names signify eras; and the nineteenth century, from an educational point of view, is dominated by the names of Pestalozzi and of Herbart. Both are to be found at the beginning, and both dominate the end of the century. Of Herbart we can say, that his works and his disciples obtained for him, after his death, an increasing amount of influence in moulding the educational world, an influence which was denied him in his lifetime. In this he shares the fate of Schopenhauer, whose chief work appeared in 1818, but whom the spirit of the times only permitted to become a force fifty years later. It was otherwise with Hegel, who fully enjoyed his fame during his lifetime, but whose influence we may consider practically ended in the second half of the century. It is again otherwise with Pestalozzi. His life is full of vicissitudes; yet in spite of many a shipwreck he enjoyed during his lifetime the worship of all classes of society, high and low, worship such as mortals rarely receive. The noble Queen of Prussia, Louise, longed for nothing more than to hasten to him and thank him in the name of humanity. Only Napoleon the First turned away from him bored; there were more important things to be done, he said, than the learning of the a, b, c. But Napoleon and his race have gone; on the other hand, the 12th of January, 1896, the 150th anniversary of the birth of the noble Swiss educationalist, showed clearly what influence Pestalozzi still exercises.
Herbart and Pestalozzi supplement one another in a happy
way. Pestalozzi is the man of intuition, of enthusiasm for education and for the improvement of the people. Herbart is the calm inquirer and exact worker, well equipped with the instrument of scientific method, the first man to sketch a system of education founded upon ethics and psychology. Both are profoundly religious men, akin to Kant in their deep ethical conviction, men of a free and wide view of life. The one devotes his compassionate love to the education of the poor and oppressed; the other is destined by education and surrounding to influence the youth of the upper classes. This difference equalised itself considerably in the course of time in this way: Herbart's ideas became more and more applied to elementary education and helped to realise Pestalozzi's views; the secondary schools, however, would not admit the pedagogy of Herbart, did not appreciate Pestalozzi, and relied entirely upon the leadership of the school-bureaucracy. In this latter, educational tendencies no longer assert themselves, especially since the immediate influence of Pestalozzi (which was very great in the time of Baron von Stein and Wilh. von Humboldt) has decreased; instead of them we find partly theological, partly philological and humanistic tendencies. Thus the Pestalozzian-Herbartian spirit wanders through the century, at first rather lonely and confining itself to small fields, but gradually extending its field of operation and advancing victoriously. And this is due to the fact that it was bound to come into touch with the chief tendencies of the century, and come to an understanding with them. How this was done we can see if we survey rapidly the chief intellectual tendencies of this century, with special reference to the principles of both Pestalozzi and Herbart.
The eighteenth century left its successor a rich inheritance; that is, three great views of life: rationalism, classicism, and romanticism. These three dominate the first half of our century. What has become of them? How do their educational representatives regard them?
Rationalism dies on account of its mediocrity, its shallowness, its insipidity and its want of historic perception. It believed it had discovered the principles and rules of religion, the State, law, art and poetry, and with these it presumed to be able to become the master of everything, of history and of morals. But just when it had thought it had reached its goal, it was conquered, and not by an outside foe, but by the greatest of its sons, by Lessing and by Kant. The philosopher of Königsberg overcame it by destroying its metaphysical sophisms; and Fichte, in his witty but blunt essay "The life and peculiar opinions of Fr. Nicolai," overcame the last representative of rationalism. In 1811, when Nicolai died, the leading world of thought had passed through this phase, which he had defended with more courage than judgment. But it was by no means dead; since the whole crowd of mediocrity, who found the philosophy of Kant too difficult, and the theology of Schleiermacher too profound, paid homage to a vulgar rationalism which flourished on the soil of politics in the form of a vulgar liberalism.
Pestalozzi and Herbart also belonged to the period of rationalism; but under the leadership of Kant they passed beyond it. Both are related to Kant in a similar manner; for both obtained from him that which had the greatest attraction to them as educationalists, namely, the ethical foundations, and especially that ethics which makes a determined stand against egoism, eudaemonism, and utilitarianism.
2. The most successful opponents of rationalism, at the beginning of this century, however, were Schiller and Goethe. They, in conjunction with Fr. A. Wolf, the philologist, and Wilhelm von Humboldt, the statesman and a lover both of philology and of poetry, introduced a new movement, classicism, a new renaissance of German intellectual life, also called the new humanism. They believed they had found the ideal of aesthetic culture in its most perfect form in Hellenism. It is difficult for us to-day to realise what Greece and especially
Homer meant to these men. About the year 1800 this classicism was the privilege of a few highly cultured people. It was thoroughly aristocratic. It was only after W. von Humboldt undertook the direction of the Prussian Education Department, that classicism became a part of German intellectual life, by becoming incorporated, first of all with the University of Berlin, and then in principle with the "Gymnasien." Humanity was the watchword of Herder; and education for humanity the aim of the New Humanism. Artists and poets were to be the instructors of mankind, were to effect that each human being should develop into a lovely individuality, into a beautiful soul. In the second half of this century there arose a formidable opponent of this classical idealism, an opponent who tried to thrust it from our secondary schools, that is to say, a REALISM, sprang up, growing stronger and stronger with the development of the natural sciences, and the resurrection of national life. The quarrel between the "Gymnasien" and the "Realschulen" became at times very fierce.
What position do Herbart and Pestalozzi occupy with regard to this movement? Both are closely connected with it, but each in a different way. Pestalozzi considers the aim of education to be "the development and education of humanity from its own centre." But he did not wish to limit this development of the inner forces of human nature to individual classes of society, but he wanted that even the poorest and lowest should have a share in it.
And so he becomes the Herbart was not hostile to
creator of the elementary schools. this creation; but his own education and his entire bringing up drew him nearer to the education and instruction as it was given in the humanistic Gymnasium. He was convinced of the importance of Homer; he wished, indeed, to place the Odyssey at the beginning of the synthetic instruction of the Gymnasium. His theory and practice belong to secondary education; but they are inspired by the same spirit that moved Pestalozzi.
It is for this reason that I said that both men supplement