The Elements of General Method | Page 3

exclusively to the acquisition of certain forms of
knowledge and to intellectual training, to the mental discipline and
power that come from a varied and vigorous exercise of the faculties.
The great majority of good schoolmasters stand squarely upon this
platform, knowledge and mental discipline. But they are none the less
deeply conscious that this is not the highest aim of education. We
scarcely need to be told that a person may be fully equipped with the
best that this style of education can give, and still remain a criminal. A
good and wise parent will inevitably seek for a better result in his child
than mere knowledge, intellectual ability, and power. All good
schoolmasters know that behind school studies and cares is the still
greater task of developing manly and womanly character. Perhaps,
however, this is too high and sacred a thing to formulate. Perhaps in the
attempt to reduce it to a scientific form we should lose its spirit.
Admitting that strong moral character is the noblest result of right
training, is it not still incidental to the regular school work? Perhaps it
lies in the teacher and in his manner of teaching subjects, and not in the
subject-matter itself nor in any course of study.
This is exactly the point at which we wish to apply the lever and to lift
into prominence the moral character-building aim as the central one in
education. This aim should be like a loadstone, attracting and
subordinating all other purposes to itself. It should dominate in the

choice, arrangement, and method of studies.
Let us examine more carefully the convictions upon which the moral
aim rests. Every wise and benevolent parent knows that the first and
last question to ask and answer regarding a child is "What are his moral
quality and strength?" Now, who is better able to judge of the true aim
than thoughtful and solicitous parents? In the second place, it is
inconceivable that a conscientious teacher should close his eyes to all
except the intellectual training of his pupils. It is as natural for him to
touch and awaken the moral qualities as it is for birds to sing. Again,
the state is more concerned to see the growth of just and virtuous
citizens than in seeing the prosperity of scholars, inventors, and
merchants. It is also concerned with the success of the latter, but chiefly
when their knowledge, skill, and wealth are equaled by their virtues.
Our country may have vast resources and great opportunities, but
everything in the end depends upon the moral quality of its men and
women. Undermine and corrupt this and we all know that there is
nothing to hope for. The uncorrupted stock of true patriots in our land
is firmly rooted in this conviction, which is worth more to the country
than corn-fields and iron mines. The perpetual enticement and
blandishment of worldly success so universal in our time can not move
us if we found one theory and practice upon the central doctrine of
moral education. Education, therefore, in its popular, untrammeled,
moral sense, is the greatest concern of society.
In projecting a general plan of popular education we are beholden to
the prejudices of no man nor class of men. Not even the traditional
prejudices of the great body of teachers should stand in the way of
setting up the noblest ideal of education. Educational thinkers are in
duty bound to free themselves from utilitarian notions and narrowness,
and to adopt the best platform that children by natural birthright can
stand upon. They are called upon to find the best and to apply it to as
many as possible. Let it be remembered that each child has a complete
growth before him. His own possibilities and not the attainments of his
parents and elders are the things to consider.
Shall we seek to avoid responsibility for the moral aim by throwing it

upon the family and the church? But the more we probe into
educational problems the more we shall find the essential unity of all
educational forces. The citadel of a child's life is his moral character,
whether the home, the school, or the church build and strengthen its
walls. If asked to define the relation of the school to the home we shall
quickly see that they are one in spirit and leading purpose, that instead
of being separated they should be brought closer together.
In conclusion, therefore, shall we make moral character the clear and
conscious aim of school education, and then subordinate school studies
and discipline, mental training and conduct, to this aim? It will be a
great stimulus to thousands of teachers to discover that this is the real
purpose of school work, and that there are abundant means not yet used
of realizing it.