2024年3月23日发(作者：爱奇艺电脑版官网)

英语学习资料：罗素经典英语散文：

EducationandDiscipline

罗素经典英语散文：Education and Discipline

Any serious educational theory must consist of two parts: a

conception of the ends of life, and a science of psychological

dynamics, i.e., of the laws of mental change. Two men who differ

as to the ends of life cannot hope to agree about education. The

educational machine, throughout Western civilization, is

dominated by two ethical theories: that of Christianity, and that

of nationali *** . These two, when taken seriously, are inpatible,

as is being evident in Germany. For my part, I hold that where

they differ, Christianity is preferable, but where they agree, both

are mistaken. The conception which I should substitute as the

purpose of education is civilization, a term which, as I meant it,

has a definition which is partly individual, partly social. It consists,

in the individual, of both intellectual and moral qualities:

intellectually, a certain minimum of general knowledge, technical

skill in one's own profession, and a habit of forming opinions on

evidence; morally, of impartiality, kindliness, and a modicum of

self-control. I should add a quality which is neither moral nor

intellectual, but perhaps physiological: zest and joy of life. In

munities, civilization demands respect for law, justice as between

man and man, purposes not involving permanent injury to any

section of the human race, and intelligent adaptation of means

to ends.

If these are to be the purpose of education, it is a question

for the science of psychology to consider what can be done

towards realizing them, and, in particular, what degree of

freedom is likely to prove most effective.

On the question of freedom in education there are at present

three main schools of thought, deriving partly from differences

as to ends and partly from differences in psychological theory.

There are those who say that children should be pletely free,

however bad they may be; there are those who say they should

be pletely subject to authority, however good they may be; and

there are those who say they should be free, but in spite of

freedom they should be always good. This last party is larger than

it has any logical right to be; Children, like *** s, will not all be

virtuous if they are all free. The belief that liberty will insure moral

perfection is a relic of Rousseaui *** , and would not survive a

study of animals and babies. Those who hold this belief think that

education should have no positive purpose, but should merely

offer an environment suitable for spontaneous development. I

cannot agree with this school, which seems too individualistic,

and unduly indifferent to the importance of knowledge. We live

in munities which require cooperation, and it would be utopian

to expect all the necessary cooperation to result from

spontaneous impulse. The existence of a large population on a

limited area is only possible owing to science and technique;

education must, therefore, hand on the necessary minimum of

these. The educators who allow most freedom are men whose

success depends upon a degree of benevolence, self-control, and

trained intelligence which can hardly be generated where every

impulse is left unchecked; their merits, therefore, are not likely to

be perpetuated if their methods are undiluted. Education, viewed

from a social standpoint, must be something more positive than

a mere opportunity for growth. It must, of course, provide this,