Close Reading Post, Weekly Post Check-In

Education Through Nature

1 Comment

In Jean Jacques Rousseau’s text, Emile, he comes up with the idea that our education comes from “nature, from men, or from other things.” However, he finds that “the object of our study is man and his environment (2).” He genuinely believes that we learn by reasoning and experiencing the world for ourselves. Rousseau relies on nature and “freedom, not power (5),” with freedom you are able to do whatever you desire. With these beliefs, he follows isolationism and individualism.

Rousseau believes that nature “is wholly beyond our control, things are only partly in our power (1).” He supposes that everything starts with nature and we later use this growth to expand our education, which is from man. After this comes education of things, by experiencing our surroundings. He comes up with the idea that “nature provides for the child’s growth in her own fashion (6),” which is why he keeps Emile isolated. In schools, children must abide by the rules of the school, but if you are isolated you can learn freely. Also, you can learn more than what a teacher tells you. Being educated in school is one “thing” that Rousseau has control over. By being isolated he gets Emile to “use his own reason not that of others (22).”

Along with being isolated from other children and the traditional ways of being raised, Rousseau believes in individualism. He is in favor of being free and being independent. He knows that you aren’t guaranteed to live and “present interest… is the motive power (12),” which is why he wants Emile to live as a child while he is a child.” Since Emile is away from others, he is able to act freely and “run, jump, and shout to [his] heart’s content (6).” Emile could say, “his childhood, at least was happy; [they] have robbed him of nothing that nature gave him (14).” Rousseau stressed the importance of experience and believes that “no book but the world” be the “only guide for the first workings of reason (14)” for a child who reads doesn’t “think, he only reads (14).” He believes that freedom and education are directly connected. However, the basics that children come to learn come from school. In schools, whenever you ask questions, most times the answers are directly given to you, Rousseau thinks that children should, “think rather than question (15).” Individualism is a great piece to his theory; he wants people to be free and think on their own rather than rely on others to tell us the answers.

Rousseau was in favor of isolationism and individualism. He thinks that being separated from the world and relying on his own experience are ways to achieve education through nature. He didn’t care if Emile learned slower as other students as long as “what he knows is really his own (22).” The issue with his thoughts however, is that by keeping him away from other children and making him think only on his own, he doesn’t know anything of the “moral relations between man and man (22).” Education should be achieved through nature, experience and man, not just nature.

Rousseau, Through the lens post

Ideology of Rousseau and Descartes

Rene Descartes spent many years after receiving his formal education traveling
the world. He gathered experiences and fed his curiosity. Through his journeys, Descartes states his travels as ”an undertaking which was accompanied with greater success than it would have been had I never quitted my country or my books” (Descartes 6). Descartes obtained knowledge through first-hand experiences, such as listening to speakers and witnessing several different situations. That concept of gathering experience goes hand in hand with an idea from Jean Jacques Rousseau’s text “Emile.”

From the excerpt of “Emile” that we have read, Rousseau and Descartes have a similar idea. Rousseau states: “The child who reads cease to think, he only reads, he is acquiring words no knowledge” (Rousseau 14). In a sense, reading does not necessarily educate a reader. In fact, education and learning come in a different manner. If one  “wish[es] to teach this child geography and you provide him with globes, spheres and maps… why not begin by showing him the real thing so that he may at least know what you are talking about” (Rousseau 15). This differentiates knowledge obtained from books and what one can potentially learned from experience. It is one thing to know what a mountain is and define it, but it is another to see what a mountain is in person. The experiences are different, and it enhances your understanding of what a real mountain is. Only so much of the true experience can be conveyed by words.

In able to fully grasp an understanding, one must experience it personally, and I believe both philosophers agree on this statement. From the quotes of both Descartes and Rousseau, their points complement one another. Rousseau presents the idea of self-learning. We should learn from experience to truly understand a subject. Descartes is the proof of success of the theory. Descartes actually went traveled and learned. From Descartes’ studies, he found that: “For it occurred to me that I should find much more truth in the reasonings of each individual” (Descartes 6). With more validity and accuracy in personal accounts it leads to Rousseau’s argument:  “[we] will be a mere plaything of other people’s thoughts” (15). If we were to accept all the ideas of others, we would not be ourselves nor would we be learning.

Close Reading Post

Rousseau’s way of Education

Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s novel Emile tells the life story of a fictional man names Emile. In the story, Rousseau connects Emile’s development and the education he receives in his life. In his first couple books, Rousseau focuses on children. He says “they retain sounds, form, sensation, but rarely ideas, and still more rarely relations.” (Rousseau, 11).  According to Rousseau, younger children in the Age of Nature must emphasize the physical side of their education. They use their physical senses to acquire knowledge. Rousseau also believes that that a person should begin formal education in his teenage years. However the education he suggests is working with a private tutor. Rousseau believes that “a student will develop reasoning” under the guidance of a tutor. He also believes that the adolescence stage is the best time to begin studies because a man is fully developed. In the adult years of Emile’s life, Rousseau proposes that a man should focus his education on religion.

In comparison to Descartes “Book of the World” and Locke’s “experience, Rousseau takes a more planned approach in life. He maps out how education should flow in a man through his life. For example, Rousseau uses Emile’s life and separates them by books to show the steps in how education came to Emile. However, it is quite similar to Locke’s idea that no man has natural abilities and must start from scratch. Rousseau recognizes that there is no “natural man” in modern society. Locke and Rousseau share the idea that human development grow around experience. Descartes and Rousseau share that idea that studies are important. This is shown through Rousseau’s focus on formal education during adolescence years. However, Rousseau is different from both these philosophers in that he thinks aside from how a person should learn and focuses on the “when” part. “It is only after long training, after much consideration as to his own feelings and the feelings he observes in others, that he will be able to generalize his individual notions under the abstract idea of humanity” (Rousseau, 30). According to Rousseau, a man will finally adjust to a society once he has gone through his course of childhood, adolescence, and adulthood and understands how education flows through himself.

Close Reading Post, Free post, Rousseau, Theory Check-In, Theory Think

Rousseau & Emile

In Emile: or A Treatise on education, Rousseau says for a child to grow up healthy is to live in a state of nature and not be pressured. It emphasizes that children shouldn’t have to deal with formal education and strict regulations. Children should be allowed to explore the world and learn from the things they see and experience. Children should enjoy their adolescence days and not be pressured to learn everything so quickly. They should take their time to learn and experience things. “Nature would have them children before they are men. If we try to invert this order we shall produce a forced fruit immature and flavourless, fruit which will be rotten before it is ripe; we shall have young doctors and old children” (Rousseau, 7). Rousseau is accentuating on the fact that in order to have intelligent children we must follow the order of education. Following the order of education, will allow the child to grow and learn and “ripe.”

Rousseau highlights how to teach children. Visually showing a child (learning based) has a significant impact rather than teaching from books.  When you visually show a child, they learn and actually have a better understanding of what is being taught. “…Never substitute the symbol for the thing signified, unless it is impossible to show the thing itself” (Rousseau 16.) Rousseau showcases this when Emilie and him were exploring a forest and were trying to find their way back home. Emile was tired and gave up. Nevertheless, Rousseau helped them find their way back. This experience helped Emile actually learn instead of forgetting what one learns if it was a lecture taught at home or school. “Teach by doing whenever you can, and only fall back upon words when doing is out of the question” (Rousseau 20). Experience plays a vital role on learning. Rousseau’s ideology is connected to Locke’s idea about experience.

Happiness of a children’s childhood is very important to Rousseau’s ideology. Every child may not live to become a man and therefore they should enjoy their childhood. Rousseau questions that why should we invest so much time in education if you don’t know if you will live another day. It takes bravery to choose the less taken, hard road and not regret the decisions we choose.

Peer Response Post, Weekly Post Check-In

Response to “What Lies Before Us?”

1 Comment

In response to Jenny Chou’s post “What Lies Before Us?”, I find some similar feelings and some contradictories to Jenny after I read Jean Jacques Rousseau’s “Emile: or a Treatise on Education”. Firstly, I agree with Jenny about the way Rousseau explains how a happy childhood is important to a child. According to Rousseau’s word, “let them run, jump, and shout to their heart’s content” (6). Children should be allowed, not forbidden, what they want to do and what is really interested them because that is what makes them happy. In addition to Jenny’s response to the text, children, like Rousseau says, do not understand thing behind the surface of its meaning, they should not be forced to do or learn anything that he cannot understand or it has no use for him at his current age. In Rousseau’s word, “No one, not even his father, has the right to bid the child do what is of no use to him” (6).

However, I want to add on to Jenny’s view of how we cannot be guaranteed a desired life even if we spent so much time on education. Like Rousseau states in the text, “a man were born tall and strong, his size and strength would be of no good to him till he had learnt to use them” (1). I think education can actually help a fully-grown man to his desired future, because he has learned how to use his knowledge and his strength to build a life from his experiences. However, education has less of a meaning to the young children because their paths of life have just begun and they do not have the ability to perform from their knowledge. Beside, children are not ready to absorb a bunch of knowledge all at once. They have to learn little by little, day by day, from their surrounding, not by books. This leads to another argument to Jenny’s view. She believes “reading is the key and essential route to stimulating imagination and creativity”, however, this statement is only true when you can fully understand your reading and know the meaning behind the text. Young child like Emile, since he just start to know how to read, can possibly misunderstand to reading and get the wrong idea that wasn’t the author’s intention, which might affect Emile’s judgment of right and wrong, good and evil.

Free post

Independence Promotes Better Behavior

I like Rousseau’s approach on how to handle children and their habits. He stated, “The only habit the child should be allowed to contract is that of having no habit” (3). I agree with him because often, many parents tend to over dominate their child’s life, therefore spoiling and shielding them from making mistakes. What was thought to protect the child, will eventually end up harming them. Rousseau’s method was to let the child touch, learn, and experience things on their own. Rousseau stated, “Do not check these movements which teach him invaluable lessons” (4). For instance, if they are curious about a hot stove and they touch it, they will burn themselves and therefore learn to never touch it again. However, if the parent constantly warns the child to not touch the stove, they would not know why and the consequences of touching the stove. 

Rousseau continued on to children until the age of twelve. He stated, “The most dangerous period in human life lies between birth and the age of twelve” (9). At this critical period, children are prone to errors so he suggested the mind to be left undisturbed until it is developed. Consequently, Rousseau did not put a strong emphasis on education during this young period of time. He stated, “It consists, not in teaching virtue or truth, but in preserving the heart from vice and from the spirit of error” (9). I agree with Rousseau and believe that education should not be so strongly emphasized in the beginning stages of your childhood. We should not be forced to memorize facts but rather, learn more about ethics and morals to better improve ourselves and become better people. Then, after you have the right mentality, you can learn all the knowledge in school.

Close Reading Post

Isolation and individualism

Rousseau from the beginning expresses a view that man, meddles, forces, destroy and defaces all things. Man will not like anything as nature made it, so the need to change or alter with what is natural, but he said these are things we are taught after being plugged into particular social conditions. Rousseau feels that we are born sensitive to everything and what we are subjected and taught does affects us from birth. Isolating a child from these elements are essential and importing to developing them. Rousseau prefers that you raise the child in a state of nature, or free form where there not corrupted and natural as possible, able to become aware of elements, learn rights from wrong . That is an example of isolation because Rousseau does not want any interference from the parent to suggest to the child what is write and what is wrong behavior, not to ruin their harvest as Rousseau phrased it. Individualism does goes hand in hand with this method of parenting because the child is encouraged to find activities and hobbies of interest, it make it a completely individualistic experience because there not placed or encouraged to do anything that they don’t  find interesting . Later on at different ages it seems as Rousseau does want you to teach them but he does not want you to correct them but more allow them to find mistakes on their own, present things in a way where the child come up with their own answer to their question with out you having to correct or discredit them.

Free post, Rousseau, Weekly Post Check-In

Multiple Ways of Learning

1 Comment

“Suppose the child were stupid enough not to perceive the result of these experiments, then you must call touch to the help of sight. Instead of taking the stick out of the water, leave it where it is and let the child pass his hand along it from end to end; he will feel no angle, therefore the stick is not broken.” (Rousseau 22)

 

While reading this it reminds me of Bach’s idea of not learning anything in school. This quote in my opinion means that there isn’t one solid way of learning something. We can learn in different ways and that depends from person to person. So the quote basically says that if you can’t learn it one way than learn it another way. This can be related to Bach’s idea because he stated that he didn’t learn anything in school and thought it was a waste of time. The part when he realized he didn’t learn anything isn’t the problem that he was dumb and you cant blame the teacher as well. Different people learn differently so when Bach said for him is was a waste of time was only for him. Maybe for other students it wasn’t and they actually learned it the way the teacher taught them unlike Bach. Another idea is that when someone doesn’t know anything that doesn’t automatically mean they are “stupid” or “dumb”, it just means they require another way of learning and understanding that idea or concept. This quote supports that idea. Some people can learn through the use of words only, whereas others need visuals to better understand the idea or concept. So when teachers teach us usually through a certain way the kids who don’t understand or learn through that would have a disadvantage compared to someone who can understand the way that certain teacher teaches. This affects the grades of student and so when Bach said that grades on papers don’t say anything about a person’s education can be true to a certain extent.

 

 

Free post

Emile and Sophy

I like Rousseau’s idea of education for children in his Emile: or A Treatise on Education. Rousseau says for a child to grow up healthy is to live in a state of nature. Children should not be bothered with formal education and strict instructions. They should be allowed to explore. We should not be in a rush to educate children and let them enjoy their youthful days.  Rousseau also says, “Nature would have them children before they are men. If we try to invert this order we shall produce a forced fruit immature and flavourless, fruit which will be rotten before it is ripe; we shall have young doctors and old children” (Rousseau 7). Hence Rousseau is trying to say we must follow the order of education or else we will be unable to produce a natural, real, and uncorrupted “fruit”.

I also liked Rousseau’s idea of how we should teach children. Rather than teaching from books, why not show it? Rousseau says, “As a general rule–never substitute the symbol for the thing signified, unless it is impossible to show the thing itself” (Rousseau 16). In the text, Rousseau provides us with an example where he and Emile explore a forest and try to find their way back to town. Emile was tired and feeling hopeless. However, through Rousseau’s help they find their way back. It is through this experience that Emile will remember what he learned. He would of forgotten this lecture if he was taught at home. Rousseau supports this with, “Teach by doing whenever you can, and only fall back upon words when doing is out of the question (Rousseau 20). This idea resonates Locke’s idea about experience. It is through experience where Emile’s knowledge expanded.

What bothered me the most in Rousseau’s text was his idea of Sophy. Why must women be “weak and passive” and the men be “strong and active” (Rousseau 35)? Why must the women care for what others have to think of her? It should not concern others what she does. I believe a woman will do just as fine without a man as a man will do fine without a woman. Women are not always dependent on man. Rousseau’s idea of Sophy is extremely ridiculous.

Free post

What Lies Before Us?

1 Comment

Overall, I liked Jean Jacques Rousseau’s method of education for Emile, his imaginary pupil, in his treatise on education. I especially liked how Rousseau emphasized the happiness of children’s childhood. He states that not every child may live to become a man and therefore, we shouldn’t jeopardize their innocent joys of early childhood in preparation for an unpromised future (Rousseau 4-5). As contradictory as it may sound, the education we are currently receiving may, indeed, draw us closer to a desired degree, but just like what Rousseau stated in his treatise, we can’t even be certain that we’ll live to see tomorrow’s sunrise (Rousseau 4). Why are we investing so much time on a degree we may or may not want, a career we may or may not like, or simply a future that may or may not be guaranteed? It takes courage to choose the road less taken and possibly even harder to not regret the decisions we chose.

One treatise of Rousseau’s education; however, that striked me the most was when he claimed that “[r]eading is the curse of childhood… [and his pupil] will only find it a nuisance” (Rousseau 12). Rousseau claims that from the age of twelve to fifteen, Emile’s imagination is still asleep and hasn’t been aroused (Rousseau 14). I have always believed that reading is the key and essential route to stimulating imagination and creativity but never a curse for childhood. As of now, we can only live one life, but it is through reading that one can live a life of many characters. Although Rousseau claims that without the activation of imagination, Emile would only see what’s really there and rate the danger at its true worth “so he never loses his head” (Rousseau 14), he also states that imagination “enlarges the bounds of possibility for us” (Rousseau 5). So if there’s a stimulant accessible, why hinder one’s chance to imagine?

A Blogs@Baruch site