Aims of Education as Reflected in Rousseau’s ‘Emile’

By: Dr. Md. Wasay Zafar

Abstract

One of the important questions of Philosophy of Education which has drawn attention of the philosophers in all the ages is; “What should be the ultimate goal of education?”. Since answer of this question is intimately related with the development of the curriculum and selection of the appropriate method of teaching, all the philosophers have tried to answer it, in their educational philosophy. Jean Jacques Rousseau is one of the famous western philosophers of the eighteenth century. His philosophy influenced the French Revolution as well as the overall development of modern political, sociological and educational thought. He is regarded as the father of paedocentric education. He wrote many books but the greatest work produced by him, which exerted its powerful impact on the theory and practice of education, is “Emile”. In this paper, the researcher has tried to explore the answer of the abovementioned question in Rousseau’s “Emile”.

Key Words: Aims of Education, Philosophy of Education, Jean Jacques Rousseau, Emile.

Introduction

What should be the ultimate goal of education? This is one of the important questions of Philosophy of Education which has profound and wider implications for the educational process. Aims enable us to determine relevant teaching strategies, tactics and techniques together with the development of proper curriculum, selection of the suitable instructional materials, structuring of the conducive conditions and appropriate learning experiences.  They also provide criterion for evaluating the educative process. Due to these functions of aims, philosophers in all the ages have tried to give the answer of the above question in their educational philosophy.

Jean Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778) is one of the famous Western philosophers of the eighteenth century, the period of enlightenment. His philosophy exerted powerful influence on the development of modern political, sociological and educational thought. He wrote many books to propagate his philosophy which offer great insight to the humanity. Specially, his two books; “The Social Contract” and “Emile”, both published in 1762, brought revolution in the field of politics and education respectively. While “The Social Contract” is regarded as the Bible of the French Revolution, “Emile” is considered as the most significant book on education after Plato's “Republic”. In “Emile” he propounded his famous naturalistic theory of education which brought a new movement in the field of education, called as child-centered education. He is regarded therefore, as the father of paedocentric education. The book “Emile” is written in the pattern of a novel whose hero character is ‘Emile’. As has been mentioned this work is more a treatise on education under the guise of a story than it is a novel in the true sense of the word. The book describes the ideal education of ‘Emile’ which makes him a Natural Man and an Ideal Citizen. This paper is a humble attempt by the researcher to explore the answer of the aforementioned question of aim in Rousseau’s “Emile”.

Rousseau’s Conception of education

First of all it appears necessary to discuss here Rousseau’s conception of education which can be understood better in the light of the following passage of “Emile”.

“Plants are formed by cultivation and men by education………we are born weak; we have need of strength; we are born destitute of everything; we have need of assistance; we are born stupid; we have need of judgment. All that we have not at our birth but which we need when we are grown, is given us by education. We derive this education from nature, from men, or from things. The internal development of our faculties and organs is the education of nature; the use which we learn to make of this development is the education of men; while the acquisition of personal experience from the objects that affect us is the education of things……………… Now of these three different educations, that of nature is entirely independent of ourselves, while that of things depends on ourselves only in certain respects. The education we receive of men is the only one of which we are truly the masters but even this is true only in theory, for who can hope to have the entire direction of the conversation and acts of those who surround a child?”[1]

It is evident that Rousseau has defined the process of education in three ways. Firstly, the analogy of plant cultivation and human education implies that education is essentially a process of growth, following a definite course prescribed by the nature of the growing being. Secondly, the emphasis on the shaping influence of physical environment (things) making itself felt through personal experiences implies that education is a process of adaptation to environment. Thirdly, the stress on the learning to use the natural development of organs and faculties reflects that education is the process of modification of behaviour of a child for social ends. It can also be called; a process of adaptation to social environment.

Of these three factors in education, nature is wholly beyond our control, things are only partly in our power; the education of men is the only one controlled by us and even here our power is largely deceptive because there is no guarantee that the men who surround a child (the learner) would be perfect in their acts and conversation. Rousseau is of the view that all three modes of education must work together in harmony with each other and the two that we can control must follow the lead of that which is beyond our control. What he means is that in the process of education outmost care should be taken of the nature of the child; his interests, inclinations, aptitudes, and capabilities emerging at the different stages of development. Behind this idea, is his contention that it is possible to preserve the 'original perfect nature' of the child, 'by means of the careful control of his education and environment, based on an analysis of the different physical and psychological stages through which he  has to pass from birth to maturity.[2]

Therefore, the most important task of the educator is to study the child’s nature and to provide opportunities for the perfect development of his abilities viz. physical, mental, social and moral in terms of his inclinations and ever developing curiosities as evident at each stage of development.  In other words it can be said that teaching does not consist largely in transmitting and inculcating knowledge or ideas but in offering the child opportunities for full physical and mental activities as natural for each stage of development.

The Aims

Rousseau has advocated different aims of education at different places in “Emile”. At one place he states;

           

“Whether my pupil be destined for the army, the church, or the bar, concerns me but little. Regardless of the vocation of his parents, nature summons him to the duties of human life. To live is the trade I wish to teach him. On leaving my hands, he will not, I grant, be a magistrate, a soldier, or a priest. First of all he will be a man; and all that a man out to be, he can be when the occasion requires it, just as well as anyone else can; and fortune will make him change his place in vain, for he will always be in his own.”[3]

Here Rousseau emphasizes ‘Complete Living Aim’ of education. He says that he wants to teach his Emile, how to live? He is not very much concerned about his career. It is important for him to make his child a complete natural man. He wants full development of his individuality in all spheres of life rather than in only one dimension. According to him, education should bring about the wholesome development which enables an individual to face all the problems of life in all spheres and to solve them with great courage and insight.

He further emphasizes the said aim by saying;

“We think only of protecting our child, but this not enough, we ought to teach him to protect himself when he has become a man; to bear the blows of destiny; to brave opulence and misery; to live , if need be, amid the snows of island or on the burning rocks of Malta. It is in vain that you take precaution against his dying, for after all he must die, and even though his death may not result from your solicitudes, they are nevertheless unwise. It is of less consequence to prevent him from dying than to teach him how to live. To live is not breath but to act, it is to make use of our senses, of our faculties, of every elements of our nature which makes us sensible of our existence. The man he has live most is not he who has numbered the most years, but he who has had the keenest sense of life.”[4]

Rousseau clearly explains here that a child should be trained to live in all possible diverse conditions by protecting himself and he should be able to solve all the problems of life efficiently and effectively. He must have the skills to utilize his senses and faculties in solving his problems which makes him fit for all conditions of life. This is more explicit in Rousseau’s following statement:

            “The education of nature ought to make a man fit for all conditions of life.”[5]

He further adds that a fully developed and educated person must have a keen sense of life. He should have a very clear idea of good and bad, he should act always in positive direction i.e. in support of good. He should be able to deal with the evils in such a way that it becomes good. Rousseau makes it more clear in the following sentence:

“He who knows how best to support the good and the evil of this life, is, in my opinion, the best educated.”[6]

In addition to the aim of education discussed above Rousseau has advocated several other specific aims of education which are actually complementary to this major aim. The first such aim is the ‘Self-Preservation Aim’. He writes;

“As soon as Emile comes to know what life is, my first care shall be to teach him how to preserve it.”[7]

Rousseau gives this aim the first rank. It is obvious that in order to live completely, a child has first of all to keep himself alive; he has to continue his own existence. If he became an eminent scholar or a citizen and a patriot, or a devoted father but he did not know how to assure his safety and his life then all these qualities are useless. Therefore, education must acquaint the learner with the laws of health and the methods to be adopted in order to be safe from the natural and social hazards.

The second aim which Rousseau points out is; ‘Training in the Methods of Acquiring Knowledge’. He declares;

“My purpose is not at all to give him knowledge, but to teach him how to acquire it when necessary”[8].

Here Rousseau differs with his predecessors like Socrates, Aristotle, Dante, and Comenius. They have promoted ‘knowledge’ as an important aim of education and even today this aim occupies prominent place in the field of education. Educational institutions are regarded as ‘knowledge shops’ and the teachers as ‘knowledge mongers’. But the question is; how much knowledge the teachers and the educational institution can impart to the young learners and whether the amount of knowledge given by them would be sufficient enough to solve all the problems of life? This question is more relevant in the present age which is regarded as the era of knowledge explosion and which is marked by continuous and fast cultural, economic, political, technological, climatic and ecological changes. The biggest concern of man today, is to cope with the problems arising due to these changes. Therefore, instead of making transmission of knowledge a prime aim of education, ‘Training in the Methods of Acquiring Knowledge’ should be the main focus of the educators so that an educated person could be able to search knowledge, when he/she feels the necessity. This is the concern of Rousseau in the above statement and this is the aim what we call in the modern terminology as ‘Training in the Scientific Methods’.

The third aim which Rousseau points out is the moral development aim. He says;

“We work in concert with nature, and while she is farming the physical man, we are trying to form the moral man but our progress is not the same.”[9]

At another place he writes in this regard;

“My principle object in teaching him to feel and to love the beautiful in all its form is to fix on it, his affections and his tastes, to prevent his natural appetites from becoming corrupted and to prevent him from someday seeking in his riches the means of happiness which he out to find within himself.”[10]

Thus to Rousseau another important function of education is to develop moral qualities in the individual and build his moral character. He says that every child comes in this world like a flying angel; good and virtuous in spirit but society makes him corrupt. They become morally bad only after learning reprehensible behavior from adults. Therefore, chief concern of the educators should be to protect the child from the vices of the society so that he could remain in his natural state. Rousseau suggested that a child should be kept away from the society in a natural environment in the guidance of his teacher till he reaches the age of sixteen. He further advised that till the age of twelve he should not be given any verbal moral lesson because at this stage he is not able to comprehend the moral concepts. He states;

“To know good and evil, and to understand the reason of human duties, is not the business of a child.”[11]

Hence the only task of the educator at this stage is to protect the child’s heart from vices and mind from errors. Rousseau named this mode of education as ‘negative education’. He recommended that after the age of fifteen, a child should be made gradually familiar with the moral principles. Now he can be given verbal positive moral lesson by citing examples of one’s own conduct as a child learns morals by observing his adults. In the view of Rousseau a virtuous man is one who controls himself, follows his reason and his conscience. He is his own master and commands his own heart.
Rousseau has given too much importance to this aim which is evident from the fact that most of Book IV of ‘Emile’ deals with moral development.

The fourth aim of education which Rousseau advocates is the ‘Achievement of Economic Efficiency’ or ‘Vocational Efficiency’. He writes;

“You fancy! You are teaching your pupils to live by teaching them certain contortions of the body and certain verbal formula which have no significance. I also have taught my Emile to live, for I have taught him to live by himself, and in addition, to know how to earn his daily bread. But this is not enough. In order to live in this world, we must know how to get on with men, and must know the instruments which give us a hold on them; we must calculate the action and reaction of individual interest in civil society.”[12]

Here Rousseau wants to say that each and every individual has some basic needs which must be fulfilled in order to live on the desired lines. Therefore, student must be given a training to earn his livelihood, so that he could become self-reliant and self-sufficient and not a parasite on the society. A number of professional and vocational courses are there which may be helpful in this direction. This aim has been so much emphasized these days that, education became totally job oriented and it is no longer value oriented.

Rousseau also emphasizes the promotion of ‘Social Efficiency’ as one of the aims of education in the passage given above by writing; “In order to live in the world we must know how to get on with men”. He makes it more distinct in his statement at another place. He writes;

“Consider that while wishing to form the man of nature, it is not proposed for this purpose to make a savage of him and to banish him to the depths of a forest; but that confined within the social vortex, it suffices that he does not allow himself to be drawn there either by passions or the opinions of men; that he see with his eyes and feel with his heart, and that he be governed by no authority save that of his own reason.”[13]

Here Rousseau asserts that in order to form a man of nature, it is not suggested to banish a child to the woods, but to make him fit to live in a social vortex without being seduced by the passions or the opinions of men. He must not be exploited by the men who surround him. He must be in a position to think and act in his own way. He must have knowledge how to deal with the men of his surroundings, and in spite of total freedom he must also have a regard of the social norms, ideals, and values. Being a member of the society he also has some social responsibilities which he ought to fulfill honestly. All this is further confirmed by Rousseau’s following statement:

“Emile is not made for living always in solitude; as a member of society he ought to fulfill its duties. Made to live with men he ought to know them.”[14]

Therefore education should develop in the child a spirit of social service. Other social qualities like love, fellow feeling, discipline, kindness, cooperation, tolerance, social sensitivity, sympathy, and sacrifice should also be inculcated in children by education. With the development of these socially desirable qualities, he will be able to lead an efficient life with others in happy union.

Thus Rousseau tried to develop such a plan for education in which a person will become able to fulfill the responsibilities of the society by remaining in his natural state. According to Noddings; “his was an attempt to balance the needs of conjoint living with those of self-actualization.”[15]

Rousseau has proposed also the ‘Recreational Aim of Education’ in ‘Emile”. He writes:

“The great secret of education is to make the exercise of the body and of the mind always serve as a recreation to each other.”[16]

Rousseau’s view is that children’s body and mind should be trained in such a way that both can serve as a recreation for each other. Since complete living includes also internal satisfaction, freedom from tension, anxiety, grief and pain, and also gratification of the tastes and feelings. He indicates that children should be taught sports, music and other fine arts. This will develop the emotional and artistic faculties of children on the one hand and creativity on the other.

Conclusion:

Thus in addition to a major aim i.e. Complete Living, the specific aims which Rousseau has proposed for an individual, are Self-Preservation, Training in the Methods of Acquiring Knowledge, Moral Development, Economic and Vocational Efficiency, Social Efficiency and Training in the Recreational Activities. But when we analyze all these aims separately it becomes very clear that all these aims are in fact complementary to the general aim of education i.e. Complete Living, because for a complete and better living all these qualities are necessary. In order to live completely, a child has first of all to continue his own existence. For this purpose self-preservation is essential. To deal with the problems arising due to continuous changes in physical and social environment ‘training in the methods of acquiring knowledge’ is needed. For a better respect in society and to achieve success in all fields of life, development of moral character of the child is indispensable. It is also required to save the humanity from conflict, decay and destruction because the bad conduct of an individual often creates disorder in society. Economic and vocational efficiency is mandatory for better living, and for a better social adjustment, all the socially desirable qualities are needed, because maladjustment leads to decay and death while adjustment leads to survival and adjustment. Recreation is also necessary and vital for good mental health. In short it can be said that education should develop all those qualities in a child which make him able to live and enjoy a complete life. Therefore it can be concluded that “Complete Living Aim” is the ultimate aim of education for Jean Jacques Rousseau.

References:

[1] . Rousseau, J.J., The Emile or Treatise on Education (Translated by William H. 

Payne), New York & London: D. Appleton & Company (1971), PP. 2-3.

[2] . Stewart, W.A.C. and McCann, W.P., The Educational Innovators. Volume 1- 

1750—1880, London: Macmillan (1967). P. 28

[3] . Rousseau, J.J., Op. Cit., PP. 8-9.

[4] . Ibid, PP. 9-10.

[5] . Ibid, P. 20.

[6] . Ibid, P. 9.

[7] . Ibid, P. 174.

[8] . Ibid, P. 189.

[9] . Ibid, P. 232.

[10] . Ibid, P. 252.

[11] . Ibid, P. 53.

[12] . Ibid, P. 224.

[13] . Ibid, P. 229.

[14] . Ibid, P. 240.

[15] . Noddings, N., Philosophy of Education: Dimensions of Philosophy Series. Colorado: 

Westview Press (1995). P. 15.

[16] . Rousseau, J.J., Op. Cit., P. 184.