網頁圖片
PDF
ePub 版

INDIVIDUALITY.

OBSERVATION of things: curiosity to SEE and EXAMINE objects: noticing things in their isolated capacity, and as independent existences: cognizance of the identity, personality, or individuality of bodies: power and desire of observation.

ADAPTATION.-On looking at any thing, as a book or a pen, the first impression made upon us is that it is a thing. It is its personality, its individuality, its thingness that first enters the mind. Before we can examine its uses or properties, wel must know that it is a something. The material world is parceled out into single objects without number, each of which has a separate existence of its own. Thus, who can count the sands upon the sea-shore, or the leaves or twigs of the forest, or the particles of matter? And each, in its very nature. has a separate existence of its own. To this necessary property of matter, therefore, this faculty is adapted.

This is the looking faculty. Its one distinctive function is to see things. It asks, what is this, and what is that. It creates that intellectual curiosity, as well as that instinctive. desire to examine and discover things which has resulted in most of the discoveries of modern science, improvements in agriculture, the arts, science, &c., and discovered Phrenology. It is that door of entrance through which a knowledge of things is received into the mind, and takes cognizance of what is called the "divisibility of matter," or that quality which allows a body to be divided and sub-divided ad infinitum. while each portion cut off still remains a distinct thing.

As this faculty is the door through which a knowledge of external objects enters the mind, so its organ is one of the first developed in infants. The babe of a few hours, or at least days old, begins to look at surrounding objects; and to notice, gaze, and stare. Indeed, this curiosity to see and handle every thing, to pull things apart so as to see what is inside of them, &c., seems to be one of the strongest intellectual desires and functions of childhood and youth, as well as the great medium of receiving information. This looking tendency of children is too strong, too unequivocal to be mistaken, and the result to which it brings us, is equally conclusive and unavoidable. It says, and in language too loud, too plain, to remain unheard or be misconstrued-the language of nature-that children

should be taught by OBSERVATION first and mainly, from

, books, afterwards and secondarily. Is not seeing a thing infinitely better than any description of it that can be given, especially on paper? This insatiable curiosity of children, and their extraordinary development of Individuality, together with the incontestible fact that what they see is far more rividly and indelibly impressed on their minds than what they read, expose the fallacy of the almost universal opinion that children must learn to read and spell first, as almost the only medium of acquiring knowledge. It also shows that the general custom of consuming five or more years of the most valuable portion of life in learning to read and spell, is unnatural and injurious. The fact is that education is now begun at the wrong end, and condacted upon erroneous principles throughout. In educating children, should we not follow the order in which their organs are developed ? Every other course is at war with their natures, and therefore preposterous. They learn by means of their organs, and therefore they should be taught nothing appertaining to any organ till it is developed. But as soon as any intellectual organ begins to be developed, its cultivation should be commenced. Individuality is one of the first of the intellectual organs developed, as well as one of the most prominent in childhood and youth, and therefore education should be begun and continued by showing them things, and how to do things. Shall we require them to study subjects which they have not yet the power to comprehend? As well set the blind to selecting colors, or the deaf to learning music.

This error of teaching children from books instead of observation, is almost fatal to the exercise of intellect, and of course to the development of both the intellectual faculties and their organs. Reading is arbitrary, and requires a vigorous and protracted exercise of the intellect; whereas observation is natural, as much so as breathing or sleeping. Learning to read is irksome and therefore repulsive, but observation is delightful and attractive, and thereby stimulates the mind to a far more vigorous action than books which are disagreeable have the power to do ; for, all know with how much greater energy the mind grasps and masters what it likes than what it dislikes. Learning to read does not interest children, and

therefore does not call their intellectual organs into action, and therefore weakens instead of strengthening or enlarging them; while observation, having things SHOWN and explained to them, delights them beyond measure, which calls their intellectual organs into exercise, and this enlarges them, and facilitates their action, as well as disciplines and invigorates the mind.

In the light of this principle, no wonder mankind are so ignorant and every way so unintellectual. No wonder they flock by thousands to see monkey shows, circus-exhibitions, and every tom-foolery and humbug that may be started, yet take but little interest in purely scientific or intellectual True, they flock in crowds to hear an eloquent speaker, yet it is because he rouses their feelings, but how few go to hear close reasoners, or read sound philosophical productions. No wonder that mankind bestow most of their time and labor upon the gratification of their feelings and passions, and that even their religious belief and practice are mainly a matter of education or feeling, and little of intellect.

This lamentable deficiency of intellect is certainly not constitutional. It is not the fault of man's nature; for, as already seen, Phrenology lays down the doctrine as fundamental and universal, that intellect should direct and govern all our feelings; and what nature requires she provides. She requires sufficient intellect to guide the feelings and moral sentiments, and accordingly, nearly all children have superior intellectual developments-far better, in proportion, than adults. How much oftener do we see fine foreheads on children than on grown persons? But why this relative decrease of those organs designed and adapted by nature to guide and sway man? What causes this relative decrease of the intellectual organs in adults? That which causes colored children to have better heads than colored adults, and colored people at the north than those at the south; namely, because nature does more for them than education perfects-because they become weak from mere INACTION; and this is because their studies are not adapted to their faculties-because books are made to precede and supersede observation and facts, and the consequent want of interest in their studies. Want of interest in their studies is the fatal secret of our intellectual inferiority.

The inability of children to comprehend book-studies, together with their utter want of adaptation to the order in which the faculties are developed in children, is the primary, procuring cause of all.

I know, indeed, that I am advocating a bold innovation; and sapping, or rather undermining the very foundation of modern education; that I am demolishing, at a single stroke, an idol to which parents cling as they do to their children themselves, and on whose altar millions are annually sacrificed in body, and almost ruined in mind-but I cannot help it; for, my data is Phrenology, and my inferences are conclusive. From the universal fact that Individuality is the first and most prominently developed intellectual organ of children, there is no appeal; and, from the inference that, therefore, this organ should be brought into habitual action in them; that to show and explain things to them should even be the leading object of early education, is direct and unequivocal. That teaching them to read and spell, exercises their observing powers but little, or at least not to any extent worth naming, is selfevident. It even absolutely prevents observation, instead of promoting it. What is there within the walls of a schoolhouse for children to see? Absolutely nothing but an occasional prank of some mischievous scholar, at which, if they see, they naturally laugh, and for this they get chastised or boxed over the ears, accompanied with a "There, now, see that you keep your eyes on your book." As well chastise. them for breathing, or for being hungry! Shut out from the view of objects at school, and mostly confined within doors. while at home, no wonder that they lose their intellectual curiosity, and find their minds enfeebled. Their arms, or feet, or any other physical organ, if laid up in a sling, or prevented from exercise, would also become enfeebled. At three years old, just when they require all the physical energies of their yet delicate nature for growth, they must be confined in a school house; their growth thereby stinted; and fatal disease often engendered, and all to spoil their intellects. True, parents mean it for the best, but that no more obviates the evil consequences, than giving them arsenic, with the intention of benefitting them, would prevent its killing them.

But this bold, and at first apparently revolting position, is

still farther established by the method by which the human mind arrives at all correct conclusions. Reasoning alone, without its being founded upon observation, cannot teach any thing. Would reason alone ever have discovered, or can it even perfect Phrenology? Can reason teach us, in the first instance, that the function of a muscle is motion, or of a nerve, sensation; that the eye was made to see; that heat can be obtained from trees? that water can quench thirst, and food satiate hunger? that a stone thrown into the air will fall again to the earth? Observation must always precede reasoning. After we have seen thousands of stones that were thrown into the air return to the earth; seen food satiate hunger, and water quench thirst, each, thousands of times, &c., we may then begin to reason that other stones thrown into the air will also fall to the earth, that food in other cases will satisfy hunger, and water allay thirst, &c. The inductive method of studying nature, namely, by observing fucts, and ascending through analogous facts up to the laws that govern them, is the only way to arrive at correct conclusions-the only safe method of studying any science or operation of nature, Phrenology included, or of ascertaining any natural truth.

Now, the minds of children are only the minds of adults in embryo. The former are compelled, by an unbending law of mind, to gain all their knowledge by the same process by which the latter perfect theirs-by observation, followed by reason. Then let children be taught this lesson of induction as their first lesson, their main lesson during childhood. This lesson never falsifies; books and papers sometimes do; and thereby bias and warp their judgment, implant errors, and blind reason.

I now appeal whether I am not on philosophical, as well as phrenological ground--whether I am not planted on a law of mind, and whether education should not be made to conform to this law. Is not this point self-evident? and should not education be at once remodeled in harmony with it? I doubt whether fifty years will pass, if twenty, before this fundamental change will be effected. I even expect to live to see it, even though the good (?) old way is so thoroughly riveted upon the affections of parents. But let every reader ask himself what good his books did him while a child? Let him

« 上一頁繼續 »