THE NEGATIVE THEORY OF EDUCATION

Three divergent theories of education all have their advocates in the present day. Of these the
first considers that the sole purpose of education is to provide opportunities of growth and to
remove hampering influences.

Freedom, in education as in other things, must be a matter of degree. Some freedoms cannot be tolerated.

The liberal story cherishes human liberty as its number one value. It argues that all authority
ultimately stems from the free will of individual humans, as it is expressed in their feelings,
desires and choices.

Why do we become more conservative as we age? Is it because we have found a place in the
existing system, have risen to a larger income, and have invested our savings in an economy,
which any significant revolt might alter to our loss?

In preparing these chapters I have often looked into my 1929 ebullition, The Mansions of Philosophy, to avoid repeating old sallies and arguments.

Shall we define our terms? Historically, religion has been the worship of supernatural powers.
Webster defines morality as “the quality of that which conforms to right ideals or principles of
human conduct.”

In the year 1830, a French customs official named Jacques Boucher de Crèvecœur de Perthes
unearthed in the valley of the Somme some strange implements of flint now interpreted by the
learned as the weapons with which the men of the Old Stone Age made war.

To what extent is freedom possible, and to what extent is it desirable, among human beings who live in communities? That is the general problem which I wish to discuss.

Before we can discuss this subject we must form some conception as to the kind of effect that
we consider a help to mankind.

The connection of science with war has grown gradually more and more intimate. It began with
Archimedes, who helped his cousin the tyrant of Syracuse to defend that city against the
Romans in 2I2 B.C.