Chapter 9 Emile (Volume Two) Section Four

There are two kinds of lies: those about past deeds and those about future obligations.The first kind of lying is: denying what he has done, or insisting that he has done something he has not done, in short, that is, he knows that the truth of the matter is not so, but he chooses to say so.The second case of lying is that of making promises which he does not intend to keep, in short, of expressing an intention contrary to his own.Sometimes these two kinds of lies are told together; however, I will only mention here their differences. A man who realizes that he needs help from others, and who at the same time receives frequent favors from others, will never try to deceive others; on the contrary, he is determined to let others know the truth of the matter, so as not to wrongly hurt him.It is therefore evident that it is not the nature of children to lie, but the duty of obedience compelled them to lie, and since obedience is painful, they quietly try to disobey as much as possible. , At the same time, they also feel that instead of exposing the truth of the matter and gaining benefits in the future, it is better to tell a lie to avoid punishment and blame once and gain current benefits.Under natural and free education, why should your children lie to you?What has he to hide from you?You don't pick on him, you don't punish him, you don't force him.Why doesn't he tell you what he's doing as innocently as he tells his buddies?He cannot possibly think that he will be in greater danger by confessing to you than to his partner.

Since the promise to do or not to do is an act of mutual agreement, which is both beyond the state of nature and injurious to liberty, the act of lying about duty is still less natural.Moreover, all the promises made by the children are in themselves invalid, because their limited perception can only see the situation in front of them, so when he makes the promise, they cannot understand what they promise. of.As soon as they lied, they made promises of one kind or another, for all they had in mind was how to get out of their present difficulties, and any means that would have no immediate effect were permissible: he promised in the future When doing something, it is actually empty talk, his imagination is still in a state of ignorance, and he can't imagine the scene of him in two different times.If he was asked to promise to jump out of the window tomorrow and save him a whipping or give him a bag of sweets, he would immediately say yes.This is the reason why the law does not respect the promises of children; and if strict fathers and teachers force children to do what they promise, it can only be because these things would have been done even if they had not promised.

A child does not lie when he promises something, because when he makes the promise he knows little of what he promises.But if he does not keep his promise, the situation is different, and his promise can be traced to a lie, because he remembers very well that he made it; but he does not know the importance of keeping it.As he has no power of seeing the future, he cannot foresee the consequences of things; and even if he breaks his promise, his conduct is not contrary to the reason of his age. It can be seen that the children's lying is completely caused by the teachers. They want to teach the children to tell the truth, but they teach the children to lie.They are eager to discipline their children well and make them behave in a good way, but they can't find a suitable means to achieve their goals.They think they can retrain the minds of their children by empty maxims and unreasonable rules, and therefore they would rather make them learn their lessons and tell their lies than keep them innocent and honest.

For our part, we only advocate that our pupils learn by doing, and we would rather have them be honest than learned; Promises of one kind or another, lest they not intend to keep their promises.If he did something wrong in my absence, and I couldn't find out who did it, I didn't blame Emile, and I didn't ask him, "Is it you?" What is the effect of teaching him to deny it?If his obstinacy compelled me to make a treaty with him, I would take the utmost care that the content of the treaty should be made by him and not by me; I feel that fulfilling the treaty can gain great real benefits; in case he does not fulfill his promise, I will also make him feel that the pain caused by such a lie is due to the inevitable consequences of the development of things, not from the teacher's revenge.However, there is no need for me to resort to such a vicious method, because I can almost conclude that Emile will not learn what it is to lie until a long time later, and when he knows, he will definitely Much to my surprise, I can't imagine any good in lying.So, it was clear that the more I freed his good life from the will and judgment of others, the more I made him understand that lying would do him no good.

If we were not so eager to teach the child well, we would not be so eager to force him to do this or that, and we could take it easy to make our demands of him only when the time is right.In this way, as long as the method of doting is not adopted, the child can be taught well.However, because an ignorant teacher does not know how to educate the children, he always asks the children to agree to do this or that. So many promises, the result is that he regards them with indifference, puts them behind him, regards them as disdainful to keep them, and even regards them as a set of empty words, and he thinks it is fun to make promises and break them.Do you wish him to be faithful to what he says?If you wish, you must be very careful about what you ask of your child.

What I have just said about lying can be used in many ways to illustrate the imposition of other duties on children, because it is not only hateful but practically impossible to impose them on them.What appears to be preaching to them is to make them love vices: in the very process of forbidding them from them, they are made to acquire them.You try to make them pious, and you bring them into church to make them grumble; you want them to babble and pray, but they think it's good news not to pray to God now.In order to make them feel kind, you tell them to give to others, as if you don't bother to give and ask them to give.what!It is not children who should give to others, but teachers.No matter how much a teacher loves children, he should compete with his students for this honor; he should make children realize that at his age, they are not worthy of giving to others.Giving is an adult's business, because he understands the value of what he gives, and he understands that others need his giving.Children do not understand these things, so even if they give alms, it cannot be counted as merit. His almsgiving is not out of compassion and kindness; moreover, based on his own example and yours, he thinks that only children give alms to others. But when he grows up, he won't do this anymore, so he still feels a little shy when giving alms.

It should be noted that a child should be called to give only things of unknown value or metal things in his pocket, because these things have no use for him except to give to others.A child would rather give a hundred ducats than a piece of cake.Now, please try if you can get this generous giver to give away his favorite things, toys, candy and treats, and we will see immediately whether you have made him a truly generous person . Another way of attaining this end can be found, that is, by giving back at intervals what he has given, and accustoming him to giving back what he thinks he can get back.I find only these two kinds of generosity in children: what he gives to others is either of no use to him, or others will definitely return it to him.Locke said: "Let them know from experience that the most generous people can often take advantage of it." It is precisely because of this that a child appears generous on the surface, but in fact he is very stingy. .He also said that in this way, children can develop the habit of generosity.Yes, usurious generosity, giving a man a piece of butter for the sake of a cow.However, when you ask him to really give it, this habit disappears; if you don't pay him back, he won't give it to you.It is important to form habits of the mind not hands.All the virtues you teach your children are like this hand, and it is by teaching them these virtues that they make their youth so melancholy!Could it be said that this is a wise education?

Dear teachers, don't be so hypocritical, you must be just and kind, and you must engrave your example in the memory of your students and make them penetrate into their hearts.Not only do I not force my students to do all charitable things, but I like to do them myself in front of him. Not only that, I even want to make it impossible for him to imitate me, so that he feels that this is not his A man of that age may enjoy the honor; for it is important not to accustom him to regard as the doing of a child what should only be done by grown-ups.If he sees me helping the poor and asks me these questions, and I think it's time to answer him, I say to him: "My friend, the reason why the poor want to meet the rich is because the rich Man has promised to feed all those who cannot live on their own property or labor." "So you also promised to support them?" he asked me again. "Of course, it is precisely because of this condition attached to the property that passes through my hands that I dispose of them in this way."

After hearing this passage (I have already told how to make a child understand the meaning of this passage), another child-not Emile-maybe follow my example and behave like a rich man in this case, I at least want to prevent him from doing it with a pompous air, and I would rather let him take away my rights, and give things to others secretly without my back.It was the kind of concealment that a man of his age could do, and it was the only concealment that was uniquely capable of my forgiveness. I think that all these imitated virtues from other people are learned like monkeys, and that any kind of good behavior can produce good moral effects only because you recognize it when you do it. It was good in the first place, not because you saw others do it.But at a child's age, when the mind is still in a state of ignorance, it is necessary to make them imitate the actions which we wish children to form habits, so that they may at last practice them with their own judgment and love of the good. Behavior.Humans are good at imitating, and animals are the same; it is a good nature to like to imitate, but this hobby has become a bad habit in society.The monkey imitates the man it fears, not the animal it despises; it thinks that the actions of a superior man must be good.We, on the contrary, imitate good deeds in order to belittle them, to make them ridiculous; Even when they try to imitate the behavior they admire, we can see from their choice of objects that the intention of these imitators is false, because their intention is to deceive others. Want others to appreciate their talents, not make themselves better or smarter.The root of our imitation of others is our constant desire to raise ourselves above our own.Had my work been successful, Emile would never have had such thoughts.So, we have to remove any superficial benefits that such thinking might have.

Examine all your laws of education thoroughly, and you will find them to be false, and especially the laws of morals and customs to be absurd.In moral education, there is only one thing which is suitable for children and is the most important for people of all ages, and that is: Do no harm to others.Even the teaching of goodness is hypocritical, contradictory, and pernicious if it is not subordinate to the teaching.Who doesn't do something nice?Everyone does something good, and the bad man does something like everyone else; when he does one good thing, hundreds of people suffer; from this comes all our evils.The noblest morality is negative, and at the same time the most difficult to practice, because it is not meant to be seen, and, even if we do it to our heart's content, it does not produce sweet pleasure in us.A man has done his fellow-men a great favor if he has never done them any harm!What steadfastness of heart and what strength of character he needed to do it!If you want to realize how great and difficult it is to make this article successful, you can't just talk about its theory, but must put it into practice.

I hope that people will pay attention to these general ideas when educating their children. If they do not always educate their children in this way, they will inevitably cause them to harm themselves or others, and especially to acquire some bad habits that are difficult to correct later. ; but, of course, it is less necessary for well-bred children, who would not be so rough, naughty, lying, and greedy if the seeds of bad behavior had not been sown in their minds.The observations I have made on this point, therefore, are more applicable to exceptional cases than to general cases; Exceptions are becoming more and more common.A child brought up in a prosperous place needs this education earlier than a child brought up in a poor country.Therefore, even if this separate education can only make the child mature in childhood, it is preferred to have it. There is another exception, which is quite different, and that is that there are children who are very gifted at a young age.Just as some people can never get rid of their childishness, so some people can be said to have never experienced childhood at all, and they become adults almost immediately.Unfortunately, such exceptions are rare and difficult to see. Every mother who thinks that a child can be a prodigy, therefore believes that her child can be a prodigy.Not only that, but they even regarded as idiosyncratic signs such commonplace things as witty talk, reckless gestures, and lively innocence, which, however, were characteristic of his age and best evidenced that a child was a child after all.Since you have made a child talk a lot, and allowed him to say anything, without any manners or rules, is it any wonder that you happen to say a few pertinent words?It would be strange if he never said a single pertinent word, even more strange than astrologers who can't make a prediction right after talking nonsense for a while.Henri IV said: "They told so many lies that they finally told the truth." If anyone wants to say a few beautiful words, he only needs to say more stupid words.God bless those fashionable people who have nothing else to praise but a few pretty words! Just as children may have the most precious diamonds in their hands, so they may have the most beautiful thoughts in their brains, or rather, the most beautiful words in their mouths, but that does not mean that The ideas and the diamonds were theirs; at their age, no one property really belonged to them.A child says things that they understand differently from ours, without the same idea.These ideas—if he has them—are incoherent in his mind; there is nothing fixed and definite in his thought.Take what you call a genius, and sometimes you find his mind so flexible that it is like a fountain so clear that it reflects the clouds in the sky.More often, however, the same person is so dull, as if trapped in a thick smoke.Sometimes, he walks in front of you; sometimes, he stays there.A moment later you say, "He's a genius." A moment later, you say, "He's a fool." Both of your statements are wrong.He is a child, he is a young eagle, which sometimes flies into the sky, and then returns to its nest. Therefore, regardless of his appearance, he should be treated according to his age.Don't wear him out with too much exercise.If his head is already hot, if you see it beginning to boil, let it think freely without stimulating it, lest it all dissipate; The essence of the body is preserved, that with age it may become living heat and true strength.If you don't, you'll be wasting your time and effort, and ruining your own grades; after you've dazzled yourself with hot fumes for a while, you'll be left with nothing but dross that has lost its essence. There is no more general and true rule, I think, than there are stupid children and there will be mediocre adults.The most difficult thing is to see in a child's childhood whether he is really stupid or appears stupid, which is often a sign of a strong character.It seems strange at first sight: the symptoms of these two extreme cases are very similar, and should be similar, because when people are still in the age of no real thinking, people with genius and people without genius The difference between the two is that the latter accepts only false ideas, while the former, seeing that they are false, accepts neither; so both are like fools: the one understands nothing, the other He feels that everything does not suit his own heart.It is only now and then that the only symptom that distinguishes them is detected, because at such times the gifted child is imbued with an idea and he understands it, whereas the untalented child remains the same all the time.Little Cato was regarded as a stupid child by his family when he was a child.He was taciturn and stubborn: that was all he was said to be.Once in Sulla's living room, his uncle discovered that he was very clever.If he hadn't gone into that parlour, perhaps he would have been looked upon as a brut until he reached a reasonable age.If Caesar did not appear at that time, perhaps people would always regard Cato as a visionary, but it was he who saw Caesar's insidiousness and anticipated his tricks long ago.He who judges children hastily is often wrong!This kind of person is more childish than children.I am honored by my friendship with a man who, at a considerable age, is regarded by his relatives as a simple-minded man; Get up, and suddenly everyone sees that he is a philosopher; I am convinced that future generations will leave him a very honorable and noble place among the best thinkers and most profound metaphysicians of our time. Respect the child and don't rush to judge him, good or bad.Let peculiar signs be shown and confirmed again and again before taking a special approach to them.Let nature teach for a long time before you take over her work so as not to conflict with her teachings.You said that you understand the value of time, so you don't want to lose every second.But you don't see that the loss caused by misuse of time is greater than the loss of doing nothing during that time. A child who has received a bad education is far less intelligent than a child who has not received any education.You are amazed to see him pass the years of his childhood with nothing to do!well!Could it be that making him happy all day long, running, jumping, and playing all day, is doing nothing and wasting time?In Plato's book, which everyone considers serious, he educates children entirely through festivals, gymnastics, singing, and amusement; Things were taught to them; Seneca said of the youth of ancient Rome: "They were always standing, and never learned to sit down."Could it be that when they are in the prime of life, their worth will drop because of this?So, don't be so worried about this so-called state of laziness.What do you think of a man who does not go to sleep in order to make use of all the time in his life?You will say, "This man is crazy; instead of enjoying his time, he is losing his time, because the result of abandoning sleep is running to death." So, you have to understand that the situation is exactly the same here, to Knowing that childhood is the sleep of reason. Educating children seems to be easy on the surface, but this superficial ease is the reason that hinders children.People don't know that such ease is itself proof that they have learned nothing.Their smooth minds reflect like a mirror whatever you show them, but it doesn't make any impression.The child remembers what you say, but reflects the ideas; anyone who listens to him can understand the meaning of his words, but he is the only one who does not understand the meaning of them. Although memory and understanding are two fundamentally different instincts, they can only be truly developed when combined with each other.Before reaching the age of reason, the child cannot receive ideas, but only images; but there is this difference between the two: images are nothing but absolute pictures of things that can be perceived, while ideas are perceptions of things , is determined by a certain relationship.An image can exist alone in the mind that reproduces it, but an idea calls forth other ideas.When you imagine in your mind, you are just seeing, and when you think, you compare.Our sensations are purely passive; on the contrary, all our understandings or ideas arise from active principles capable of judging.I will elaborate on this point later on. So I think that because children don't have the ability to judge, they don't have real memory.They remember sounds, shapes, and sensations, but rarely remember ideas, let alone their connections.My opponents, seeing that they have learned some elementary geometry, think that this proves me wrong; on the contrary, they prove my point, showing that children not only cannot reason for themselves, but they cannot even remember Others' arguments; examine the methods employed by these little geometers, and you will soon see that they have memorized nothing but the exact figures and terms of the examples.If you refute it a little, they won't understand; if you turn the graph upside down, they won't understand it.All their knowledge rests on the senses, and nothing is thoroughly understood.What they have heard told when they are young, they have to learn again when they grow up. It can be seen that their memory is not stronger than their other abilities. I don't think, however, that children are completely devoid of understanding.On the contrary, I think they understand very well everything that concerns their immediate and sensible interests.However, what we don't understand is what they know. Therefore, they don't know, but we think they know, and they don't understand, but we ask them to explain the truth.Another mistake we make is to call their attention to matters that do not concern them at all, such as their future interests, how happy they will be as adults, and how much they will be respected when they grow up; For someone with a little foresight, it is absolutely meaningless.To force poor children to study these things often leads them to devote their minds to things which have nothing to do with them.So, please judge whether you can call their attention to these things. Mr. Dong Hong, who boasted a lot about how he taught his students, has been trained by others, so their views are completely different; in fact, according to their own behavior, it can be seen that their views are exactly the same as mine.Because, what exactly are they teaching their students?Words, words, words.Of all the subjects they boast about, those that are really useful to the student, they do not teach, because they are sciences of things, and they do not teach them well; Geography, Chronology, Languages, etc., to show their proficiency in these subjects; but all these studies are of little concern to adults, and still less to children, so that, as long as he can learn them in his life, It is a great thing to use them for the last time. You may find it strange that I regard the teaching of languages ​​as a useless education; but you know, I am only speaking of childhood education here; so whatever you say, I do not believe that any child (Except for gifted children) Before the age of twelve or fifteen, they really learned two languages. If language learning is nothing more than learning some words, that is to say, learning to express the symbols or sounds of these words, then I also think that this kind of learning may be suitable for children. However, while language changes symbols, it also Change the ideas they express.Knowledge is formed by language, while thought is colored by ideas. Only reason is common, and the spirit of each language has its own unique form. This difference may be part of the cause or result of the different national character; it can be used This inference is justified by the fact that the languages ​​of the nations of the world have changed several times according to their customs, and like customs they either remain or change. A child learns one of those different forms of language in the process of using it, and this is the only language he can remember until he reaches an age of reason.In order to learn two languages, they need to know how to compare their concepts, but now they don't even know the concepts, how can they compare them?Everything appears to them in a thousand different symbols, but each concept can only have one form, so they can only learn one language.Some say they did learn several languages; I don't think that's true.I have seen a few child prodigies who were said to be able to speak five or six languages.I heard them speak German, then Latin, French, and Italian; they did use five or six, but they always spoke German.In short, no matter how many synonyms you are willing to teach your children, but you are changing words rather than languages, so they will still only learn one of them. It is to conceal their incompetence that you teach them dead languages, for there is no one to judge whether their teaching is legal or not.Since the common use of these languages ​​has long been lost, you copy the words written in books, and say that these are spoken languages.If this is the case with the Greek and Latin of the teacher, we can also imagine the Greek and Latin of the children.When they have just memorized a little grammar and don't know how to use it at all, you ask them to translate an article written in French into Latin; Rowe's sentences were written in prose, and some of Virgil's poems were written in verse.Then they thought they could speak Latin, and who was to say they were wrong? In any science, the symbols which represent things are meaningless if they do not have an idea of ​​what they represent.And what you make children learn is limited to such symbols, and you cannot make them understand what they represent.You think you have taught him what the earth looks like, but in fact you have only shown him some maps: you have taught him the names of cities, countries and rivers, and he thinks that these places can only be shown to him on the maps. Otherwise, it doesn't really exist.I remember seeing a geography book somewhere that began: "What is the world? The world is a ball made of cardboard." That's what children learn about geography.I dare say that after two years of teaching them globes and world history, you will not find a boy of ten who can tell the way from Paris to Saint-Denis in the way you teach.I dare say that no child can follow the winding roads in his father's garden diagram without losing his way.See, the doctor who knows where on the map is Beijing, Ispachen, Mexico and all the countries on earth, that's it. I've heard some people say that it's best for children to learn things that can be learned only with the eyes; if there is anything that can be learned with the eyes alone, it's certainly possible; but I don't have such things at all. seen. What is even more ridiculous is that you ask them to study history: you imagine that history can be understood by them, because it collects all facts.But how should the word "fact" be understood?Do you think the relations which determine the facts of history are so easily comprehended that the corresponding ideas can be formed without difficulty in the minds of children?Do you think that the real knowledge of events can be separated from the knowledge of their causes and effects; and that history has so little to do with morality that an ignorant person can learn history?What can you learn by studying history for a while, if you observe only external and purely bodily activities in human behavior?That is absolutely nothing to learn; the study of history, being dull, gives us neither pleasure nor instruction.If you are willing to measure those actions by their moral relations, please try to see if your students can understand those relations, and then you will understand whether it is suitable for people of their age to study history. Readers, always remember that the man who is speaking to you is neither a scholar nor a philosopher; The solitary man, who lives seldom with other people, has little opportunity to be contaminated with their prejudices, and has ample time to think about what his association with them makes him feel.My arguments are based not so much on principles as on facts; and I think there is no better way to enable you to judge them than to give you often a few instances from which I have inspired them. I once went to live with a country family for a few days. The respectable housewife of the family was very concerned about the children's life and their education.I was present one morning when the elder boy had his lessons; his teacher, who had taught him ancient history at length, this time told the story of Alexander, and the famous anecdote of Philip the Physician; Illustrated for the story, indeed, the story is worth telling.The teacher was a respectable man, but I did not agree with some of the things he said about Alexander's valor, and I did not argue with him at the time, so as not to lessen his reputation in the eyes of his pupils. prestige.At mealtimes, according to the French custom, it is inevitable to make the lovely child talk nonsense for a while.The buoyant nature of his age, and the confidence of being applauded, led him to say innumerable foolish things;使人把其余的傻话忘掉了。最后，他就谈到医生菲力浦的故事；他把这个故事叙述得很简要和优美。大家照例地称赞（做母亲的巴不得人家这样称赞，而孩子也是等着人家这样称赞）一番之后，就开始议论他所讲的这个故事了。大多数人都责备亚历山大太冒失，有几个人则跟着老师说他们佩服亚历山大的果断和勇气，所有这些，使我认为在场的人没有哪一个是看出了这个故事的美究竟是美在什么地方。 “至于我，”我向他们说，“我觉得，如果说在亚历山大的这个做法中有点儿勇敢和果断的表现的话，那也不过是一种蛮头蛮脑的行为罢了。”于是大家都赞同我的看法，说那是一种蛮头蛮脑的行为。我跟着就想解释和热烈地论述一番，这时候，坐在我旁边的一个妇人（她到现在还没有开过口哩）侧过身来在我的耳朵边上轻轻地说：“别说了，让?雅克，他们是听不懂你的意思的。”我望她一眼，我吃了一惊，我马上就闭嘴不讲了。 由于有几个现象使我怀疑我们这位小小的博士对他讲述得那么好的历史并没有真正了解，所以晚餐以后就拉着他的手，同他到花园中去散了一会步；我随便问了他几个问题之后，发现他比任何人都更钦佩被人们所吹嘘的亚历山大的勇敢；不过，你可知道他是从什么地方看出亚历山大的勇敢的呢？原来，唯一无二地是因为亚历山大毫不犹豫，毫无难色地把那难吃的药一口就吞下去了。这个可怜的孩子，在不到十五天以前还吃了一次药，不知费了多大的劲才把药吃下去了，而至今口上还有药的余味咧。死亡和中毒，在他的心目中只不过是一些不愉快的感觉罢了，而他所能想到的毒药就是旃那。然而，必须承认的是，亚历山大的果断对他幼稚的心灵确已产生了很大的影响，使他下定决心，以后吃药的时候一定要做一个亚历山大。我没有进行解释，因为这显然是他不能理解的，所以我只告诉他说这种想法很值得称赞。我回去的时候，暗中好笑有些做父亲的和作老师的也真是高明，竟想到了拿历史来教育孩子。 使他们在口头上学会国王、帝国、战争、征服、革命和法律这些辞，是很容易的；但是，当问题是要赋予这些辞以明确的观念时，也许就不可能象我们同园主罗贝尔谈话那样来解释了。 有些读者对“别说了，让?雅克”这句话是不很满意的，我早已料到，他们会问在亚历山大的行为中究竟哪一点在我看来是值得称赞的。可怜的人啊！如果要我告诉你们的话，你们怎么懂得呢？亚历山大的行为之所以值得称赞，是因为他相信德行；是因为他敢于拿他的头胪，拿他自己的生命来证实他的信念；是因为他的伟大的心灵配得上这个信念。啊，他所吞的那一剂药正是这种信念的真实表白！还没有哪一个人对自己的信念做过这样庄严的表白哩。如果谁是当今的亚历山大的话，那就请他照样把他的信念表白给我看一看。 如果孩子们还不懂得你所讲的字眼，就不宜于拿你的功课去教他们。如果他们没有获得真正的观念，他们就不会有真正的记忆，因为我认为仅仅保留一些感觉是不能叫做记忆的。他们在脑子里记上一迹串莫明其妙的符号，对他们有什么用处呢？在学习事物的过程中，他们岂不也就学会了那些符号吗？为什么要他们浪费气力学两次呢？而且，你要他们拿一些根本不懂得的话作为他们的学问，岂不会使他们产生极其危险的偏见！正是由于孩子所学的第一个辞，由于他所学的第一件事物，全是照别人的话去了解，而自己根本就不明白它的用途，所以才丧失了他的判断的能力：他也许可以在傻子面前炫耀一个很长的时期，但是他不可能弥补他这样的一个损失。 不，纵然说大自然使一个孩子的头脑具备了这种能够接受种种印象的可塑性，那也不是为了让你记住什么国王的名字、年代、谱系、地球仪和地方名称，或者记住那些对他这样年纪的人来说既毫无意义，而且对任何年纪的人来说也没有一点用处的辞句；把这些东西压在他的身上，是必然会使他的童年过得十分忧郁和没有趣味的；所以，孩子的头脑之有可塑性，是为了让那些能够为他所理解和对他有用处的观念，这些观念关系到他的幸福和日后指导他履行其天职，早已以不可磨灭的印象记在他心中，使他一生当中能按照适合于他的天性和才能的方式过他的生活。 即使是不读书本，一个孩子可能有的记忆力也不会因此而闲着没有用处；他所看见的和他所听见的一切，都会对他产生影响；他将把它们记下来，他将把大人的言语和行为都记在心里；他周围的事物就是一本书，使他在不知不觉中继续不断地丰富他的记忆，从而增进他的判断能力。为了培养他具备这种头等重要的能力，真正的好办法是：要对他周围的事物加以选择，要十分慎重地使他继续不断地接触他能够理解的东西，而把他不应该知道的事物都藏起来，我们要尽可能用这个办法使他获得各种各样有用于他青年时期的教育和他一生的行为的知识。是的，这个办法既不能培养出什么神童，也不能使他的保姆和教师得到人家的夸耀，但是，它能培养有见识、有性格、身体和头脑都健康的人，这样的人，小时候虽没有谁称赞，到长大后是一定会受到人人尊敬的。 爱弥儿是绝不背诵什么课文的，即使是寓言，即使是拉?封登的寓言，不论它们是多么简单和动人，他都是不背诵的，因为寓言中的话并不就是寓言，就象历史中的文字并不就是历史一样。人们怎么会这样糊涂，竟把寓言也称为孩子们的修身学，毫不考虑寓言固然可以使他们高兴，但同时也会使他们产生谬误，毫不考虑他们受了杜撰的事情的迷惑，就必然会遗漏真理，毫不考虑这样教法虽然可以使他们觉得有趣，但也妨碍了他们从其中得到益处？寓言可以用来教育大人，但对孩子们就应该直截了当地讲真理；你用幕布把真理盖起来了，他就不愿意花力气去把它揭开。 大家都要孩子们学拉?封登的寓言，但是没有哪一个孩子是真正学懂了的。要是他真正学懂了的话，那就更加糟糕了，因为其中的寓意对他那样年龄的人来说，是那样的拐弯抹角和不相适应，以致不仅不能使他学到良好的德行，反而使他学到了许多的坏毛病。你也许会说：“瞧，又在发怪论了。”不错。但是让我们看一看这番怪论说的是不是真理。 ------------------