,,the ,,reform ,,of ,,education   ,,by  
,,giovanni ,,gentile   ,,authorized     
,,translation ,,by ,,dino ,,bigongiari  
,with an ,introduction by ,,benedetto   
,,croce     ,,new ,,york   ,,harcourt1  
,,brace ,,and ,,company   #aibb         
,,copyright1 #aibb1 ,,by   ,,harcourt1  
,,brace ,,and ,,company1 ,,inc4         
,,printed ,,in ,,the ,u4 ,s4 ,a4 ,,by   
,,the ,,quinn  ,,boden ,,company        
,,rahway1 ,n4,j4     ,,contents         
,,page         ,introduction            
vii      ,i4 ,education and ,nationality
                                    #c  
,,ii4 ,education and ,personality       
#ah    ,,iii4 ,the ,fundamental         
,antinomy of ,education                 
#dj     ,,iv4 ,realism and ,idealism in 
the ,concept of ,culture                
#fc      ,v4 ,the ,spirituality of      
,culture                                
#he     ,,vi4 ,the ,attributes of       
,culture                                
#aaj    ,,vii4 ,the ,bias of ,realism   
#aci   ,,viii4 ,the ,unity of ,education

                                        
#aff     ,,ix4 ,character and ,physical 
,education                              
#aib      ,x4 ,the ,ideal of ,education 
#bai     ,,xi4 ,conclusion              
#bdf     ,,note   ,shortly after        
,trieste fell into ,italian hands1 a    
series of lectures was arranged for the 
school teachers of the city1 in order to
 welcome them to their new duties as    
citizens and officials of ,italy4 ,the  
task of opening the series was assigned 
to ,giovanni ,gentile1 ,professor of    
,philosophy in the ,university of ,rome1
 who delivered the lectures which       
constitute the present volume4 ,at my   
request ,signor ,gentile has rewritten  
the first chapter1 eliminating some of  
the more local of the allusions which   
the nature of the original occasion     
called forth1 and ,senatore ,croce has  
very generously contributed his         
illuminating ,introduction4 ,the volume 
as it stands is more than a treatise on 
education3 it is at one and the same    

time an introduction to the thought of  
one of the greatest of living           
philosophers1 and an introduction to the
 study of all philosophy4 ,if the       
teachers of ,trieste were able to       
understand and to enjoy a philosophic   
discussion of their chosen work1 why    
should not the teachers of ,america8    
,j4 ,e4 ,s4     ,,introduction   ,the   
author of this book has been working in 
the same field with me for over a       
quarter of a century1 ever since the    
time when we undertook--he a very young 
man1 and ,i somewhat his senior--to     
shake ,italy out of the doze of         
naturalism and positivism back to       
idealistic philosophy2 or1 as it would  
be better to say1 to philosophy pure and
 simple1 if indeed philosophy is always 
idealism4  ,together we founded a       
review1 the ,critica1 and kept it going 
by our contributions2 together we edited
 collections of classical authors2 and  
together we engaged in many lively      
controversies4 ,and it seems indeed as  

though we really succeeded in laying    
hold of and again firmly re-establishing
 in ,italy the tradition of             
philosophical studies1 thus welding a   
chain which evidently has withstood the 
strain and destructive fury of the war  
and its afterclaps4  ,by this ,i do not 
mean to imply that our gradual          
achievements were the result of a       
definite preconcerted plan4 ,our work   
was the spontaneous consequence of our  
spontaneous mental development and of   
the spontaneous agreement of our minds4 
,and therefore this common task1 too1   
gradually becoming differentiated in    
accordance with the peculiarities of our
 temperaments1 our tendencies1 and our  
attitudes1 resulted in a kind of        
division of labour between us4 ,so that 
whereas ,i by preference have devoted my
 attention to the history of literature1
 ,gentile has dedicated himself more    
particularly to the history of          
philosophy and especially of ,italian   
philosophy1 not only as a thinker but as

 a scholar too1 and as a philologist4   
,he may be said to have covered the     
entire field from the ,middle ,ages to  
the present time by his works on        
,scholasticism in ,italy1 on ,bruno1 on 
,telesio1 on ,renaissance philosophy1 on
 ,neapolitan philosophy from ,genovesi  
to ,galluppi1 on ,rosmini1 on ,gioberti1
 and on the philosophical writers from  
#ahej to #aijj4 ,and though his         
comprehensive ,history of ,italian      
,philosophy1 published in parts1 is far 
from being finished1 the several        
sections of it have been elaborated and 
cast in the various monographs which ,i 
have just mentioned4  ,in addition to   
this1 ,gentile has been devoting special
 attention to religious problems4 ,he   
took a very important part in the       
inquiry into and criticism of modernism1
 the hybrid nature of which he laid     
bare1 exposing both the inner           
contradictions and the scanty sincerity 
of the movement4 ,his handling of this  
question was shown to be effective by   

the fact1 among others1 that the authors
 of the encyclical ,pascendi1 which     
brought upon ,modernism the condemnation
 of the ,church1 availed themselves of  
the sharp edge of ,gentile's logical    
arguments1 prompted by scientific       
loyalty and dictated by moral           
righteousness4  ,finally1 and in a more 
close connection with the present work1 
it will be remembered that ,gentile has 
done away with the chaotic pedagogy of  
the positivistic school1 and has also   
definitely criticised the educational   
theory of ,herbart4 ,as far back as     
#aijj he published a monograph of       
capital importance1 in which he showed  
that pedagogy in so far as it is        
philosophical resolves itself without   
residuum into the philosophy of the     
spirit2 for the science of the spirit's 
education can not but be the science of 
the spirit's development1--of its       
dialectics1 of its necessity4  ,indeed1 
we owe it to ,gentile that ,italian     
pedagogy has attained in the present day

 a simplicity and a depth of concepts   
unknown elsewhere4 ,in ,italy1 not      
educational science alone1 but the      
practice of it and its political aspects
 have been thoroughly recast and amply  
developed4 ,and this1 too1 is due       
pre-eminently to the work of ,gentile4  
,his authority therefore is powerfully  
felt in schools of all grades1 for he   
has lived intensely the life of the     
school and loves it dearly4  ,in        
addition to these differences arising   
from our division of labour1 others may 
of course be noticed1 and they are to be
 found in the form that philosophical   
doctrines have taken on in each of us4  
,identity is impossible in this field1  
for philosophy1 like art1 is closely    
bound up with the personality of the    
thinker1 with his spiritual interests1  
and with his experiences of life4 ,there
 is never true identity except in the   
so-called philosophical school1 which   
indicates the death of a philosophy1 in 
the same way that the poetical school   

proclaims death in poetry4  ,and so it  
has come about that our general         
conception of philosophy as simple      
philosophy of the spirit--of the        
subject1 and never of nature1 or of the 
object--has developed a peculiar stress 
in ,gentile1 for whom philosophy is     
above all that point in which every     
abstraction is overcome and submerged in
 the concreteness of the act of         
,thought2 whereas for me philosophy is  
essentially methodology of the one real 
and concrete ,thinking--of historical   
,thinking4 ,so that while he strongly   
emphasises unity1 ,i no less            
energetically insist on the distinction 
and dialectics of the forms of the      
spirit as a necessary formation of the  
methodology of historical judgment4 ,but
 of this enough1 especially since the   
reader can only become interested in    
these differences after he has acquired 
a more advanced knowledge of            
contemporary ,italian philosophy4  ,i am
 convinced that the translation and     

popularisation of ,gentile's work will  
contribute to the toilsome formation of 
that consciousness1 of that system of   
convictions1 of that moral and mental   
faith which is the profound need of our 
times4 ,for our age1 eager and anxious  
for ,faith1 is perhaps not yet          
completely resigned to look for the new 
creed of humanity there where alone it  
may be found1 where by firm resolve it  
may be secured--in pure ,thought4       
,clear-sighted observers have perhaps   
not failed to notice that the ,world    
,war1 in addition to every thing else1  
has been a strife of religions1 a clash 
of conflicting conceptions of life1 a   
struggle of opposed philosophies4 ,it is
 surely not the duty of thinkers to     
settle economic and political           
contentions by ineffective appeals to   
the universal brotherhood of man2 but it
 is rather their duty to compose mental 
differences and antagonisms1 and thus   
form the new faith of humanity--a new   
,christianity or a new ,humanism1 as we 

may wish to call it4 ,such a faith will 
certainly not be spared the conflicts   
from which ancient ,christianity itself 
was not free2 but it may reasonably be  
hoped that it will rescue us from       
intellectual anarchy1 from unbridled    
individualism1 from sensualism1 from    
scepticism1 from pessimism1 from every  
aberration which for a century and a    
half has been harassing the soul of man 
and the society of mankind under the    
name of ,romanticism4  ,,benedetto      
,,croce4  ,,rome1 ,april1 #aiba4        
,,chapter ,i  ,,education ,,and         
,,nationality   ,participation on the   
part of elementary school teachers in   
the work and studies of the             
,universities has always seemed to me to
 constitute a real need of culture and  
of primary education4 ,for the          
elementary school1 by the very nature of
 the professional training of its       
teachers1 is exposed to a grave danger  
from which it must be rescued if we mean
 to keep it alive4  ,the training of the

 elementary school teacher tends to be  
dogmatic4 ,true it is that vigilant     
individuality and passionate love for   
his exquisitely spiritual calling impel 
the school teacher to an untiring       
criticism of his methods1 of his actual 
teaching1 and of the life of the school 
which he directs and promotes4 ,but     
nevertheless in consequence of those    
very studies by which he has prepared   
himself to be an elementary instructor1 
he is led to look upon that learning    
which constitutes his mental equipment  
and the foundation of all his future    
teaching1 as something quite finished1  
rounded out1 enclosed in definite       
formulas1 rules1 and laws1 all of which 
have been ascertained once for all and  
are no longer susceptible of ulterior   
revision4 ,he looks upon this learning  
not as a developing organism1 but as    
something definitely moulded and        
stereotyped4 ,from this the conclusion  
is drawn that a certain kind of         
knowledge may serve as a corner stone   

for the whole school edifice4 ,since his
 discipline and his teaching consist    
mainly of elements which because of     
their abstractness miss the renovating  
flow of spiritual life1 the teacher     
slowly but surely ends by shutting      
himself up in a certain number of ideas1
 which are final as far as he is        
concerned4 ,they are never corrected or 
transformed2 in their mechanical fixity 
they cease to live2 and the mind which  
cherishes and preserves them loses its  
natural tendency to doubt4 ,yet what is 
doubt but dissatisfaction with what is  
known and with the manner of knowing1   
and a spur to further inquiry1 to better
 and fuller learning1 to self scrutiny1 
to an examination of one's own          
sentiments1 one's own character1 and an 
inducement to broadmindedness1 to a     
welcoming receptiveness of all the      
suggestions and all the teachings which 
life at all moments generously showers  
on us8  ,the remedy against this natural
 tendency of the teacher's mind is to be

 found in the ,university1 where in     
theory1 and so far as is possible1 in   
practice too1 science is presented not  
as ready-made1 definitely turned out in 
final theories1 enclosed in consecrated 
manuals2 but as inquiry1 as research1 as
 spiritual activity which does not rest 
satisfied with its accomplishments1 but 
for ever feels that it does not yet know
 or does not know enough1 aware of the  
difficulties which threaten every       
attained position1 and ready unrestingly
 to track them1 to reveal them1 and meet
 them squarely4 ,this life1 which is    
perpetual criticism1 and unceasing      
progress in a learning which is never   
completed1 which never aspires to be    
complete1 is the serious and fruitful   
purpose of the ,university4 ,here we    
must come1 to restore freshness to our  
spiritual activities1 which alone give  
value to knowledge1 and wrest it from   
deadening crystallisation1 from         
mechanical rigidity4 ,for this reason1  
it seems to me1 special provision should

 be made in the ,university to satisfy  
the needs of school teachers4 ,it is not
 a question of merely furnishing them   
with additional information which they  
might just as well get out of books4    
,the ,university must act on their      
minds1 shake them1 start them going1    
instil in them salutary doubt by        
criticism1 and develop a taste for true 
knowledge4  ,the following chapters     
contain a series of ,university         
lectures1 in accordance with these      
criteria1 and delivered originally to   
the elementary teachers of ,trieste1 now
 for the first time again an ,italian   
city4 ,they constitute a course which   
aims not to increase the quantity of    
culture1 but to change its character4   
,it is an attempt to introduce the      
elementary teacher into those spiritual 
workshops which are the halls of a      
,university1 to induce him to take part 
in the original investigations which    
constantly contribute to the formation  
of our national learning2 which forever 

make and reshape our ideas and our      
convictions as to what we should want   
,italian science to be1 the ,italian    
concepts of life and literature2 as to  
what constitute the heirloom of our     
school1 that sacred possession          
bequeathed to us by our forefathers     
which makes us what we are1 which gives 
us a name and endows us with a          
personality1 by which we are enabled to 
look forward to a future of ,italy which
 is not solely economic and political1  
but moral and intellectual as well4     
,and thus1 because of the time1 the     
place1 the audience1 and the subject1 we
 are from the start brought face to face
 with a serious question1--a question   
which has often been debated1 and which 
in the last few years1 on account of the
 exasperation of national sentiment     
brought about by the ,world ,war1 has   
become the object of passionate         
controversies4 ,for if it has been      
frequently argued on one side that      
science is by nature and ought to be    

national1 there has been no lack of     
warning from the other side as to the   
dangers of this position4 ,for war1 it  
was said1 would1 sooner or later1 come  
to an end and be a thing of the past2   
whereas truth never sets1 never becomes 
a thing of the past2 it is error alone  
that is destined to pass and disappear4 
,we were reminded of the fact that what 
is scientifically true and artistically 
beautiful is beautiful and true beyond  
no less than within the national        
frontier2 and that only on this         
condition is it worthy of its name4     
,this question therefore presents itself
 as a preliminary to our investigation1 
and it is for us to examine it4 ,we     
shall do so in as brief a manner as the 
subject will allow4  ,we shall first    
point out the inutility of              
distinguishing science from culture1    
education from instruction4 ,those who  
insist on these distinctions maintain   
that though a school is never national  
in virtue of the content of its         

scientific teaching1 it must            
nevertheless be national in that it     
transforms science into culture1 makes  
it over into an instrument with which to
 shape consciousness and conscience1 and
 uses it as a tool for the making of men
 and for the training of citizens4 ,thus
 we have as an integral part of science 
a form of action directed on the        
character and the will of the young     
generations that are being nurtured and 
raised in accordance with national      
traditions and in view of the ends which
 the state wants to attain4 ,such       
distinctions however complicate but do  
not resolve the controversy4 ,they      
entangle it with other questions which  
it were better to leave untouched at    
this juncture4 ,for it might be said of 
questions what ,manzoni said of books3  
one at a time is enough--if it isn't too
 much4  ,we shall therefore try to      
simplify matters1 and begin by          
clarifying the two concepts of          
nationality and of knowledge1 in order  

to define the concept of the nationality
 of knowledge4 ,what1 then1 is the      
nation8 ,a very intricate question1     
indeed1 over which violent discussions  
are raging1 and all the more            
passionately because the premises and   
conclusions of this controversy are     
never maintained in the peaceful        
seclusion of abstract speculative       
theories1 but are dragged at every      
moment in the very midst of the concrete
 interests of the men themselves who    
affirm or deny the value of             
nationalities4 ,so that serious         
difficulties are encountered every time 
an attempt is made to determine the     
specific and concrete content of this   
concept of the nation1 which is ever    
present1 and yet ever elusive4          
,proteus-like1 it appears before us1 but
 as we try to grasp it1 it changes      
semblance and breaks away4 ,it is       
visible to the immediate intuition of   
every national consciousness1 but it    
slips from thought as we strive to fix  

its essence4  ,is it common territory   
that constitutes nationality8 or is it  
common language8 or political life led  
in common8 or the accumulation of       
memories1 of traditions1 and of customs 
by which a people looks back to one past
 where it never fails to find itself8   
,or is it perhaps the relationship which
 binds together all the individuals of a
 community into a strong and compact    
structure1 assigning a mission and an   
apostolate to a people's faith8 ,one or 
the other of these elements1 or all of  
them together1 have in turn been        
proposed and rejected with equally      
strong arguments4 ,for in each case it  
may be true or it may be false that the 
given element constitutes the essence of
 a people's nationality1 or of any      
historical association whatsoever4 ,all 
these elements1 whether separately or   
jointly1 may have two different         
meanings1 one of which makes them a mere
 accidental content of the national     
consciousness1 whereas the other        

establishes them as necessary1          
essential1 and unfailing constituents4  
,for they may have a merely natural     
value1 or they may have a moral and     
spiritual one4 ,our birth-land1 which   
nourished us in our infancy1 and now    
shelters the bodies of our parents1 the 
mountains and the shores that surround  
it and individualise it1 these are      
natural entities4 ,they are not         
man-made2 we cannot claim them1 nor can 
we fasten our existence to them4 ,even  
our speech1 our religion itself1 which  
do indeed live in the human mind1 may   
yet be considered as natural facts      
similar to the geographical accidents   
which give boundaries and elevation to  
the land of a people4 ,we may1          
abstractly1 look upon our language as   
that one which was spoken before we were
 born1 by our departed ancestors who    
somehow produced this spiritual         
patrimony of which we now have the use  
and enjoyment1 very much in the same way
 that we enjoy the sunlight showered    

upon us by nature4 ,in this same way a  
few1 perhaps many1 conceive of religion3
 they look upon it as something         
bequeathed and inherited1 and not       
therefore as the fruit of our own       
untiring faith and the correlate of our 
actual personality4 ,all these elements 
in so far as they are natural are       
evidently extraneous to our personality4
 ,we do dwell within this peninsula     
cloistered by the ,alps2 we delight in  
this luminous sky1 in our charming      
shores smiled upon by the waters of the 
,mediterranean4 ,but if we emigrate from
 this lovely abode1 if under the stress 
of economic motives we traverse the     
ocean and gather1 a number of us1       
somewhere across the ,atlantic2 and     
there1 united by the natural tie of     
common origin1 and fastened by the      
identity of speech1 we maintain         
ourselves as a special community1 with  
common interests and peculiar moral     
affinities1 then1 in spite of the       
severance from our native peninsula1 we 

have preserved our nationality3 ,italy  
has crossed the ocean in our wake4 ,not 
only can we sunder ourselves from our   
land1 but we may even relinquish our    
customs1 forget our language1 abandon   
our religion2 or we may1 within our own 
fatherland1 be kept separate by peculiar
 historical traditions1 by differences  
of dialects or even of language1 by     
religion1 by clashing interests1 and yet
 respond with the same sentiment and the
 same soul to the sound of one ,name1 to
 the colours of one flag1 to the summons
 of common hopes1 to the alarm of common
 dangers4  ,and it is then that we feel 
ourselves to be a people2 then are we a 
nation4 ,it is not what we put within   
this concept that gives consistency and 
reality to the concept itself2 it is the
 act of spiritual energy whereby we     
cling to a certain element or elements  
in the consciousness of that collective 
personality to which we feel we belong4 
,nationality consists not in content    
which may vary1 but in the form which a 

certain content of human consciousness  
assumes when it is felt to constitute a 
nation's character4  ,but this truth is 
still far from being recognised4 ,its   
existence is not even suspected by those
 who utilise a materially constituted   
nationality as a title1 that is1 an     
antecedent1 and a support for political 
rights claimed by more or less          
considerable ethnical aggregates that   
are more or less developed and more or  
less prepared to take on the form of    
free and independent states and to      
secure recognition of a de facto        
political personality on the strength of
 an assumed de jure existence4  ,this   
truth1 however1 was grasped by the      
profound intuition of ,mazzini1 the     
apostle of nationalities1 the man who   
roused our national energies1 and whose 
irresistible call awakened ,italy and   
powerfully impelled her to affirm her   
national being4 ,even from the first    
years of the ,giovine ,italia he        
insisted that ,italy1 when still merely 

an idea1 prior to her taking on a       
concrete and actual political reality1  
was not a people and was not a nation4  
,for a nation1 he maintained1 is not    
something existing in nature2 but a     
great spiritual reality4 ,therefore like
 all that is in and for the spirit1 it  
is never a fact ready to be ascertained1
 but always a mission1 a purpose1       
something that has to be realised--an   
action4  ,the ,italians to whom ,mazzini
 spoke were not the people around him4  
,he was addressing that future people   
which the ,italians themselves had to   
create4 ,and they would create it by    
fixing their souls on one idea--the idea
 of a fatherland to be conquered--a     
sacred idea1 so noble that people would 
live and die for it1 as for that        
sovereign and ultimate ,good for which  
all sacrifices are gladly borne1 without
 which man can not live1 outside of     
which he finds nothing that satisfies   
him1 nothing that is conducive to a     
life's work4 ,for ,mazzini nationality  

is not inherited wealth1 but it is man's
 own conquest4 ,a people can not        
faint-heartedly claim from others       
recognition of their nation1 but must   
themselves demonstrate its existence1   
realise it by their willingness to fight
 and die for its independence3          
independence which is freedom and unity 
and constitutes the nation4 ,it is not  
true that first comes the nation and    
then follows the state2 the nation is   
the state when it has triumphed over the
 enemy1 and has overcome the oppression1
 which till then were hindering its     
formation4 ,it is not therefore a vague 
aspiration or a faint wish1 but an      
active faith1 an energetic volition     
which creates1 in the freed political   
,power1 the reality of its own moral    
personality and of its collective       
consciousness4 ,hence the lofty aim of  
,mazzini in insisting that ,italy should
 not be made with the help of foreigners
 but should be a product of the         
revolution1 that is1 of its own will4   

,and truly the nation is1 substantially1
 as ,mazzini saw and firmly believed1   
the common will of a people which       
affirms itself and thus secures         
self-realisation4 ,a nation is a nation 
only when it wills to be one4 ,i said1  
when it really wills1 not when it merely
 says it does4 ,it must therefore act in
 such a manner as to realise its own    
personality in the form of the ,state   
beyond which there is no collective     
will1 no common personality of the      
people4 ,and it must act seriously1     
sacrificing the individual to the       
collective whole1 and welcoming         
martyrdom1 which in every case is but   
the sacrifice of the individual to the  
universal1 the lavishing of our own self
 to the ideal for which we toil4  ,from 
this we are not1 however1 to infer that 
a nation can under no circumstances     
exist prior to the formation of its     
,state4 ,for if this formation means the
 formal proclamation or the recognition 
by other ,states1 it surely does        

pre-exist4 ,but it does not if we       
consider that the proclamation of       
sovereignty is a moment in a previously 
initiated process1 and the effect of    
pre-existing forces already at work2    
which effect is never definite because a
 ,state1 even after it has been         
constituted1 continues to develop in    
virtue of those very forces which       
produced it2 so that it is constantly   
renewing and continually reconstituting 
itself4 ,hence a ,state is always a     
future4 ,it is that state which this    
very day we must set up1 or rather at   
this very instant1 and with all our     
future efforts bent to that political   
ideal which gleams before us1 not only  
in the light of a beautiful thought1 but
 as the irresistible need of our own    
personality4  ,the nation therefore is  
as intimately pertinent and native to   
our own being as the ,state1 considered 
as ,universal ,will1 is one with our    
concrete and actual ethical personality4
 ,italy for us is the fatherland which  

lives in our souls as that complex and  
lofty moral idea which we are realising4
 ,we realise it in every instant of our 
lives1 by our feelings1 and by our      
thoughts1 by our speech and by our      
imagination1 indeed1 by our whole life  
which concretely flows into that ,will  
which is the ,state and which thus makes
 itself felt in the world4 ,and this    
,will1 this ,state is ,italy1 which has 
fought and won2 which has struggled for 
a long time amid errors and sorrows1    
hopes and dejection1 manifestations of  
strength and confessions of weakness1   
but always with a secret thought1 with a
 deep-seated aspiration which sustained 
her throughout her entire ordeal1 now   
exalting her in the flush of action1    
now1 in the critical moment of          
resistance1 confirming and fortifying   
her by the undying faith in ultimate    
triumph4 ,this nation1 which we all wish
 to raise to an ever loftier station of 
honour and of beauty1 even though we    
differ as to the means of attaining this

 end1 is it not the substance of our    
personality1--of that personality which 
we possess not as individuals who drift 
with the current1 but as men who have a 
powerful self-consciousness and who look
 upward for their destiny8  ,if we thus 
understand the nation1 it follows that  
not only every man must bear the imprint
 of his nationality1 but that also there
 is no true science1 no man's science1  
which is not national4 ,the ancients    
believed1 in conformity with the        
teachings of the ,greeks1 that science  
soars outside of the human life1 above  
the vicissitudes of mortals1 beyond the 
current of history1 which is troubled by
 the fatal conflicts of error1 by       
falterings and doubts1 and by the       
unsatisfied thirst for knowledge4       
,truth1 lofty1 pure1 motionless1 and    
unchangeable1 was to them the fixed goal
 toward which the human mind moved1 but 
completely severed from it and          
transcendent4 ,this concept1 after two  
thousand years of speculation1 was to   

reveal itself as abstract and therefore 
fallacious1--abstract from the human    
mind1 which at every given instance     
mirrors itself in such an image of      
truth1 ever gazing upon an eternal ideal
 but always intent on reshaping it in a 
new and more adequate form4 ,the modern 
world1 at first with dim consciousness1 
and guided rather by a fortunate        
intuition than by a clear concept of its
 own real orientation1 then with an ever
 clearer1 ever more critical conviction1
 has elaborated a concept which is      
directly antithetical to the classical  
idea of a celestial truth removed from  
the turmoil of earthly things4 ,it has  
accordingly and by many ways reached the
 conclusion that reality1 lofty though  
it be1 and truth itself1 which nourishes
 the mind and alone gives validity to   
human thought1 are in life itself1 in   
the development of the mind1 in the     
growth of the human personality1 and    
that this personality1 though ideally   
beyond our grasp1 is yet in the concrete

 always historical and actual1 and      
realises itself in its immanent value4  
,it therefore creates its truth and its 
world4 ,modern philosophy and modern    
consciousness no longer point to values 
which1 transcending history1 determine  
its movement and its direction by       
external finalities3 they show to man   
that the lofty aim which is his law is  
within himself2 that it is in his ever  
unsatisfied personality as it           
unceasingly strains upward towards its  
own ideal4  ,science is no longer       
conceived to-day as the indifferent pure
 matter of the intellect4 ,it is an     
interest which invests the entire       
person1 extols it and with it moves     
onward in the eternal rhythm of an      
infinite development4 ,science is not   
for us the abstract contemplation of    
yore2 it is self-consciousness that man 
acquires1 and by means of which he      
actuates his own humanity4 ,and         
therefore science is no longer an       
adornment or an equipment of the mind1  

considered as diverse to its content2 it
 is culture1 and the formation of this  
very mind4 ,so that whenever science is 
as yet so abstract that it seems not to 
touch the person and fails to form it or
 transform it1 it is an indication that 
it is not as yet true science4  ,so we  
conclude thus3 he who distinguishes his 
person from his knowledge is ignorant of
 the nature of knowledge4 ,the modern   
teacher knows of no science which is not
 an act of a personality4 ,it knows no  
personality which admits of being       
sequestered from its ideas1 from its    
ways of thinking and of feeling1 from   
that greater life which is the nation4  
,concrete personality then is           
nationality1 and therefore neither the  
school nor science possesses a learning 
which is not national4  ,and for this   
reason therefore our educational reforms
 which are inspired by the teachings of 
modern idealistic philosophy demand that
 the school be animated and vivified by 
the spiritual breath of the fatherland4 

,,chapter ,,ii  ,,education ,,and       
,,personality   ,it is essential at the 
very outset to understand clearly what  
is meant by concrete personality1 and   
why the particular or empirical         
personality1 as we are usually          
accustomed to consider it1 is nothing   
more than an abstraction4  ,ordinarily1 
relying on the most obvious data of     
experience1 we are led to believe that  
the sphere of our moral personality     
coincides exactly with the sphere of our
 physical person1 and is therefore      
limited and contained by the surface of 
our material body4 ,we consider this    
body in itself as an indivisible whole1 
with such reciprocal correspondence and 
interdependence of its parts as to      
become a veritable system4 ,it seems to 
us also that this system moves in space 
as a whole when the body is displaced1  
continuing to remain united as long as  
it exists4 ,we look upon it as though it
 were separated from all other bodies1  
whether of the same or of different     

kinds1 in such a manner that it excludes
 others from the place it occupies1 and 
is itself in turn excluded by them4 ,one
 body then1 one physical person1 one    
moral personality--that moral           
personality which each one of us        
recognises and affirms by the           
consciousness of the ego4  ,and in fact 
when ,i walk ,i am not a different      
person from when ,i think4 ,my ego      
remains the same whether my body moves  
through space or whether my mind        
inwardly meditates4 ,impenetrability1   
which is possessed by matter1 seems to  
be also a property of human             
individualism4  ,from my ego every other
 ego is apparently excluded4 ,what ,i am
 no one else can be1 and ,i in turn     
cannot be confused with another person4 
,those of my fellow beings that are most
 intimately1 most closely related to me 
seem yet as completely external to me1  
as thoroughly sundered from my spirit1  
as their bodies are from mine4 ,my      
father1 my brother are dead4 ,they have 

vanished from this world in which ,i    
nevertheless continue to exist2 just as 
a stone remains in its place and is in  
no way affected when another stone near 
by is removed2 or as a mutilated        
pedestal may still remain to remind the 
onlooker of the statue that was torn    
away4  ,hundreds of individuals assemble
 to listen to the words of an orator4   
,but no necessary ties exist between the
 various persons2 and when the speaking 
is over1 each one goes his way confident
 that he has lost no part of himself and
 that he has maintained his             
individuality absolutely unaltered4     
,our elders lived on this planet when we
 had not yet arrived4 ,after we came1   
they gradually withdrew1 one after the  
other4 ,and just as they had been able  
to exist without us1 so shall we        
continue to live without them1 and away 
from them develop our personality4 ,for 
each one of us1 according to this point 
of view1 has his own being within       
himself1 his own particular destiny4    

,every man makes of himself the centre  
of his world1 of that universe which he 
has created with deeds and thoughts3 a  
universe of ideas1 of images1 of        
concepts1 of systems1 which are all in  
his brain2 a universe of values1 of     
desirable goods and of abhorred evils1  
all of which are rooted in his own      
individual will1 in his character1 and  
originate from the peculiar manner in   
which he personally colours this world  
and conceives the universe4  ,what is   
another man's sorrow to me8 ,what part  
have ,i in his joys8 ,and how can the   
science of ,aristotle or of ,galileo be 
anything to me1 since ,i do not know    
them1 since ,i cannot read their books1 
and am totally unfamiliar with their    
teachings8 ,and the unknown wayfarer who
 passes by1 wrapped in his thoughts1    
what does he care for my loftiest       
conceptions1 for the songs that well    
forth from the depths of my soul8 ,the  
hero's exploit brings no glory to us2   
the heinous deed of the criminal makes  

us shudder indeed1 but drives no pangs  
of remorse through our conscience4 ,for 
every one of us has his own body and his
 own particular soul4 ,every one1 in    
short1 is himself independently of what 
others may be4  ,this conception1 which 
we ordinarily form of our personality1  
and on which we erect the system of our 
practical life in all our manifold      
relations with other individuals1 is an 
abstract concept4 ,for when we thus     
conceive our being1 we see but a single 
side of it and that the least important3
 we fail to grasp that part which       
reveals all that is spiritual1 and      
human1 and truly and peculiarly ours4 ,i
 shall not here investigate how the     
human personality has two aspects so    
totally different one from the other2   
and in what remote depths we must search
 for the common root of these two       
contrasting and apparently contradictory
 manifestations4 ,our task for the      
moment is to establish within ourselves 
through reflection the firm conviction  

that we are not lone individualities3   
that there is another and a better part 
of us1 an element which is the very     
antithesis of the particular1 that one1 
namely1 which is the deep-seated source 
of our nature1 by which we cease1 each  
one of us1 to be in irreducible         
opposition to the rest of humanity1 and 
become instead what all the others are  
or what we want them to be4  ,in order  
to fix our attention on this more       
profound aspect of our inner life1 ,i   
shall take as an example one of those   
elements which are contained in the     
concept of nationality1 ,language4      
,language it must be remembered does not
 belong per se to nationality2 it       
belongs to it in virtue of an act by    
which a will1 a personality1 affirms    
itself with a determined content4 ,we   
must now point out the abstract         
character of that concept by which      
language1 which is a constituent element
 of our personality1 is usually ascribed
 to what is merely particular in it4    

,that language is a peculiar and        
constituent element of personality is   
quite obvious4 ,through language we     
speak not to others only1 but to        
ourselves also4 ,speaking to ourselves  
means seeing within ourselves our own   
ideas1 our soul1 our very self in       
short1--it means self-consciousness1 as 
the philosophers say1 and therefore     
self-control1 clear vision of our acts1 
knowledge of what stirs within us2 it   
means1 therefore1 living not after the  
manner of dumb animals1 but as rational 
beings1 as men4 ,man cannot think1 have 
consciousness of himself1 reason1       
without first expressing all that to    
himself4 ,man has been defined as a     
rational animal2 he may also be defined 
as the speaking animal4 ,the remark is  
as old as ,aristotle4  ,man1 however1   
this animal endowed with the faculty of 
speaking1 is not man in general who     
never was1 but the real man1 the        
historical man1 actually existing4 ,and 
he does not speak a general language1   

but a certain definite one4  ,when ,i   
speak before a public1 ,i can but use my
 language1 the ,italian language4 ,and  
,i exist1 that is ,i affirm myself1 ,i  
come into real being1 by thinking in    
conformity with my real personality1 in 
so far as ,i speak1 and speak this      
language of mine4 ,my language1 the     
,italian language4 ,here lies the       
problem4 ,were ,i not to speak1 or were 
,i to speak otherwise than ,i know how1 
,i would not be myself4 ,this manner of 
expressing myself is then an intrinsic  
trait of my personality4 ,but this      
speech which makes me what ,i am1 and   
which therefore intimately belongs to   
me1 could it possibly be mine1 could ,i 
use it1 mould it into my own            
life-substance1 if1 mine though it be1  
it were yet enclosed within me in the   
manner that every particle of my flesh  
is contained within my body1 having     
nothing in common with any other part of
 matter co-existing in space8 ,could my 
language in short really be my language1

 if it belonged exclusively to me1 to   
what ,i have called my particular or    
empirical personality8  ,a simple       
reflection will suffice to show that my 
language1 like a beacon of light1       
inwardly illumines my ,thought1 and     
renders visible to me every movement and
 every sense1 only because this language
 is not exclusively my own4 ,it is that 
same language through which ,i grasp the
 ancient authors of ,italy4 ,i read     
about ,francesca da ,rimini and ,count  
,ugolino1 and find them within me in the
 emotion of my throbbing soul4 ,i read  
of ,petrarch's golden-haired ,laura1 of 
,ariosto's ,angelica1 fair love of      
chivalrous men and the unhappy friend of
 youthful ,medoro4 ,i read of the       
cunning art whereby the ,florentine     
secretary1 in his keen speculative      
discourses1 sought to establish the     
principalities and the state of ,italy4 
,i read of the many loves1 sorrows1     
discoveries and sublime concepts which  
did not blossom forth from my spirit1   

but which1 once expressed by the great  
men of my country1 have1 because of     
their merits1 continued to exist in the 
imagination1 in the intellect1 in the   
hearts of ,italians1 and have thus      
constituted a literature1 a             
light-shedding history which is the life
 of language1 varied indeed and         
restless1 but ever the same4 ,this is   
the language which ,i first heard from  
the dear lips of my mother1 which       
gradually and constantly ,i made my own 
by studying and reflecting on the books 
and on the conversations of those who   
for years1 or days1 or instants1 were   
with me in my native town and exchanged 
with me their thoughts and their        
sentiments2 the language which unites to
 me all those who1 living or dead1      
together constitute this which ,i call  
and feel to be my own people4  ,yet ,i  
might want to break away with my speech 
from this glorious communion4 ,i might  
try to demonstrate to myself that my    
speech is exclusively mine1 and surely  

,i would thus accomplish something4 ,i  
would produce an exception which in this
 case too would serve to confirm the    
rule4  ,for surely a man may devise a   
cryptic language1 a cipher1 a jargon4   
,secret codes and conventional cants are
 resorted to by individuals who have    
some reason to conceal their meaning    
from others4 ,such individuals1 however1
 can form but very small groups1 and    
because of the artificial character of  
their communications never may          
constitute a nation4 ,an artificial     
jargon of this sort is however a        
language of some kind3 it must be1 since
 art imitates nature4 ,it complies with 
the law that is immanent in the peculiar
 nature of language1 namely1 that there 
be nothing secret or hidden in it1 for  
speech and in general every form of     
spiritual activity invests a community  
and aims at universality4 ,the jargon is
 possible only because of the key by    
which it may be translated back into the
 common language4 ,give a ciphered      

document to the cryptographer2 by study 
and ingenuity--that is by the use of    
that very intelligence which arbitrarily
 combined the cipher--he discovers the  
key2 thus he too breaks up the          
artificial form1 and draws from it the  
natural flow of a speech that is        
intelligible to all those who speak the 
same national tongue4 ,and again1 words 
as they flow from the inspired bosom of 
the poet1 when they first appear in the 
freshness of the new artistic creation1 
do have something that is cryptic4 ,that
 language is the poet's own2 it never   
had been used by another2 a jargon      
before it is deciphered may be and is   
the language of a particular            
personality4 ,but if we look more       
attentively1 we shall see that in both  
cases the language is the language of   
the community4 ,the inspired poet does  
indeed speak to himself1 but with the   
consciousness of a potential audience1  
he utters a word to himself which must  
eventually be intelligible to others    

because it is by its nature             
intelligible4 ,in the conditions in     
which the poet finds himself when       
speaking1 he must use that word and no  
other1 and any other person in those    
same spiritual conditions would use1    
could not help using1 the same word4    
,for his word is the ,word1 the one that
 is required by the circumstances4 ,and 
since he is a poet1 a serious mind      
uttering a word which needs no          
translation1 it will be the word of his 
own people first and then of humanity at
 large1 in so far as its beauty will    
inspire men of different nations and of 
diverse speech with the desire of       
learning the poet's own intimate        
language4  ,all this is true because the
 spirit is universal activity1 which1   
far from separating men1 unites them4   
,it realises historically its           
universality in the community of the    
family1 of the city1 of the district1   
and of the nation1 and in every form of 
intimate aggregation and of fusion which

 history may call into being4  ,language
 may or may not be in the formation of a
 man's nationality4 ,what however must  
be ever present is the ,will by which   
man every moment of his life renovates  
his own personality4 ,can the ,will1 by 
which each one of us is what he is1 be  
his own ,will1 exclusively his own8 ,or 
is the ,will itself1 like language1 not 
perhaps a national heirloom1 but surely 
a common act1 a communion of life1 in   
such a way that we live our own life    
while living the life of the nation8    
,of course1 in the abstract1 as ,i have 
explained above1 my will is particular4 
,but we must be reminded that ,will is  
one thing1 and faint wishing another4   
,there is such a thing as real effective
 volition1 and there is something which 
strives to be such and fails2 this      
latter we might call velleity4 ,real    
will does not rest satisfied with       
intentions1 designs1 or sterile desires2
 it acts1 and by its effectiveness it   
reveals itself1 and by its value shows  

its reality4 ,and our being results not 
from velleities but from the real will4 
,we are not what we might conditionally 
desire to be1 but what we actually will 
to be4 ,a velleity we might say is the  
will directed to an end which is either 
relatively or absolutely impossible2    
will is that which becomes effective4   
,but1 then1 when is it that my will     
really is effective1 really wills8 ,i am
 a citizen of a state which has power2  
this power1 this will of the state      
expresses itself to me in laws which ,i 
must obey4 ,the transgression of laws1  
if the state is in existence1 bears with
 it the inevitable punishment of the    
transgressor1 that is1 the application  
of that law which the offender has      
refused to recognise4 ,the state is     
supported by the inviolability of laws1 
of those sacred laws of the land which  
,socrates1 as ,plato tells us1 taught   
his pupils to revere4 ,i1 then1 as a    
citizen of my country1 am bound by its  
,law in such a manner that to will its  

transgression is to aim at the          
impossible4 ,if ,i did so1 ,i should be 
indulging in vain velleities1 in which  
my personality1 far from realising      
itself1 would on the contrary be        
disintegrated and scattered4 ,i then    
want what the law wants me to will4  ,it
 makes no difference that1 from a       
material and explicit point of view1 a  
system of positive law does not coincide
 throughout with the sphere of my       
activity1 and that therefore the major  
part of the standards of my conduct must
 be determined by the inner dictates of 
my particular conscience4 ,for it is the
 ,will of the ,state that determines the
 limits between the moral and the       
juridical1 between what is imposed by   
the law of the land and what is demanded
 by the ethical conscience of the       
individual4 ,and there is no limit which
 pre-exists to the line by which the    
constituent and legislative power of the
 ,state delimits the sphere subject to  
its sanctions4 ,so that positively or   

negatively1 either by command or by     
permission1 our whole conduct is subject
 to that will by which the ,state       
establishes its reality4  ,but the ,will
 of the ,state does not manifest itself 
solely by the enactments of positive    
legislation4 ,it opens to private       
initiative such courses of action as may
 presumably be carried on satisfactorily
 without the impulse and the direct     
control of the sovereign power4 ,but    
this concession has a temporary         
character1 and the ,state is ever ready 
to intervene as soon as the private     
management ceases to be effective4 ,so  
that even in the exercise of what seems 
the untrammelled will of the individual 
we discern the power of the ,state2 and 
the individual is free to will something
 only because the sovereign power wants 
him to4 ,so that in reality this        
apparently autonomous particular will is
 the will of the state not expressed in 
terms of positive legislation1 there    
being no need of such an expression4    

,but since the essence of law is not in 
the expression of it1 but in the will   
which dictates it1 or observes it1 or   
enforces the observance of it1 in the   
will1 in short1 that wills it1 it       
follows that the law exists even though 
unwritten4  ,in the way of conclusion1  
then1 it may be said that ,i1 as a      
citizen1 have indeed a will of my own2  
but that upon further investigation my  
will is found to coincide exactly with  
the will of the ,state1 and ,i want     
anything only in so far as the ,state   
wants me to want it4  ,could it possibly
 be otherwise8 ,such an hypothesis      
overwhelms me at the very thought of it4
 ,for it would come to this1--that ,i   
exist and my state does not3--the state 
in which ,i was born1 which sustained   
and protected me before ,i saw the light
 of day1 which formed and guaranteed to 
me this communion of life2 the state in 
which ,i have always lived1 which has   
constituted this spiritual substance1   
this world in which ,i support myself1  

and which ,i trust will never fail me   
even though it does change constantly4  
,i could1 it is true1 ignore this close 
bond by which ,i am tied and united to  
that great will which is the will of my 
country4 ,i might balk and refuse to    
obey its laws4 ,but acting thus1 ,i     
would be indulging in what ,i have      
called velleities4 ,my personality1     
unable to transform the will of the     
state1 would be overcome and suppressed 
by it4  ,let us however assume for a    
moment that ,i might in the innermost   
depths of my being segregate myself4    
,averse to the common will and to the   
law of the land1 ,i decide to proclaim  
over the boundless expanse of my thought
 the proud independence of my ego1 as a 
lone1 inaccessible summit rising out of 
the solitude4 ,up to a certain point    
this hypothesis is verified constantly  
by the manner in which my personality   
freely becomes actual4 ,but even then ,i
 do not act as a particular being3 it is
 the universal power that acts through  

my personal will4  ,for when we         
effectively observe the law1 with true  
moral adhesion and in thorough          
sincerity1 the law becomes part of      
ourselves1 and our actions are the      
direct results of our convictions1--of  
the necessity of our convictions4 ,for  
every time we act1 inwardly we see that 
such must be our course2 we must have a 
clear intuition of this necessity4 ,the 
,saint who has no will but the will of  
,god intuitively sees necessity in his  
norm4 ,so does the sinner in his own    
way3 but his norm is erroneous and      
therefore destined to fail4 ,every      
criminal in transgressing the law obeys 
a precept of his own making which is in 
opposition to the enactments of the     
state4 ,and in so doing he creates      
almost a state of his own1 different    
from the one which historically exists  
and must exist because of certain good  
reasons1 the excellence of which the    
criminal himself will subsequently      
realise4 ,from the unfortunate point of 

view which he has taken1 the            
transgressor is justified in acting as  
he does1 and to such an extent that no  
one in his position1 as he thinks1 could
 possibly take exception to it4 ,his    
will is also universal2 if he were      
allowed to1 if it were possible for him1
 he would establish new laws in place of
 the old ones3 he would set up another  
state over the ruins of the one which he
 undermines4 ,and what else does the    
tyrant when he destroys the freedom of  
the land and substitutes a new state for
 the crushed ,commonwealth8 ,in the same
 manner the rebel does away with the    
despot1 starts a revolution and         
establishes liberty if he is successful2
 if not1 he is overcome and must again  
conform his will to the will of that    
state which he has not been able to     
overthrow4 ,so then1 ,i exercise my true
 volition whenever the will of my state 
acts in my personal will1 or rather when
 my will is the realisation of the will 
of a super-national group in which my   

state co-exists with other states1      
acting upon them1 and being re-acted    
upon in reciprocal determinations4 ,or  
perhaps better still1 when the entire   
world wills in me4 ,for my will1 ,i     
shall say it once again1 is not         
individual but universal1 and in the    
political community by which individuals
 are united into a higher individuality1
 historically distinct from other       
similar ones1 we must see a form of     
universality4  ,for this reason1 then1  
we are justified in saying that our     
personality is particular when we       
consider it abstractly1 but that        
concretely it realises itself as a      
universal and therefore also as a       
national personality4 ,this conception  
is of fundamental importance for those  
of us who live in the class-room and    
have made of teaching our life's        
occupation1 our ultimate end1 and the   
real purpose of our existence4 ,for in  
this conception of human activities we  
find the solution of a problem that has 

been present in the minds of thinking   
men ever since they began to reflect on 
the subject of education1 or1 in other  
words1 from time immemorial4 ,education1
 we must remember1 is not a fact1 if by 
fact we mean1 as we should1 something   
that has happened1 or is wont to happen1
 or must inevitably take place in virtue
 of the constancy of the law which      
governs it4 ,we teachers are all        
sincerely convinced that education1 as  
we speak of it1 as it draws our         
interests1 for which we work1 and which 
we strive to improve1 is not now what it
 was before4 ,for there is no education 
that works out in conformity with       
natural laws4 ,it is a free act of ours1
 the vocation of our souls1 our duty as 
men4 ,by it more nobly than by any other
 action man is enabled to actualise his 
superior nature4 ,animals do not        
educate3 even though they do raise their
 young ones they yet form no family1 no 
ethical organism with members           
differentiated and reciprocally         

correlated4 ,but we freely1 by an act of
 our conscience1 recognise our children1
 as we do our parents and our brothers2 
and we discern our fellow-beings in     
ourselves and ourselves in others2 and  
by the growth of our own we             
unconsciously develop the personality of
 others2 and therefore in the family1 in
 the city1 in any community1 we         
constitute one spirit1 with common needs
 that are satisfied by the operations of
 individual activity which is a social  
activity4  ,man has been called a       
political or a social animal4 ,he might 
therefore be considered also as an      
educating animal4 ,for we do not merely 
educate the young ones1 our young ones4 
,education being spiritual action       
bearing on the spirit1 we really educate
 all those that are in any way and by   
any relations whatsoever connected with 
us1 whether or not they belong to our   
family or to our school1 as long as they
 concur with us in constituting a       
complete social entity4 ,and we not only

 train those of minor age1 who are as   
yet under tutelage1 and still frequent  
the schools and are busily intent upon  
developing and improving their skill1   
their character1 their culture4 ,we also
 educate the adults1 the grown-up men   
and women1 the aged2 for there is no man
 alive who does not daily add to his    
intellectual equipment1 who does not    
derive some advantage from his human    
associations1 who could not             
appropriately repeat the statement of   
the ,roman emperor--nulla dies sine     
linea4 ,man always educates4  ,but here1
 as in every other manifestation of his 
spiritual activity1 man does not behave 
in sole conformity with instinct2 he    
does not teach by abandoning himself1 so
 to speak1 to the force of natural      
determinism4 ,he is fully aware of his  
own doings4 ,he keeps his eyes open on  
his own function1 so that he may attain 
the end by the shortest course1 that he 
may without wasting his energies derive 
from them the best possible results4    

,for man reflects4  ,it is evident then 
that education is not a scheme which    
permits pedagogues and pedants to       
interfere with their theories and       
lucubrations in this sacred task of     
love1 which binds the parents to the    
children1 brings old and young together1
 and keeps mankind united in its never  
ceasing ascent4 ,before the word came   
into being1 the thing1 as is usually the
 case1 already existed4 ,before there   
was a science and an incumbent for the  
chair1 there existed something that was 
the life of this science and therefore  
the justification of the chair4 ,there  
was the intent reflectiveness of man1   
who in compliance with the divine       
saying1 ,know thyself1 was becoming     
conscious of his own work1 and          
therefore1 unwilling to abandon his     
actions to external impulses1 began to  
question everything4 ,what the lower    
animal does naturally and unerringly    
through its infallible instinct1 man    
achieves by the restless scrutiny of his

 mind4 ,ever thoughtful1 always yearning
 for the better1 he searches and        
explores1 often stumbling in error1 but 
ever rising out of it to a higher       
station of learning and of art4 ,our    
education is human1 because it is an    
action and not a fact2 because it is a  
problem that we always solve and have to
 keep solving for ever4  ,this intuitive
 truth is demonstrated experimentally to
 us by the very lives we live as        
educators4 ,as long as the freshness of 
our vocation lasts1 as long as we can   
remain free from mechanical routine and 
from the impositions of fixed habits2 as
 long as we are able to consider every  
new pupil with renewed interest1        
discover in him a different soul1 unlike
 that of any other that we have         
previously come in contact with1 and    
differing within itself from day to day2
 as long as it is still possible for us 
to enter the class-room thrilled and    
throbbing in the anticipation of new    
truths to reveal1 of novel experiments  

to perform1 of unexpected difficulties  
to overcome1 in the full consciousness  
of the rapid motion of a life ever      
renewed in us and around us by the      
incoming generations1 that flow to us   
and ebb away unceasingly towards life   
and death2 so long shall we really live 
and love the teacher's life1 so long    
shall we demonstrate to ourselves and to
 others the truth ,i have already       
affirmed4  ,we teachers should be       
constantly on our guard against the     
dangers of routine1 against the belief  
that we have but to repeat the same old 
story in the same class-room1 to the    
same kind of distant1 blank faces1      
staring at us in dreary uniformity from 
the same benches4 ,we shall continue to 
be educators only as long as we are able
 to feel that every instant of our      
life's work is a new instant1 and that  
education therefore is a problem that   
insistently stimulates our ingenuity to 
an ever renewed solution4  ,now the most
 important of all tasks1 ancient and    

modern1 in the field of education is    
this1--the task of the teacher to       
represent the ,universal to his pupils1 
the ,universal1 of course1 as           
historically determined4 ,scientific    
thought1 customs1 laws1 religious       
beliefs are brought before the pupil's  
mind1 not as the science1 the laws1 the 
religion of the teacher1 but as those of
 humanity1 of his country1 of his       
period4 ,and the pupil is the particular
 individual who1 having entered upon the
 process of education1 and being        
submitted1 so to speak1 to the yoke of  
the school1 ceases to enjoy his former  
liberty in the pursuit of a spiritual   
endowment and in the formation of his   
character1 and1 in consequence of this  
educational pressure1 bends compliantly 
before the common law4 ,hence the       
world-old opposition to the coercive    
power of the school1 and the outcry     
raised from time to time against the    
privilege demanded by the educator1 who 
on the strength of the assumedly higher 

quality of his beliefs1 his learning1   
his taste1 or his moral conscience1     
claims to interfere with the spontaneous
 development of a personality in quest  
of itself4  ,on one side education      
undoubtedly assumes the task of         
developing freedom1 for the aim of      
education is to produce men2 and man is 
worthy of this name only when he is a   
master of himself1 capable of initiating
 his own acts1 responsible for his      
deeds1 able to discern and assimilate   
the ideas which he accepts and          
professes1 affirms and propagates1 so   
that whatever he says1 thinks1 or does1 
really comes from him4 ,our children are
 said to be properly raised when they   
give evidence of being able to take care
 of themselves without the help of our  
guidance and advice4 ,and we trust that 
we have accomplished our task as        
educators when our pupils have made our 
language their own and are able to tell 
us new things originally thought out by 
them4 ,freedom then must be the result  

of education4  ,but on the other hand1  
teaching implies an action exercised on 
another mind1 and education cannot      
therefore result in the relinquishment  
and abandonment of the pupil4 ,the      
educator must awaken interests that     
without him would for ever lie dormant4 
,he must direct the learner towards an  
end which he would be unable to estimate
 properly if left alone1 and must help  
him to overcome the otherwise           
unsurmountable obstacles that beset his 
progress4 ,he must1 in short1 transfuse 
into the pupil something of himself1 and
 out of his own spiritual substance     
create elements of the pupil's          
character1 mind1 and will4 ,but the acts
 which the pupil performs in consequence
 of his training will1 in a certain     
measure1 be those of his teacher2 and   
education will therefore have proved    
destructive of that very liberty with   
which the pupil was originally endowed4 
,is it not true that people constantly  
attribute to early family influences and

 to environment--that is1 to            
education--the good and the bad in the  
deeds of the mature man8  ,this is the  
form in which the problem usually       
presents itself4 ,the mind of the       
educator is therefore torn by two       
conflicting forces3 the desire zealously
 to watch and control the pupil's growth
 and direct his evolution along the     
course that seems quickest and surest   
for his complete development2 and1 on   
the other hand1 the fear that he may    
kill fertile seeds1 stifle with         
presumptuous interference the           
spontaneous life of the spirit in its   
personal impulses1 and clothe the       
individual with a garment that is not   
adapted for him1--crush him under the   
weight of a leaden cape4  ,the solution 
of this problem must be sought in the   
concrete conception of individual       
personality2 and this will be the theme 
of the next chapter4 ,but ,i must at the
 very outset utter an emphatic word of  
warning4 ,my solution does not remove   

all difficulties2 it cannot be used as a
 key to open all doors4 ,for as ,i have 
repeatedly stated1 the value of         
education consists in the persistence of
 the problems1 ever solved and yet ever 
clamouring for a new solution1 so that  
we may never feel released from the     
obligation of thinking4  ,my solution   
must be simply accepted as affording a  
guidance by which different people may1 
along more or less converging lines1    
approach their particular objectives4   
,for the problem presents itself under  
ever-changing forms1 and demands a      
continuous development1 and almost a    
progressive interpretation of the       
concept which ,i am going to offer as an
 aid to its solution4 ,no effort of     
thinking1 once completed1 will ever     
exonerate us from thinking1 from        
thinking unceasingly1 from thinking more
 and more intensively4     ,,chapter    
,,iii  ,,the ,,fundamental ,,antimony   
,,of ,,education   ,a more precise      
determination must now be given to the  

problem1 touched upon in the preceding  
chapter1 which might be called the      
fundamental antinomy of education1      
understanding by antinomy the conflict  
of two contradictory affirmations1      
either one of which appears to be true  
and irrefutable4  ,the two contradictory
 affirmations are 7#a7 that man as the  
object of education is and must be free1
 and 7#b7 that education denies man's   
freedom4 ,they might perhaps be better  
re-stated in this way3 7#a7 ,education  
presupposes freedom in man and strives  
to increase it4 7#b7 ,education treats  
man by ignoring the freedom he may      
originally be endowed with1 and acts in 
such a way as to strip him entirely of  
it4  ,each of the two propositions must 
be taken1 not as an approximate         
affirmation1 but as an exact enunciation
 of an irrefutable truth4 ,therefore    
freedom here means full and absolute    
liberty2 and when we speak of the       
negation of freedom1 we mean that       
education as such1 and as far as it is  

carried1 destroys the freedom of the    
pupil4  ,let us first see precisely what
 is meant by this freedom which we      
attribute to man4 ,each one of us firmly
 even though obscurely possesses some   
conception of it4 ,every one of us1 even
 though unfamiliar with the             
controversies that have raged for       
centuries on the question of free will1 
must have sometimes been compelled by   
the conditions of human life to face the
 difficulties that beset the concept of 
man's freedom1 and must have been led to
 question1 if not to deny outright1 the 
proposition that man is free4 ,but on   
the other hand1 every one of us has to  
admit that the experience of life has   
confirmed the belief in our freedom     
which for a moment had been shaken by   
doubt and perplexity2 and that faith1   
instinctive and incoercible1 outlives   
every time the onslaughts of negation4  
,by liberty we mean that power peculiar 
to man by which he moulds himself into  
his actual being and originates the     

series of facts in which every one of   
his actions becomes manifest4 ,in       
nature1 all facts1 or1 as they are      
called1 all phenomena appear to us to be
 so interrelated as to constitute a     
universal system in which no phenomenon 
can ever be considered as absolutely    
beginning1 but can in each case be      
traced back to a preceding phenomenon as
 its cause1 or at any rate as the       
condition of its intelligibility4 ,the  
condensation of the aqueous vapour in   
the cloud produces rain2 but vapour     
would not condense without the action of
 temperature1 nor again would           
temperature be lowered without the      
concurrence of certain meteorological   
facts which modify it1 etc4  ,but we    
believe on the other hand that man      
derives from no one but himself the     
principles and the causes of his        
actions4 ,so that whenever we see in his
 conduct the necessary effects of causes
 that have acted on his character or    
momentarily on his will1 we cease to    

consider such acts as partaking of that 
moral value through which man's conduct 
is really human and completely sundered 
from the instinctive impulses of the    
lower animal1 and even more so from the 
behaviour of the forces of inanimate    
matter4  ,we may in certain moments deny
 a man's humanity1 and see in his       
conduct only brutal impulse1 fierce     
cruelty1 and unreasoning bestiality4 ,in
 such moments we cannot stop either to  
praise or to blame him4 ,we do not even 
strive to reason with him1 for we feel  
that arguments would produce no         
impression on his obdurate              
consciousness4 ,only through force can  
we defend ourselves from his violence2  
against him we must use the same weapon 
that we rely upon in our struggle with  
the wild beasts and the blind forces of 
nature4 ,we then become aware that our  
soul refuses to recognise such an       
individual as a man4 ,we esteem man to  
be such only when we believe that we can
 influence him by words1 by arguments   

that are directed to reason1 which is   
the birthright of man1 and when we are  
able to prevail upon those sentiments of
 his which1 as peculiarly human1 appear 
to be almost the foundation and the     
understructure of rational activity4    
,this reason and these sentiments it    
must be remembered are the peculiar     
constituents of human personality4 ,they
 cannot be imparted to man from the     
outside4 ,they are in him from the very 
start even if only as germs which he    
must himself cultivate1 and which will1 
when developed1 enable him to act       
consciously1 that is1 with full         
knowledge of his acts4 ,this knowledge  
is twofold1 for he knows what he is     
doing1 and he knows also how his actions
 must be judged4 ,and so all the causes 
that bear on him are practically of no  
weight in determining a course which he 
will take1 if he is a man1 only after   
the approval of his own judgment4 ,what 
is more natural than to avenge an       
insult1 and to harbour hatred against an

 enemy8 ,and yet from the viewpoint of  
morals1 man is worthy of this name only 
in so far as he is able to resist his   
overpowering passions and to release    
himself from that force which compels   
him to offset harm with more harm1 and  
meet hatred with hatred4 ,he must       
pardon2 he must love the enemy who harms
 him4 ,only when a man is capable of    
understanding the beauty of this pardon 
and of such love1 only when1 attracted  
by their beauty1 he acts no longer in   
compliance with the force of instinctive
 nature1 does he cease to count as a    
purely natural being1 and lift himself  
to a higher level into that moral world 
where he must progressively exhibit his 
human activities4 ,whether man is equal 
to this task or not1 we must demand that
 he satisfy this requirement before we  
admit him into the society of mankind4  
,he must have in himself the strength to
 withstand the pressure of external     
forces which may act on his will1 on his
 personality1 on that inner centre from 

which his personality moves towards us1 
speaks to us1 and thus affirms its      
existence4 ,we make these demands on    
him2 and as we extol him when by his    
deeds he shows sufficient capacity for  
his human role1 so we also blame him    
every time we find him through weakness 
yielding to these forces4 ,and the      
import of our blame is that he is       
responsible for not having the power    
which he should have had4  ,it is of no 
importance that out of compassion1 or   
through sympathy for human frailty1 we  
lighten or even entirely remove the     
burden of our censure4 ,our disapproval 
of the deficiency1 even though          
unexpressed1 remains within us side by  
side with the conviction that the       
delinquent may do a great deal1 nay1    
must1 aided by us in the future1 do     
everything in his power to meet         
successfully the opposing forces of     
evil4 ,we surely cannot abandon the     
unfortunate wretch who through moral    
impotence--whether it be the craven     

submissiveness of the coward1 or the    
undaunted violence of the overbearing   
brute--commits an evil deed4 ,we feel it
 our duty to watch over him and help him
 on the road to redemption1 because of  
our firm conviction that he will        
eventually redeem himself2 for he is    
after all a man like the rest of us1 and
 possesses therefore within himself the 
source and principle of a life which    
will raise him from the slough in which 
he lies immersed4  ,there is1 however1 a
 pseudo-science which1 on the basis of  
superficial and inaccurate observations1
 dogmatically asserts that certain forms
 of criminality give evidence of        
original and irremediable moral         
depravity2 and that therefore persons   
tainted with it are fatally condemned   
never to heed sufficiently the voice of 
duty and ever to yield to their         
perverted instinct1 which presses       
unrestrained from the depths of their   
being at the slightest provocation and  
on the occasion of the most             

insignificant clash with other human    
beings4  ,this is the doctrine of the   
modern school of criminal anthropology  
which has spread throughout the world   
the fame of some ,italian writers4      
,though their influence is now on the   
wane1 their observations on the         
pathological nature of criminal acts    
have contributed to establish the need  
of a more humane treatment of           
offenders1--more humane because rational
 and effective4  ,their doctrine falls  
in with a series of systems which at all
 times1 and always for materialistic    
motives1--materialistic even though     
disguised under religious and           
theological robes1--have denied to man  
that power which we call liberty1       
compelling him therefore to bend down   
under the stress of universal           
determinism1 and to behave as the drop  
that forever moves with the motion of   
the boundless ocean1 an insignificant   
particle of the entire watery mass4     
,what force intrinsic to this drop could

 ever stop it on the crest of the wave  
which hurls it forward8 ,man1 they say1 
is no different from this drop3 from the
 time of his birth to the instant of his
 death1 hemmed in by all the beings of  
nature1 acted upon by innumerable       
concurrent causes1 he is pushed and     
dragged at every moment by the          
irresistible current of all the forces  
of the entire mass of the universe4 ,at 
times he may delude himself into        
believing that he has lifted his        
consciousness out of the huge flood1    
that it is within his power to resist1  
to stop it as far as he is concerned1   
and to control it2 that1 in short1 it   
rests with him to fashion his own       
destiny4 ,but alas6 this very belief1   
this illusion is the determined result  
of the forces acting upon him3 it is the
 inevitable effect of the play of his   
representations1--representations which 
have not their origin in him1 but have  
been impressed upon him by outside      
forces4 ,so that the illusion of        

independence is but a mocking           
confirmation of the impossibility of    
escaping the rush of fatal currents4  ,i
 shall not here give a critical         
presentation of the arguments by which  
systems such as these have established  
the absence of freedom in man4 ,in our  
present need1 a single remark will      
suffice1 and will permit us1 ,i believe1
 to cut the discussion short4 ,a great  
,german philosopher1 who had conceived  
science and reality1 which is the object
 of science1 in such a way as to        
preclude the possibility of finding in  
reality a place for man's freedom1      
noticed that freedom1 in spite of all   
the difficulties which science          
encounters in accounting for it1        
corresponds and answers to an invincible
 certitude in our soul1 invincible      
because a postulate of our moral        
conscience4 ,that is to say1 that       
whatever our scientific theories and    
ideas1 we have a conscience which       
imposes a law upon us1--a law which1    

though not promulgated and sustained by 
any external force1 or rather because of
 it1 compels us in a manner which is    
absolute4 ,this law is the moral law4   
,it requires no speculative             
demonstration4 ,the scrutiny of         
philosophers might not be helpful to it4
 ,it rises spontaneously and naturally  
from the intimate recesses of our       
spirit2 and it demands from our will1   
from the will of the most uncouth man1  
an unconditional respect4 ,what sense   
would there be in the word duty1 if man 
were able to do only those things which 
his own nature1 or worse still1 nature  
in general1 compelled him to do8 ,the   
existence of duty implies a power to    
fulfil it4 ,and the certitude of our    
moral obligations rests on the          
conviction that we have within us the   
power to meet them4 ,we can answer the  
call of duty because we are free4  ,this
 consideration1 important as it is1     
cannot however be considered as         
sufficient4 ,for this moral conscience1 

this certitude with which the moral     
conscience affirms the existence of an  
unavoidable duty1 might also be an      
illusion determined in us by natural    
causes4 ,nothing hinders us from        
thinking thus1 and surely there is no   
contradiction implied in this           
explanation1 which in fact because of   
its possibilities is offered by the     
philosophers of materialism4  ,but the  
need of liberty is not solely felt when 
we strive to conceive our moral         
obligations2 freedom is not only the    
ground for existence1 the raison d'etre 
of moral law1 as ,kant thought--for he  
is the philosopher to whom ,i alluded   
above2--no6 freedom is the condition of 
the entire life of the spirit4 ,and the 
materialist who1 having destroyed       
liberty as a condition of moral conduct1
 believes that he is still able to      
think1 that his intellectual activity   
can proceed undisturbed after his faith 
in the objective value and in the       
reality of moral laws has been          

abandoned1 such a materialistic thinker 
is totally mistaken4 ,for without       
freedom1 man not only is unable to speak
 of duty1 but he cannot speak at        
all1--not even of his materialistic     
views4 ,this is the same as saying that 
the negation of liberty is unthinkable4 
,a brief reflection will make this      
clearer4 ,we speak to others or to      
ourselves in so far as we think1 or say 
something or make affirmations4 ,let us 
suppose that ideas be present to our    
minds 7as people have sometimes         
imagined7 without our looking at them1  
without our noticing them4 ,such ideas  
would have offered themselves in vain1  
in the same way that many material      
objects remain unseen before us1 because
 we do not turn our gaze toward them4   
,every object of the mind1 that is1     
every thought1 can only be thought      
because in addition to it we too are in 
the mind3 our mental activity is there1 
the ego of the thinking man1 the subject
 which is ready to affirm the object4   

,and thought proper consists in this    
affirmation of the object by the        
subject4 ,now1 the subject1 that is1    
man1 must be as free in the affirmation 
of his thought1 by which he thinks      
something1 as he must be free in every  
one of his actions in order that his    
action be truly his1 and really human4  
,in fact1 we demand of man that he give 
an account of his thoughts as well as of
 his deeds4 ,we evaluate not only what  
he does1 but also what he thinks2 we    
praise him or we disapprove of him      
because of his sayings1 that is1 his    
thoughts1 and we call upon him to       
correct those thoughts which he should  
not entertain4 ,in this way we indicate 
our conviction that the thought of each 
one of us is not simply a logical       
consequence of its premises1 not an     
effect determined by a psychic mechanism
 set in motion by the universal         
mechanism of which our individual psyche
 is a part2 we are convinced that       
thought depends upon man1 upon his      

capacity1 upon his personality1 which is
 not controlled by any mechanical       
forces1 nor subject to premises which he
 may no longer modify once he has       
accepted them4 ,we are the masters of   
our thinking2 and if the vigour of the  
human personality is indeed shown by the
 steadfast constancy whereby in         
practical life we pursue a hard and     
toilsome course toward an arduous goal1 
it is revealed just as much by the      
quickness1 the readiness1 the           
assiduousness1 the lack of prejudice1   
the love which we manifest in our search
 after truth4  ,it has therefore been   
said that cognition in man has moral    
value1 and that on the other hand the   
will is operative in the act of the     
intellect4 ,such distinctions are       
dangerous4 ,but whether we call it will 
or intellect1 the activity which makes  
us what we are1 by which we actualise   
our personality1 also by thinking1 it is
 certain that it is a conscious and     
discriminating activity1 through no     

force of gravity precipitating on its   
object1 but approaching it with         
selective freedom of determination4 ,and
 in the manner that every action aims at
 the good1 because it seems good1 and   
appears in contrast with evil1 so every 
cognition is the affirmation of what to 
us is or seems to be a truth in         
opposition to error and falseness4      
,without the antithesis of good to evil 
there would be no moral action3 without 
the antithesis of the true to the false 
there would be no cognition4 ,but the   
existence of this antithesis implies a  
choice and therefore the liberty of     
choosing4  ,should we deny freedom1 and 
consequently abandon man to the         
determinism of the causes acting upon   
him1 we should deny the possibility of  
distinguishing between good and evil1   
between true and false4 ,the            
materialist1 therefore1 when he rejects 
freedom1 is compelled to affirm that the
 value which moral conscience attributes
 to goodness is devoid of any real      

grounds1 and what is worse1 that his    
very statement is thereby stripped of   
all the value of truth4 ,for he must be 
inwardly convinced that what he thinks  
has no reason to be thought and         
therefore cannot be thought4  ,the      
negation of freedom leads to this       
absurdum1 to this impossible thought1   
which is the ,thought that is being     
thought as such1 and yet does not admit 
of being thought4 ,man1 in so far as he 
thinks1 affirms his faith in freedom1   
and every attempt on his part to uproot 
this faith from his soul is but a       
glaring confirmation of its existence4  
,this observation1 properly grasped1 is 
sufficient to establish human freedom on
 a solid ground4  ,freedom1 moreover1   
which man needs in order to be human1   
cannot be1 as some have supposed1 a     
relative liberty1 limited and restricted
 by certain conditions1 for conditional 
liberty does not differ from slavery4   
,here indeed is the very crux of the    
problem4 ,every one would readily admit 

the existence of a limited freedom1 and 
the divergence would then be reduced to 
a question of degree4 ,but the fact is  
that freedom must be absolute or not be 
at all4 ,matter1 that is1 every material
 object1 is not free for the very reason
 that it is limited2 whereas the        
spirit--every spiritual act--is free    
because it is infinite1 and as such not 
relative to any thing1 and therefore    
absolute4  ,any limitation of the spirit
 would annihilate its liberty4 ,the     
slave is such because his will is       
constrained within the bounds imposed   
upon it by the master's volition4 ,the  
human spirit is not free in the presence
 of nature because nature envelops it   
and enfolds it within narrow confines1  
which allow only a certain development2 
and this development therefore cannot be
 looked upon as a grant of nature but   
rather as a condemnation1 in that it    
marks out boundaries which cannot be    
trespassed4 ,the lower animal is not    
free because even if its actions seem to

 imply a rationality not very different 
from that of man1 yet in reality its    
acts1 differently from the doings of    
man1 follow the straight line           
pre-established by instinct1 which      
admits of no original power and allows  
no individual creation4 ,if there is a  
limit1 there must be something limiting 
and something limited2 there must be a  
necessary relationship of one to the    
other1 so that the thing limited can in 
no way free itself from the consequences
 of this relationship4 ,these           
consequences are summed up in the       
impossibility of being all1 or in other 
words in the necessity of remaining     
within limits1 and to obey therefore the
 untransgressable laws set by one's own 
nature4 ,this necessity which binds     
every natural being to the laws of its  
own nature1 this impossibility of being 
aught else than what is appointed by    
nature1 to be a wolf of necessity1 and  
of necessity to be a lamb2 this is the  
hard lot of natural beings1 this is the 

destiny from which man is ransomed by   
the power of his freedom4  ,the sculptor
 in the fervour of his inspiration1     
which proceeds from the image that lives
 in his phantasy1 searches eagerly for  
the marble with which1 as though from   
the very bosom of nature1 he may call to
 life the phantom of his mind4 ,he fails
 in his search1 and his chisel remains1 
must need remain1 inactive4 ,the artist 
then in the utmost intensity of his     
creation is baffled by an external      
impediment1 by an obstacle of nature    
which therefore seems to have the power 
of limiting his creative power4 ,but    
when we consider what the artist has    
created in the statue itself1 in this   
living image of marble1 we find nothing 
that is material4 ,the artist has       
transfused into the stone an idea1 a    
sentiment1 a soul1 which we1 under the  
influence of the ravishing power of     
artistic beauty1 are able to seize to   
the exclusion of all material           
attributes2 as though we no longer      

possessed eyes for the whiteness of the 
marble and were deprived of the muscle  
which gives us the impression of its    
physical weight4 ,when we are able thus 
to spiritualise the statue--and we do so
 every time we get to know it as a work 
of art--then all limitations that might 
be imposed on the creative power of the 
artist disappear4 ,for we see no longer 
the artist's phantasy1 and then his arm1
 and then his hand1 his chisel1 the     
block which he is carving2 all we see is
 the phantasy soaring untrammelled in   
the infinite world of the artist1 with  
his arm1 his hand1 his marble1 his      
universe which is totally different from
 the universe in which the men live who 
quarry the marble and move it and sell  
it4  ,there is a point of view from     
which we see the spirit limited and     
enslaved by the conditions in which its 
life is unfolded4 ,but there is a higher
 point of view to which we must ascend  
if we are bent on discovering our       
freedom4 ,if we say1 as the             

psychologists do1 this is a soul and    
this is a body1 here are sensations1    
there is motion1 this is thought within 
us and that is the world outside of us1 
then we are obliged to consider the     
spirit as conditioned by physical       
happenings to which in some manner our  
internal determinations correspond4 ,it 
is not possible to see without eyes and 
without the light that strikes them4 ,it
 is equally impossible not to see when  
we have eyes and are surrounded by      
light1 and according to the greater or  
lesser velocity of the luminous waves1  
we shall of necessity discern now one   
colour and now another4 ,and the objects
 thus seen by us will determine our     
thoughts2 and in turn our volitions will
 depend upon these thoughts2 and our    
characters will be shaped accordingly1  
and we shall be this or that man in     
conformity with the determination of    
circumstances4 ,man1 according to this  
conception1 will be the result of time1 
of place1 of environment1 of everything 

except of his own self4  ,but there is a
 higher point of view than the one ,i   
have just described1 and to it we must  
rise1 if we mean to understand our      
nature1--this marvellous human nature   
which was first disclosed to our        
consciousness at the advent of          
,christianity and in the course of time 
made more and more manifest1 until it   
now loudly proclaims in us our human    
dignity exalted above the forces of     
nature1 and is empowered by its         
cognitive faculty to dominate these     
forces1 which must bend to man's        
purposes without ever blocking or       
obstructing his progress4 ,whosoever    
says3 here is a body and there is a     
soul--two things1 one outside of the    
other--such a man does not consider that
 these two things are two terms         
distinguished and differentiated by     
thought in the bosom of thought1 that is
 to say1 of the soul3 of that soul which
 is truer than the other for the obvious
 reason that the latter thinks and      

therefore reveals its soul-nature by its
 own acts1 whereas the former is the    
object of thinking1 is a thing thought1 
and may therefore be a fallacious       
entity1 an idolon1 and a simple ens     
rationis1 like so many other things that
 are thought and are subsequently found 
to have no kind of subsistence4 ,in     
speaking of sensation and of motion     
which generates or somehow conditions   
sensation1 we lose sight of the fact    
that sensation is truly enough a        
determination of consciousness1 but in  
the same manner as the motion which is  
encountered in consciousness when the   
latter1 in thinking1 among other things 
thinks the displacement of objects in   
space4  ,for everything is within       
consciousness1 and no way can be devised
 of issuing forth from it4 ,we say that 
the brain is external to consciousness1 
and that the cranium encloses the brain1
 which in turn is enveloped by space    
luminous and airy1 space filled with    
beautiful plants and beautiful animals2 

yet the fact remains that brain and     
skull and everything else are the       
potential or actual object of our       
thinking faculty1 and cannot but remain 
therefore within that consciousness to  
which for a moment we supposed them to  
be external4 ,we may start thinking1    
keeping in mind this indestructible     
substance of our thought2 and as we     
proceed from this centre in which we    
have placed ourselves as subjects of    
thinking1 and advance towards an        
ever-receding horizon1 do we ever come  
in sight of the point where we must     
pause and say3 ,here my thought ends2   
here something begins that is other than
 my thought8 ,thought halts only before 
mystery4 ,but even then it thinks it as 
mystery1 and thinking it1 transforms it1
 and then proceeds1 and so never really 
stops4  ,such being the true life of the
 spirit1 rightly have we called it      
universal4 ,at every throb it soars     
through the infinite1 without ever      
encountering aught else than its own    

spiritual actualisations4 ,in this life1
 such as we see it from the interior    
when we do not fantastically materialise
 it with our imaginations1 the spirit is
 free because it is infinite4           
,education then posits this liberty in  
the pupil1 for it presupposes in him a  
susceptibility of                       
development1--educability1 as we may    
call it4 ,the learner could not possibly
 be educable1 that is1 susceptible of   
receiving instruction1 unless he were   
able to think4 ,but thinking1 we have   
already seen1 signifies freedom4 ,and   
not only is freedom presupposed by the  
educator1 but it is the very thing he is
 aiming at in his work4 ,as a result of 
his teaching1 liberty must be developed 
in the same manner that the capacity for
 thinking and all modes of spiritual    
activity are developed4 ,for the        
development of thought is a development 
of reflection1 a constant increase of   
control over our own ideas1 over the    
content of our consciousness1 over our  

character1 over our whole being in      
relation to every other being4 ,and this
 growth of power is what we mean when we
 speak of the development of our        
freedom4 ,it has been said1 in fact1    
that education consists in liberating   
the individual from his instincts4      
,surely1 education is the formation of  
man1 and when we say man we mean        
liberty4  ,here we stumble upon our     
antinomy4 ,how are we to reconcile this 
presupposition and this aim of the      
educator with his interference in the   
personality of the pupil8 ,this         
interposition surely signifies that the 
disciple must not be left to himself and
 to his own resources2 that he has to   
clash with something or somebody that is
 not his own personality4 ,education    
implies a dualism of terms1 the teacher 
and the learner2 and it is this dualism 
which destroys the freedom1 which sets a
 limit1 and therefore annihilates       
infinity in which freedom consists4 ,the
 disciple who encounters a stronger     

mastering will1 an intellect equipped   
with a multitude of ideas1 with an      
experience which forestalls his own     
powers of observation1 and his innate   
zeal for investigation1 sees in this    
more potent personality either a barrier
 obstructing his progress towards a goal
 which he spontaneously would attain2 or
 else a goad which hurries him along the
 way which he would have indeed chosen  
of his own accord1 but along which he   
would have liked to advance freely1     
calmly1 joyously1 as our ,vittorino da  
,feltre would have it1 and without any  
unwelcome compulsion4 ,this pupil then  
would want to be left alone in order    
that he might be free1 as free as ,god  
when as yet the world was not and he    
created it out of nothing by his joyous 
fiat1 symbol of the loftiest spiritual  
liberty4  ,for these reasons we have    
come to believe that the most serious   
problem of education is the agreement   
between the liberty of the pupil and the
 authority of the teacher4 ,therefore   

great masters who meditated on the      
subject of education1 from ,rousseau to 
,tolstoi1 have exalted the rights of    
liberty1 but have fallen into the       
opposite extreme of denying the duty to 
authority1 and have pursued in their    
abstractions a vague and unrealisable   
ideal of negative education4  ,but we   
must not cling to negatives4 ,it should 
be our purpose to construct1 not to     
destroy4 ,the school1 this glorious     
inheritance of human experiences1 this  
ever-glowing hearth where the human     
spirit kindles and sublimates life as an
 object of constant criticism and of    
undying love1 may be transformed1 but   
cannot be destroyed4 ,let the school    
live1 and let us cling to the teacher   
and maintain his authority1 which limits
 the spontaneity and the liberty of the 
pupil4 ,for this limitation is only     
apparent4  ,apparent1 however1 when we  
deal with true education4 ,for the      
school has for centuries been the victim
 of a grave injustice4 ,people have been

 led to consider the classroom as a     
place of confinement and of punishment1 
and teachers have been cruelly lashed by
 the scourge of ridicule cracked in the 
face of pedantry4 ,through this         
injustice1 the school has been burdened 
with faults that are not its own1 and   
teachers1 genuine educators1 have been  
confused with the pedantic drill-masters
 that are the negation of intelligent   
education and of inspired ethical       
discipline4 ,in order to see whether    
education really limits the free        
activity of the pupil1 we must not      
consider abstractly any school1 which   
may not be after all a school4 ,we must 
examine an institution at the moment and
 in the act which realises its          
significance--when the instructor       
teaches and the pupils are learning4    
,such a moment should at least          
hypothetically be granted to exist4     
,let us take a concrete example and     
consider a teacher in the act of giving 
lessons in ,italian4 ,where is this     

something which ,i have called the      
,italian language8 ,in the grammar1     
perchance8 ,or in the dictionary8 ,yes1 
partly4 ,provided grammar can invest its
 rules with the life of the individual  
examples that together constitute the   
expressive power of the living language2
 and provided the dictionary does not   
wither up all words in the arid         
abstraction of alphabetical             
classification2 does not hang each of   
them by itself as limbs torn from the   
living body of the speech in which they 
had so often resounded and to which they
 will be joined again in the fulness of 
life and expressiveness2 but does       
instead incorporate1 as every good      
dictionary should1 complete phrases1    
living utterances of great authors or   
perhaps of that nameless many-souled    
writer that somewhat confusedly is      
called the people4  ,but more than in   
the grammar and more than in the        
dictionary1 the word is and exists in   
the writers themselves4 ,the teacher    

should there point it out1 as he guides 
his pupils through the authors who were 
able to express most powerfully our     
common thoughts4 ,to his students who   
are striving to learn the language--that
 is the writers--he reads for example   
the poems of ,leopardi4 ,the poet's     
word1 his soul hovers over the          
classroom1 as the master reads4 ,it     
penetrates into the minds of the pupils1
 hushes every other sentiment1 removes  
every other thought1 and throbs within  
them1 stirs them1 arouses them4 ,it     
becomes one with the soul of each pupil1
 which speaks to itself a language of   
its own1 using1 truly enough1 the words 
of ,leopardi1 but of a ,leopardi who is 
peculiar to each of the listeners4      
,under this spell1 the pupil who hears  
the poet's word echoing in the depths of
 his being1 will he stop to reflect that
 this word is the echo of an echo8 ,that
 he is under the influence of something 
repeated after a first utterance8 ,our  
own experience answers3 ,no6 ,but if any

 of the audience become absent-minded1  
if they should lose the rapt delight of 
poetical exaltation communicated to     
their soul by the teacher's voice1 and  
should say that the word they hear is   
not their own but the master's1 or      
rather1 the poet's1 then they would     
commit a serious blunder4 ,for the word 
they intently listen to in their soul is
 their own1 exclusively their own4      
,leopardi does not impart any poesy to  
him who1 through his love1 his study1   
and the intensity of his feelings1 is   
unable to live his own poetry4 ,and     
,leopardi 7or the teacher who reads him7
 is not materially external to the      
enraptured listener2 he is his own      
,leopardi1 such as he has been able to  
create for himself4 ,the master1 as ,st4
 ,augustine long ago warned us1 is      
within us4  ,he is within us even if we 
see him in front of us1 away from us    
seated in his chair4 ,for in so far as  
he is a real teacher1 he is ever the    
object of our consciousness1 surrounded 

and uplifted in our spirit by the       
reverence of our feelings and by our    
trustful affection4 ,he is our teacher1 
he is our very soul4  ,the dualism then 
is non-existent when we are educating4  
,we do notice it before1 and we are thus
 brought to examine the antinomy2 but   
the difficulty is removed by the very   
act of education itself1 by the first   
word that comes to the pupils' ears from
 the lips of the teacher4 ,the dualism  
however cannot be resolved if the       
master's word fails to reach the pupils'
 soul1 but then under those             
circumstances there is no education4    
,but even in such cases1 if the teacher 
is not sluggish1 if he displays a real  
spiritual power1 the abiding existence  
of the barrier between the two minds    
proves helpful to the spiritual growth  
of the learner1 who1 because of his     
incoercible freedom1 is impelled by the 
insufficiency of the master to affirm   
his personality with increased vigour4  
,so that the school is a hearth of      

liberty1 even in spite of the intentions
 of the teacher4 ,a school without      
freedom is a lifeless institution4      
,,chapter ,,iv  ,,realism ,,and         
,,idealism ,,in ,,the ,,concept ,,of    
,,culture   ,we found it necessary in   
the previous chapter to pass from the   
abstract to the concrete in order to    
arrive at the truth4 ,the universality  
of the individual was made clear when   
for the empirical concept of the        
individual1 abstractly considered1 we   
substituted the deeper and more         
speculative one of the individual       
himself in the concreteness of his      
relationships4 ,in like manner1 the     
fundamental antinomy of education was   
resolved as soon as we replaced the     
abstract idea of the dualism of teacher 
and pupil1 by the idea of their         
intrinsic1 profound1 unseverable unity  
as it gradually works out and is        
actualised in the process of education4 
,we were enabled therefore to conclude  
that the real teacher is within the soul

 of the pupil1 or1 better still1 the    
teacher is the pupil himself in the     
dynamism of his development4 ,so that1  
far from limiting the autonomy of the   
disciple1 the master1 as the propulsive 
element of the pupil's spontaneity1     
penetrates his personality1 not to      
suppress it1 but to help its impulses   
and facilitate its infinite development4
  ,the same method of resorting to the  
concrete now leads us to the            
determination of a third essential      
element in the process of education4 ,we
 have spoken of the master1 and we have 
spoken of the pupil1--of the latter as  
becoming actual as universal            
personality1 of the former as becoming  
identical with this same personality4   
,we must now take up the connecting link
 between the two1 that is1 culture4 ,by 
culture we mean the content of          
education1 the presupposed heirloom     
which in the course of time must pass   
from the teacher to the pupil4 ,this    
spiritual content1 in being apprehended1

 appears under different aspects3 as    
erudition and information2 as formation 
of personal capacities and training of  
spiritual activities2 as art and        
science2 as experience of life and as   
concept and ideal of existence2 as      
simple cognition and as a norm of       
conduct4 ,it includes everything that   
comes within the scope of teaching1 and 
from whose value education derives its  
peculiar worth4  ,culture1 so defined1  
may be conceived of in two ways2 and in 
as much as their differences are highly 
significant in the sphere of education  
as elsewhere1 we must now somewhat      
carefully consider them4  ,these two    
ways correspond to two opposite         
conceptions of reality1 and as such they
 pertain to philosophy4 ,but men in     
general constantly have recourse to     
them1 and so it happens that people     
frequently indulge in philosophic       
speculations without knowing it2 and    
much philosophising goes on outside of  
the schools of the specialists1 who are 

few compared to the great number of     
those who in their own way handle       
genuine concepts of philosophy4  ,let us
 begin from the most obvious of these   
concepts1 from the one which is         
fundamental and original to the human   
mind4 ,our whole life1 if we consider   
the data of experience1 seems to unfold 
itself on the substratum of a natural   
world1 which therefore1 far from        
depending on human life1 represents the 
very condition of it4 ,in order to live1
 to act1 to produce1 or in any way to   
exercise an influence on the external   
world1 we must1 first of all1 be born4  
,our birth is the effect of a life which
 is not our life1 which step by step    
rises and grows and spreads until it    
gathers all nature within itself4 ,this 
nature existed before we were born1 it  
will continue to be after we are all    
dead4 ,men draw their life from an      
organic and inorganic nature which had  
to exist in order that they might come  
into being4 ,when nature will cease to  

provide these conditions1 human life1   
according to this point of view1 will   
come to an end2 but nature1 transformed1
 chilled1 darkened1 dead1 will yet      
continue to be4  ,on this living trunk  
of nature our own life is grafted2      
animals come into existence1 and among  
animals the human species4 ,each of us1 
as he comes into the world1 finds this  
nature1 developed1 abundant1 diversified
 in millions of forms1 traversed by     
innumerable forces1 organised up to the 
most highly developed structures1 man   
included4 ,we find this nature1 and we  
begin to study it4 ,we examine its parts
 one by one1 their complexity1 and the  
difference of their functioning4 ,for   
each one of them has its peculiar way of
 being and of acting2 it has its laws4  
,the aggregate of these laws1 mutually  
corresponding1 and integrating one      
another1 constitutes the natural        
world--reality--as it stands before us4 
,with this external reality we strive to
 become acquainted2 and in order that we

 may live in it we either adapt         
ourselves to it1 or adapt its conditions
 to ourselves4 ,in this reality too we  
acquire the knowledge of the needs of   
our organism and of the means by which  
they may be satisfied1--the ratio1 so to
 speak1 between natural desires and     
controlled resources4  ,we are also told
 that our organism is in constant change
 and hurries on to its destination1 to  
our death1 which we abhor as            
passionately as we cherish life1 but    
which we accept because such is the law 
of human life1 fatal and inexorable2 for
 reality is what it is1 and we must     
adapt ourselves to it4  ,but if reality 
appears as constituted before us1 as    
therefore conditioning our existence1   
and as existing independently of us2 if 
it is indifferent to reality whether we 
be in it or not2 if we are truly        
extraneous to it1 the conclusion must   
then be drawn that we1 from the outside1
 presume to know reality and to move    
about it without being this reality     

itself or any part of it4 ,for all      
reality is thought by us as a connected 
whole1 though indeed vaguely2 in its    
totality it is regarded as an object    
known to us1 but existing in utter      
independence of this knowledge of ours4 
,its whole process is therefore complete
 in objective nature1 which conditions  
our spiritual life1 and this in turn can
 mirror reality but can never be a part 
of it4  ,this then is the primitive and 
fundamental concept that the human mind 
forms of reality4 ,in consequence of it 
man feels that he is enclosed within    
himself3 he knows he is producing the   
dreams and the fair images of art2 that 
he can construct inwardly abstract      
geometrical figures and numbers2 that he
 can generate ideas4 ,but he also feels 
that between these ideal creations of   
his own1 and the solid1 sound1 real     
living forms of nature1 there is an     
abyss4 ,he must1 indeed1 fall in with   
nature1 in the process of generating    
other living beings of flesh and blood4 

,he must avail himself of nature by     
first submitting to its unfailing laws1 
if he intends to give body1 that is1    
real existence1 to the ideal conceptions
 of his intelligence4 ,on one side then 
we have thought2 on the opposite side   
reality1--that reality1 ,nature4  ,this 
conception at a certain moment is       
transformed but not substantially       
changed4 ,as we begin to reflect1 we    
notice that this nature1 as known to us1
 is not the real external nature1 the   
nature which is unfolded in time and    
space1 which we see before our eyes1 an 
object perceptible by our bodily senses4
 ,we conclude then1 that nature as known
 to us is an idea2 that ,nature is one  
thing and the idea of nature another4   
,and if we think this perceptible nature
 and have faith in its reality and in   
the reality of its determinations1 this 
nature in which reality is made to      
consist is the nature which is within   
our thought1--the idea of nature2 or in 
other words1 thought considered as the  

content of our mind4 ,this thought is   
the aim of all the inquiries by which we
 strive to become thoroughly acquainted 
with nature1 and which we finally       
discover or at least ought to discover  
when we succeed in attaining true       
knowledge4 ,we say that we know nature  
only when we are able to recognise an   
idea in nature3 that is1 an idea in each
 of its elements1 and a system of ideas 
in the whole of nature4 ,so that what we
 know is not really nature as it        
presents itself to our senses1 still    
less nature as it is1 before it has     
impressed our senses2 but nature as     
disclosed to us by thought1 as it exists
 in thought--i4e41 the idea4 ,and this  
idea must be real1 otherwise nature1    
which has its truth in the idea1 could  
not be real4 ,not only is it real1 it is
 that reality itself which a moment ago 
we were led to think of as consisting in
 external perceptible nature4  ,this    
reality makes the life of our thought   
possible1 but it is not a product of    

this life4 ,it is a condition and a     
prerequisite of thought1 and as such it 
does not exist because we think it3 but 
rather we are able to think it because  
it exists4 ,it is eternal truth1 at     
first unknown to man1 then by him       
desired4 ,in quest of it he gradually   
lifts on all sides the veil which hides 
it from his eyes1 without however hoping
 that it will ever entirely disclose to 
him its divine countenance4  ,according 
to this transformed point of view1 then1
 reality1 which in the first instance   
appeared to be natural1 that is physical
 or material1 has now become ideal4 ,but
 even thus it remains extraneous to     
thought1 and unconcerned with the       
presence or the absence of it2          
transcending the entire life of the     
human spirit1 and incessantly subject to
 the danger of error4 ,whereas the idea 
as a complexus of all ideas that can be 
thought 7but have not been thought1 or  
rather have not all been thought7 is the
 beacon of light that guides the way of 

man in the ocean of life2 it is ,truth  
pure and perfect4  ,this idea evidently 
must not be confused with the purely    
subjective ideas which we spoke of      
above1 and which as such are extraneous 
to reality4 ,this idea is reality itself
 idealised4 ,it is to this idea1 for    
instance1 that we all appeal when we    
affirm the existence of a justice       
superior to that of which man is        
capable1 of a justice in behalf of which
 man is in duty bound to sacrifice his  
private interests1 and even his life4   
,this idea we have in mind when we speak
 of a sacred and inviolable right1      
whereas in daily practice there is      
perhaps no right which is not more or   
less trampled upon4 ,this idea is before
 us when we consider truth in general3  
truth which is indeed real1 even though 
it may not be seen or felt1 much more   
real than physical nature1 for nature   
comes to life and dies and constantly   
changes1 while truth is motionless1     
impassible1 eternal4 ,in its bosom then 

we must try to find everything that we  
want to accept as not illusory4  ,but in
 substituting the conception of an ideal
 reality for the conception of a        
material one1 reality as a whole        
continues to be something               
contradistinguished from us1 an object  
indeed of our thoughts1 but one which   
cannot be conceived as it is in itself  
except by abstracting it from our own   
thought4  ,we1 then1 who open our eager 
eyes in the endeavour to discover1 to   
know1 to orient ourselves1 to live in   
the midst of a known and familiar world2
 we1 thinking beings1 and not simply    
things of nature1 beings who as such    
affirm our personality in the very act  
of saying ,we1 we then are of less      
account than the earthworms which crawl 
along until they die unknown to the foot
 that crushes them4 ,we are nothing     
because we do not belong to reality2 we 
deceive ourselves into believing that we
 are doing something on our own account1
 but in truth we renounce every desire  

of doing or creating something original1
 something we might really call ours2   
and we abandon ourselves1 we drift away 
confused with external reality and      
submerged under the irresistible current
 of its laws4  ,this conception of life1
 which ,i have given only in its barest 
outline1 is a very common one4 ,for     
thousands of years it has persisted in  
the philosophical field1 the nourishment
 and the torment of the greatest        
intellects of humanity4 ,but humanity   
could not rest satisfied with a world   
conceived in such a manner2 with a world
 which1 whether we call it nature or    
idea1 is at bottom always nature4 ,for  
by nature we understand not only that   
reality which is in space and time1 but 
also every reality which is not the     
product of our will1 nor the result in  
general of that spiritual activity1     
which in a manner peculiar to all human 
acts reveals a diversity of values1     
extending from the sublimity of heroism 
and of genius to the lowest depths of   

cowardice and to the gloom of sloth4    
,nor can it be considered as the product
 or result of a process2 for it is      
immediate reality1 original and         
immutable4 ,in a world which is ,nature1
 man is an intruder1 a stranger without 
rights1 without even real existence4 ,as
 a being1 he is destined to be          
suppressed2 nay1 he does not even exist4
 ,and his life1 with all his            
aspirations1 his needs1 his claims1 is  
but a fallacious illusion which will    
sooner or later collapse4 ,man cannot   
help succumbing in a world where there  
is no place for him4 ,therefore a more  
or less cloudy gust of pessimism lowers 
over the consciousness that has stopped 
at this conception of reality4 ,leopardi
 is the most eloquent expression of the 
intense misery to which man is condemned
 in such circumstances1 or to which     
rather he condemns himself4 ,he condemns
 himself because he has it in his power 
to conceive reality otherwise4 ,for let 
him ponder seriously and he will succeed

 in convincing himself that the         
naturalistic conception of reality is   
absurd4 ,philosophy has so demonstrated 
this truth1 that he who now strives     
eagerly to attain a moral point of view 
in harmony with established principles  
can no longer repeat that note of       
pessimism1 can no longer assert that the
 world is nature1 or that it is the     
eternal idea from which nature is       
derived and by which it is made         
intelligible4 ,such views are no longer 
tenable4  ,the teacher who1 because of  
his lofty mission1 claims the right of  
forming souls1 of arousing those        
powerful moral energies which alone     
empower man to live as a human being1   
may not1 must not be ignorant of the    
fact that the contention of naturalism1 
which makes of the world an abstract    
reality1 presupposed by the human spirit
 and therefore anterior and indifferent 
to it1 is a belief that has been        
superseded and surpassed by modern      
thought4 ,the teacher too can easily    

grasp this view1 for in gathering all   
the arguments by which1 along different 
lines1 the new conception of reality has
 been attained1 we find that the whole  
matter reduces itself to a simple and   
very easy reflection4 ,very easy in     
itself1 though it may seem difficult to 
the greater part of us1--to the         
superficial thinkers1 to the            
absent-minded1 to those who lack the    
strength necessary to face the great    
responsibility imposed upon us by the   
truth which is derived from this        
reflection4  ,for naturalism reduces    
itself to the affirmation that we think 
nature1 but do not ourselves exist2     
nature alone exists4 ,we do not exist   
and yet we think1 and we think of nature
 as existing4 ,we do not exist and yet  
nature exists1 of whose existence we    
have no other testimony than our        
thoughts4 ,and if thought is a shadow1  
what will reality then be8 ,the dream of
 a shadow1 in the words of the ,greek   
poet4 ,is it possible for us to stop at 

this conclusion8 ,is it possible for an 
inexistent thing to vouch for the       
existence of something which we know    
only from its attestations8 ,such is the
 absurd position we are forced into when
 we assume that ,thought1 in equipoise  
with reality1 remains outside of it and 
leaves it out of its own self4  ,we give
 the name of realism to that manner of  
thinking which makes all reality consist
 in an external existence1 abstract and 
separate from thought1 and makes real   
knowledge consist in the conforming of  
our ideas to external things4 ,by       
idealism on the other hand we mean that 
higher point of view from which we      
discover the impossibility of conceiving
 a reality which is not the reality of  
thought itself4 ,for it reality is not  
the idea as a mere object of the mind1  
which therefore can exist outside of the
 mind1 and must exist there in order    
that the mind may eventually have the   
means of thinking it4 ,reality is this  
very thought itself by which we think   

all things1 and which surely must be    
something if by means of it we want     
somehow to affirm any reality           
whatsoever1 and must be a real activity 
if1 in the act of thinking1 it will not 
entangle itself in the enchanted web of 
dreams1 but will instead give us the    
life of the real world4 ,if it is not   
conceivable that such activity could    
ever go forth from itself and penetrate 
the presumably existent world of matter1
 then it means that it has no need of   
issuing from itself1 in order to come in
 contact with real existence2 it means  
that the reality which we call material 
and assume to be external to thought is 
in some way illusory2 and that the true 
reality is that which is being realised 
by the activity of thought itself4 ,for 
there is no way of thinking any reality 
except by setting thought as the basis  
of it4  ,this is the conception1 or1 if 
you will1 the faith1 not only of modern 
philosophy1 but of consciousness itself 
in general1 of that consciousness which 

was gradually formed and moulded under  
the influence of the deeply moral       
sentiment of life fostered by           
,christianity4 ,for it was ,christ that 
first opposed to nature and to the flesh
 a truer reality1--not the world in     
which man is born1 but that world to    
which he must uplift himself3 that world
 in which he has to live1 not because it
 is anterior to him1 but because he must
 create it by his will3 and this world  
is the kingdom of the spirit4  ,in      
accordance with this conception there   
is1 properly speaking1 no reality3 there
 is a spirit which creates reality1     
which therefore is self-made and not the
 product of nature4 ,the realist speaks 
of external existence1 of a world into  
which man is admitted and to which he   
must adapt himself4 ,but the idealist   
knows only what the spirit does1 what   
man acts4 ,a nature1 ever at work in the
 progress of the spirit1 throbs in the  
soul of man1 who with his intellect and 
his will re-creates it by its restless1 

unceasing motion4 ,it is a world which  
is never created1 because the entire    
past flows and becomes actual in that   
form which is peculiar to it and in     
which it exists1 namely1 the            
present1--history in the incessant      
rhythm of its becoming1 in the          
ever-living act of self-production4  ,on
 what side of the controversy should the
 teacher stand who means to absorb into 
his soul the life of the school8 ,will  
he with the realists believe in a       
reality which must be observed and      
verified8 ,or will he as an idealist    
trust that the only world is the one    
which is to be constructed by him2 that 
in all this task he can rely only on the
 creative activity of the spirit that   
moves within us1 ever unsatisfied with  
what is1 incessantly aspiring for what  
does not yet exist1 for what must come  
to be as being the only thing which     
deserves to exist and to fulfil life8   
,there are then these two ways of       
conceiving culture1 the realistic and   

the idealistic4 ,by the former we are   
led to imagine that man's spirit is     
empty1 and that no nourishment can come 
to it except from the outside world1    
from those external elements which he   
can acquire because they exist prior to 
the activity by which he assimilates    
them4 ,the latter1 admitting only what  
is derived from the developing life of  
the spirit1 can conceive of culture     
solely as an immanent product of this   
very life1 and separable from it only by
 abstraction4  ,it is evident that the  
ordinarily accepted view of educators   
to-day is realistic rather than         
otherwise4 ,the ideal and therefore the 
historical origin of the school itself  
is intimately connected with the        
realistic presupposition4 ,for the      
school begins when man for the first    
time becomes aware of the existence of a
 store of accumulated culture which     
should be protected from dispersion4    
,grammar1 for instance1 exists before   
the notion of teaching it arises4 ,men  

already possess a language when they    
make up their minds to teach it to their
 children4 ,self-taught and inventive   
genius1 by new observation and          
discoveries1 gives rise to new          
disciplines2 and men1 discovering the   
value of such disciplines1 determine to 
institute a school where they may be    
cultivated and handed down to the coming
 generations4 ,in general then1 first   
comes knowledge2 then the school as a   
depository of it4 ,it may be granted    
that the progress of learning is made   
possible or at least accentuated by     
educational institutions2 but the fact  
remains that the school is founded on   
pre-existing knowledge4 ,science1 arts1 
customs must exist before they can be   
taught to others1 and they do exist1 but
 not in the spirit of the one who is to 
acquire them1 who must appropriate them 
as they are in themselves4 ,the ,iliad  
exists3 ,homer sang3 the poems          
attributed to him were collected into an
 epic from which we learn of the        

beliefs1 of the aspirations1 and of the 
memories that were dear to the ancient  
,greeks1 and every cultivated person    
to-day must derive from them his own    
spiritual substance4 ,the teacher shows 
to his pupils how best to read1 how to  
understand that epic which is a treasure
 of the past bequeathed not only to the 
modern ,greeks but to humanity in       
general4 ,for we all profit from this   
inherited spiritual wealth in the same  
manner that every man that comes into   
the world enjoys the light and the heat 
of the sun which he surely did not      
kindle in heaven4  ,the fact that       
culture1 as the subject matter of       
education1 exists before the exercise of
 that spiritual activity which can be   
educated only through its means1 seems  
to the realist a condition without which
 the school cannot arise4 ,only as      
culture develops and spreads does the   
school grow and expand2 and1 in the     
progress of civilisation1 as culture    
becomes specialised1 the school is      

correspondingly differentiated into     
institutions of ever-growing            
specialisation4 ,for the school can but 
follow and reflect the advance of       
science1 of letters1 of art1--of        
humanity in general in all it strives to
 perpetuate4  ,all this evidently can be
 maintained only from the point of view 
of the realist4 ,for him the school is  
concerned not with those that already   
know and therefore have no need of it1  
but for those who are still ignorant4   
,for them it is instituted2 it ministers
 to their needs1 and is therefore       
adjusted in the direction in which it   
believes their spirit should be         
oriented4 ,in the school of physicians1 
there is not medicine but the learning  
of it1 for if the art of healing were   
already mastered as it seems to be in   
the case of the professors1 there would 
be no need of a medical school4 ,there  
is indeed the professor in the lecture  
room2 but he is there only for the      
learners1 and his role has no meaning   

except in relation to their needs4 ,he  
is the possessor of science1 and as such
 he teaches and does not learn4 ,the    
school then is not the possession of    
culture1 but the development of a       
spiritual life aspiring to this         
possession2 and this aspiration is      
possible because of the existence of the
 teacher who has already mastered it1   
who possesses it1 not as his own        
property1 but as social wealth entrusted
 to him for the use of everybody4 ,he   
himself is only an instrument of        
communication4 ,culture antedates him2  
it does so even when he is the author of
 it4 ,for it is not possible for him to 
impart it to others until he has first  
elaborated it himself1 and not until the
 merits of his contributions have been  
in part at least recognised by the      
world4  ,the school to the realist      
presupposes the library4 ,the teacher   
needs books1 plenty of books in order to
 increase his knowledge and thus become 
better acquainted with that world       

through which he has to pilot his       
pupils4 ,in the books1 then1 in the long
 shelves1 culture lives3 in the         
innumerable volumes that no one ever    
hopes to read2 in the shelves which     
contain a world of beautiful things1 and
 so valuable that man1 as ,horace says1 
should spend sleepless nights in order  
to acquire them1 should endure cold and 
heat1 fatigue and sacrifice4 ,for       
humanity1 we are told1 lives in those   
volumes to which the teacher must       
somehow link himself if he intends to   
advance properly1 to live the life which
 our forefathers have generously endowed
 for us1 and to protect our spiritual   
inheritance from dispersion4 ,in this   
atmosphere he must live2 he must plunge 
in that spiritual sea which rolls       
limitless across the centuries4 ,the    
pupil looks out upon this ocean which   
allures every man who is born to the    
life of culture4 ,at first he clings to 
the shore1 dreads the water1 and asks to
 be helped until he has at least become 

familiar with the element4 ,who will    
encourage the beginner to leave the dry 
land and plunge into the deep where he  
would meet sure destruction8 ,he must   
first be trained in some sheltered cove1
 where protected from the violence of   
the tumultuous surf1 from the might of  
the indivisible mass of the ocean1 he   
may gradually learn the ways of the     
deep4  ,the student must accordingly    
begin with a definite book2 he must be  
saved from the haunting power of the    
library1 which draws the youthful mind  
towards every volume1 towards every     
subject4 ,in the multitude of books1 not
 all of them read1 not all of them      
readable1 thought founders1 sees        
nothing1 thinks nothing1 is unable to   
rest in any of the things which he      
imagines exist in the vast library      
shelves4 ,he must choose4 ,let him      
select1 say1 ,dante4 ,he reads the      
,divine ,comedy1 the poem written by    
that great ,italian who has been dead   
these six centuries and now rests at    

,ravenna1 no longer mindful of his      
,francesca1 of his magnanimous          
,farinata1 of his kindly master         
,brunetto1 or of ,beatrice4 ,dante      
created his miraculous world1 he        
breathed life into his characters1 wrote
 the last line of his last canto1 smiled
 in rapture at the divine beauty of his 
creation1 now complete and perfect1 and 
died4 ,his manuscript was copied        
thousands of times2 and after the       
discovery of printing1 millions of      
copies were made4 ,in one of these we   
now are able to find it1 this divine    
poem1 just as it was written1--for we   
want it exactly as it flowed from his   
pen without the change of a letter1     
without the omission of a comma4 ,and   
this volume is an example of what exists
 in a library1--of the culture that     
teachers strive to find there1 and      
thence communicate to their             
pupils6--something that belongs to the  
world1 something which is a part of     
reality1 which men therefore can grasp1 

if they want to1 just as they can get to
 know the stars and the plants1 and all 
things of nature4 ,the ,divine ,comedy  
can be realistically conceived in       
respect to us who open the volume and   
prepare to read it1 for the reason that 
it already exists and arouses our       
desire4 ,if we had left it on the shelf 
where it was resting1 it would have had 
exactly the same existence4 ,what we    
find in the volume1 as we read of that  
land of the dead which is much more     
living than all the living beings who   
surround us in our daily life1 would all
 of it have been in that book1 would    
have continued to be there1 even if we  
had never opened it4  ,but is it really 
so8 ,if we reflect a while we shall see 
that this is not the case4 ,the book    
contains exactly what we find there1    
what we are capable of finding there1   
nothing more1 nothing less4 ,different  
persons discover in it different things1
 but it is nevertheless obvious that for
 each individual the book contains only 

what he finds in it2 and in order to be 
able to say that the book contains more 
than what a given reader discovers in   
it1 it is necessary that some other     
person should find that something more2 
and that the text contains this         
additional beauty is only true for him  
who discovered it and for those who seek
 it after him4  ,dante waited for       
centuries for ,de ,sanctis#a to appear  
and to disclose the meaning of          
,francesca's words4 ,therefore it has   
been said that to understand ,dante is a
 sign of greatness4 ,abstractly         
considered1 of course1 the poet is what 
he is1 but only in the abstract4 ,in the
 concrete1 ,dante is the author whom we 
admire and appreciate proportionately to
 our power4 ,for as we read the poem in 
accordance with our training1 and the   
development of our personality1 ,dante  
is grafted on a trunk which did not     
exist before us1 which1 on the contrary1
 is our very life2 and before this life 
is realised1 evidently none of those    

things can be found there which actually
 come into being in the process of its  
realisation4 ,so that if we had not read
 the book1 far from its being true that 
everything we found in it would still   
continue to be there1 nothing would     
remain of what we find in it1 absolutely
 nothing4  ,we have said nothing of what
 we find4 ,but if we consider the matter
 we shall see that what we find is      
everything2 everything for me2          
everything for everybody4 ,only that can
 come out of a book which the reader    
with his soul and with his labours is   
capable of getting out of it2 and in    
consequence of these labours and in     
virtue of his soul he is able to say    
that a certain book has a content4 ,in  
fact1 to return to our example1 the     
,divine ,comedy which we know1 the only 
one which we can know1 the only one     
which exists1 is the one which lives in 
our souls1 and which is a function of   
the criticism that interprets it1       
understands it1 and appreciates it4     

,that ,divine ,comedy therefore did not 
close the circle of its life on the day 
when ,dante wrote the last line of the  
last canto2 it continued to live1 still 
continues to exist in the history1 in   
the life of the spirit4 ,its life never 
draws to a close4 ,the poem is never    
finished4  ,this is true of the poem of 
,dante2 it is true of everything which  
we conceive of as inherited from our    
great predecessors1 from those who built
 up the patrimony of human culture4     
,culture then is not before us1 a       
treasure ready to be excavated from the 
depths of the earth1 awaiting to be     
revealed to us4 ,culture is what we     
ourselves are making2 it is the life of 
our spirit4  ,abstract culture1 on the  
contrary1 is merely as realistically    
conceived4 ,it slumbers in the          
libraries1 in the sepulchres of those   
who lived1 who passed away and created  
it once for all4 ,it belongs to the     
past1 to the things that have died4 ,but
 the past1 if we really mean to grasp   

it1 if we want to see it close by as    
something that is and not merely as an  
abstraction1 the past itself1 becoming  
the present1 made into that actuality   
which we call living memory1 is         
history1--history constructed by us1    
meditated by us1 re-created by us1 in   
accordance with our abilities2--and with
 our powers of evocation we awaken the  
past from its slumber and breathe into  
it the life of the spiritual interests1 
of the ideas1 of the sentiments that    
are1 after all1 the living substance in 
which the past really survives1 in which
 it is real4 ,in the same way the only  
culture that can be bestowed upon the   
spirit1 the only one that admits of     
being concretely taught and learned1 the
 only one that can be sought1 because it
 is the only one that really exists1 is 
idealistic culture4 ,it is not in books1
 nor in the brains of others4 ,it exists
 in our own souls as it is gradually    
being formed there4 ,it cannot therefore
 be an antecedent to the activity of the

 spirit1 since it consists in this very 
activity4  ,this must be the faith of   
all those who cannot bring themselves to
 believe that they are strangers in this
 world1 and that they have come here to 
exercise a function which is not their  
own4 ,for the world in general1 and the 
sphere of culture in particular1 is not 
completed when we arrive upon the scene4
 ,this is why human life has a value1   
why education is a mission4             
,,footnotes3    #a ,francesco de        
,sanctis1 a great ,italian critic1 whose
 ,history of       ,italian ,literature 
is still unfortunately inaccessible in  
,english4     ,,chapter ,v  ,,the       
,,spirituality ,,of ,,culture   ,the    
idealistic conception of culture enables
 us to get an initial understanding of  
the spirituality of the school4 ,this   
spirituality is surely felt by all those
 who live within the class-room2 but it 
should be understood in the most        
rigorous and absolute manner by those   
who wish to have a deeper consciousness 

of the extreme delicacy of the tasks    
performed and the words uttered by those
 who enter it with the sincere heart and
 the pure soul of the teacher4  ,the    
school is obviously not the hall which  
contains the teacher and the pupils4    
,these may have a hall1 may even have   
the teacher1 without yet possessing the 
school1 which consists in the           
communication of culture4 ,this culture1
 we have seen1 is not really            
pre-existent to the act which           
communicates it2 it is not to be found  
in books1 not to be looked for in an    
ideal transcendent world1 not to be     
demanded of the teacher4 ,it is only in 
the spirit of the person who is in the  
act of learning4 ,it is there in the    
manner in which it is possible for it to
 be there1 not comparable to any        
presumed form of pre-existing culture4  
,the school gains its existence entirely
 in the soul of the learner4  ,knowledge
 is not to be found beyond the bounds of
 the human spirit4 ,i insist on this    

conception because ,i am well aware that
 the minds of many rebel against this   
conclusion1 no matter how irrefutable   
its grounds may be4 ,for they ask3 what 
then is the learning which we ascribe to
 the master minds of humanity1 now      
indeed dead but still active in their   
works8 ,they also ask how we are able to
 think and account for that learning    
which we feel we are not originating1   
which we know we are re-acquiring for   
ourselves after it has many times been  
in the domain of others4  ,can we really
 consider as non-existent what we as yet
 do not know1 may perhaps never know1   
but which is none the less capable of   
being known8 ,when we are filled with   
reverence for the glory of men whose    
learning surpasses our powers1 are we   
the victims of an illusion8 ,are we     
prevailed upon by ignorance and lack of 
reflection8 ,and how then can we justify
 the cult which every civilised man     
consecrates to the mighty               
spirits--philosophers1 poets1 artists1  

and heroes--who added so much to the    
moral fund of humanity8 ,was there not a
 ,dante six centuries back1 who composed
 a lofty poem1 which was admired by     
everybody1 at a time when we1 who now   
read it and bring it to life in our     
souls1 were still so far removed from   
the entrance of this life8  ,the answer 
to all these questions is very simple1  
so simple that we must be careful lest  
we miss its significance4 ,all this lore
 of the past which we strive to preserve
 surely does exist2 it does contain all 
the names which are sacred to the memory
 of humankind4 ,the ,divine ,comedy has 
been written and no longer awaits its   
,dante4 ,but this lore of the past1 as  
we for brevity's sake call it1 is       
nothing else than what we think as such4
 ,history1 as it unfolds itself from    
century to century1 is never compressed 
within a past which because of its      
completeness might be made to exist     
beyond the present and in opposition to 
it2 but it exists in a past which is in 

the present as a plant that grows or an 
animal that lives1 never adding anything
 new to the old1 always transforming the
 old into the new2 at no time1          
therefore1 having anything but what is  
new1 never being anything else but the  
new4 ,in history1 thus comprehended1 we 
to-day are but one person with the men  
who thought before us1 with the poets1  
the philosophers1 the spiritual creators
 of the past4 ,with them we are a person
 that grows and develops1 ever          
acquiring1 never losing2 a single being 
that apprehends and recalls and         
constantly makes all his past bear fruit
 in the present4 ,our childhood has not 
completely passed away into nothing3 it 
keeps returning to the ever-busy        
phantasy that tenderly fondles it1      
cherishes it1 idealises it into poetry4 
,if we consider this childhood as       
something that once was1 that existed in
 utter ignorance of this poetry that was
 yet to be written1 that could not then 
be written1 surely this infancy is quite

 dead2 we should rather say that it     
never existed4 ,but it does live as the 
childhood which is a recollection1 which
 arouses feelings1 and such feelings as 
are at a given moment the actual        
sentiment of the adult4 ,once in the    
years long gone by a kindly word reached
 the depths of my soul4 ,we all have    
heard in the years long gone by some    
such kindly words that in the mystery of
 our childish mind appeared as a        
revelation4 ,such words as fall from the
 lips of a mother and inspired by her   
tender affection have the secret power  
of appeasing us in a moment of rage1 and
 of making us feel the gentle sweetness 
of that goodness which is made of love4 
,we may since have forgotten that word1 
and the circumstances in which it was   
uttered3 but it is none the less true   
that on that day our soul was modified  
and became endowed almost with a sixth  
sense4 ,this sense has enabled us       
subsequently to perceive so many things 
that are beautiful in life1 and it in   

turn grew stronger because of frequent  
use and increasing exercise1 until it   
finally became the most potent organ of 
our moral personality4 ,here too our    
development has been a constant         
acquiring with no losing3 a preserving  
of the past by which it was converted   
into the present1 and therefore annulled
 as past pure and simple4  ,such is the 
moral development of man1 who believes  
himself an individual1 but is in truth  
humanity considered momentarily in one  
of its fragments4 ,such is history3 the 
unfolding of the spirit in its          
universality4 ,it is not therefore      
difficult to determine what is the past 
culture in which we desire to graft our 
present one4 ,it is our own actual      
culture in so far as it is not the      
patrimony1 not the spiritual life of the
 isolated individual1 of a particular   
being2 but is instead the life of the   
spirit in its universality1 the         
development of the human personality    
taken in its effective1 historical      

concreteness4  ,the past with its entire
 content is a projection of our actual  
consciousness1 i4e41 of the present4    
,but we must not give this proposition a
 sceptical sense4 ,as ,i have already   
pointed out1 the present neither in the 
particular individual nor in the        
universal history of the spirit1 is     
sundered from the past by that abyss    
which is ordinarily seen from a         
materialistic point of view4 ,the past  
is one and the same thing with the      
present4 ,the past is the present in its
 inmost substance2 and the present is   
the past that has matured4 ,the grain of
 wheat which was buried in the furrow is
 now no longer to be found under the    
glebe4 ,it lives1 multiplied in the ear 
of wheat4 ,the seed as such was         
decomposed and destroyed in the soil2 it
 is there no more1 it sprung thence as a
 blade of grass1 it grew1 was           
transformed1 still is1 still lasts1 and 
will continue to endure in other forms4 
,where is it now8 ,why1 in whatever form

 it may now have assumed4 ,it is the    
past in the present1 as the present4    
,so then1 what is ,dante the poet who   
towers over the centuries1 the object of
 our admiration1 the master of all who  
speak and use the ,italian language8 ,he
 is the lordly poet of the fourteenth   
century1 not because he then lived his  
own individual life1 but because he     
survives to-day in us who think him1 who
 appreciate him even when we are not    
fully acquainted with him4 ,in this     
sense he lives in us1 as the seed does  
in the ear of corn4  ,i have just hinted
 at the possibility of appreciating     
something without fully understanding   
it4 ,i wanted to make clear how         
impossible it is to separate1 with a    
clean cut1 knowledge from ignorance4 ,it
 is far from true that before taking up 
a certain science we know absolutely    
nothing about it1--that the boy who goes
 to school for the first time is        
completely devoid of all knowledge1 or  
that he who is in quest of a book which 

he has never read can in no way whatever
 speak about it4  ,for fair renown      
begets love for the unseen person1 as   
the poet reminds us and as experience   
often teaches4 ,frequently we know of   
the existence and the beauty of a woman 
whom we have never seen1 but who is not 
therefore completely unknown to us4 ,so 
also many of us desired to go to school 
long before we had seen the inside of a 
classroom4 ,what is dearer than the joy 
foretasted at the first imaginings of   
school8 ,we look forward to that new    
life upon which we are about to enter in
 the company of our bigger brothers and 
of our older playmates4 ,they have told 
us so many things about it4 ,from their 
accounts and from the fond memories of  
our parents we already know the school  
before we approach it1 and its pleasing 
aspects invite us into the classroom4   
,for the same reason we search for books
 we have never seen1 and we are drawn   
towards new studies and pursuits4 ,there
 is no leaping from ignorance to        

knowledge1 as from pitch darkness to    
noon-tide brilliancy4 ,the transition is
 imperceptible1 as when the dim morning 
twilight merges into the first          
glimmerings of dawn1 which in turn fade 
away under the dazzling flashes of      
sunrise4 ,and even from the midst of    
darkness we yearn for a world which     
though unseen is somehow present to our 
consciousness1 already illumined by our 
thought1 warmed by our sentiments4 ,or1 
in other words1 the culture which we do 
not yet possess1 and which we expect to 
get at school1 is already implanted in  
our mind1 where it will sprout and grow 
and bear fruit1 fused and confused with 
the life of our spirit4  ,having now    
reached this point1 can we define       
culture8 ,i am inclined for a moment to 
assume the role of ,don ,ferrante in    
,manzoni's novel4#b ,by pedantic        
ratiocinations he proved that the plague
 could not be a contagious disease3 for1
 he said1 in nature everything is either
 a substance or an accident4 ,contagion1

 he then went on to prove1 could neither
 be the one nor the other2 therefore the
 plague was but an influx of the stars1 
and there could be no use in taking     
precautions2 and having proved this1 he 
fell a victim to the epidemic1 and died 
cursing the stars like an operatic hero4
 ,let us follow for a moment in the     
footsteps of this pedant1 whose method1 
ridiculous as it may seem1 has had      
nevertheless a glorious history1 and one
 which ,manzoni himself admired4  ,i    
say3 ,we can think only and we do think 
only two kinds of reality1--person or   
thing4 ,every one of us is naturally    
drawn to this distinction2 and when we  
have formulated it1 we feel more or less
 vaguely1 more or less clearly1 that    
every possibility is comprised within   
these two terms1 that outside of them it
 is impossible to think any reality     
whatsoever4 ,the reason is this3 if we  
think1 if we act1 if we live1 we        
inevitably place ourselves in a         
situation such that we on one side are  

as centre1 as beginning1 or as subject  
of our activity2 and on the other side  
are the objects toward which our        
activity is directed and by which it is 
terminated4 ,we therefore as subject of 
the entire surrounding world2 and this  
world as the end of our thoughts and of 
our scientific inquiries1 end of our    
desires and of our practical activity2  
the world which is represented in our   
consciousness1 and which we strive to   
dominate by our labours1 and our reason4
 ,can there be anything else beside us  
and what we think8  ,the world which we 
think and which we oppose to ourselves  
seems at first to contain different     
kinds of objects4 ,there seem to be both
 persons and things2 simple objects of  
cognition which we ordinarily call      
things which can never become subjects2 
and persons who at first are represented
 to us as objects of our knowing1 of our
 love1 and of our hatred1 as ends of our
 activity2 but who under a closer       
scrutiny are transformed before our eyes

 into knowing and acting subjects1 who1 
in other words1 become just exactly what
 we are4 ,but when we really get to know
 these beings that surround us as       
subjects on an equal basis1 then we     
cease to consider them as objects of our
 cognition1 and as solely endowed with  
that material objectivity which at first
 put them in the same category with the 
inanimate things1 with plants and       
animals4 ,we then find them close to us1
 very close3 fused with our own         
spiritual substance4 ,we feel them to be
 our fellow men1 our kinsmen1 with whom 
we constitute that person of whose      
existence ,i am aware every time ,i say 
,we3 the person we must take into       
account whenever we wish to affirm our  
personality in a concrete manner1 the   
only person1 the one subject1 the true  
subject of human knowledge and of human 
activity4 ,the subject which knows and  
acts as a universal in the interests of 
all men1 or rather in behalf of the one 
man in whom all single individuals are  

united and with whom they are all       
identified4  ,then if we give a rigorous
 and exact meaning to the expressions1  
,we and what is before us1 ,we and the  
objects1 ,we and the ,world1 we have a  
correct classification of all thinkable 
reality differentiated into persons and 
things1 but with the understanding that 
all persons are in reality one ,person4 
,one person1 and things innumerable6 ,as
 we look about us1 we find the horizon  
peopled with thousands and millions and 
infinite quantities of objects1 which   
may one by one attract our attention1   
and may be gathered up in the vast1     
unbounded picture surveyed by the eye as
 it moves on from thing to thing1       
incessantly1 without ever reaching the  
last4 ,the world which we first discover
 is the world of matter1 of things which
 strike our senses4 ,this world rushes  
impetuously into our mind at the        
beginning of our natural experience4    
,and these material objects are many not
 only de facto but also de jure4 ,they  

must be1 they cannot but be many if we  
are to consider them as material things4
 ,it is their peculiar nature1 it is    
their very essence to be an indefinite  
multitude4  ,a material thing means a   
thing occupying space4 ,and space is    
made up of elements1 each one of which  
excludes all the others and is therefore
 conceived independently of the others1 
must so be conceived4 ,for it is the    
very nature of space to be divisible4   
,when it is narrowed down to a point and
 cannot be further subdivided1 then it  
ceases to be space4 ,its divisibility   
signifies that space is nothing more    
than the sum of its parts2 that it      
contains nothing in addition to these   
parts2 that it therefore resolves itself
 into them without at all losing its    
being and without any of the parts being
 deprived of anything which was theirs  
in the whole4 ,in fact1 if anything were
 lost of the entire whole1 this loss    
could not but be felt in each single    
part4 ,a book1 considered as a material 

thing1 is composed of a certain number  
of printed leaves stitched together2 and
 if the leaves fall apart1 they may be  
brought together again so that they will
 compose the same book as before4 ,an   
iron rod weighs the same before and     
after it has been broken up into parts4 
,things cease to be exclusively and     
solely material when1 though they may be
 divisible in a certain respect1 they   
are nevertheless indivisible in another 
respect4 ,plants1 animals1 all living   
organisms1 considered simply as objects 
occupying space and as therefore having 
certain dimensions1 admit surely of     
being separated into parts4 ,trees are  
cut into logs1 sawed into boards2       
animals are slaughtered and quartered4  
,but considered from the point of view  
of its peculiar quality1 of the         
essential property which distinguishes  
it from all other bodies1 an organism is
 not divisible4 ,if we do divide it1    
each component part ceases to be what it
 previously was when conjoined with the 

others4 ,such a part cannot be          
preserved2 it withers1 it decays1 and is
 dispersed1 so that the whole can never 
be reconstituted4 ,the various parts of 
an organism1 considered as such1 are    
inseparable1 because each of them is and
 maintains itself on the strength of its
 relations to the others1 forming with  
them a true and essential unity4 ,if we 
however try to find out what this unity 
is by which all the limbs are           
indissolubly held together1 we shall    
discover nothing which can be observed  
and represented spatially1 nothing      
endowed with dimensions1 however small1 
after the manner of the several limbs   
which this unity fuses within itself and
 vivifies4  ,if unity which is the      
life-giving principle of every organism 
could be spatially represented1 or in   
other words1 if it were something       
material1 it would be one of those very 
limbs that have to be unified1 and could
 not then be the unifying principle     
itself4 ,hence the vanity of the efforts

 on the part of materialistic           
physiologists who obstinately strive to 
explain life by observing the parts     
which compose the organic mass1 by      
studying the concurrence of their       
processes1 their chemical relationships1
 and their mechanism4 ,a material being1
 organically constituted1 is something  
more than a material thing pure and     
simple3 it announces already a higher   
principle2 it presages the spirit4  ,but
 the things that we all agree to regard 
as spiritual defy absolutely every      
attempt at division4 ,a poem may be     
considered in a certain way as material1
 and may accordingly be divided into    
various parts1--stanzas1 lines1 words4  
,but it is clear that such a separation 
cannot have the value which we assign to
 the divisions of things material4 ,for 
in their case every part can stand by   
itself1 and is in no way deprived of its
 characteristic being2 whereas every    
part of a poem1 stanza1 verse1 word1    
calls out and responds to every other   

part2 and if isolated from them1 loses  
the meaning which it had in the context2
 or rather it loses every meaning1 and  
consequently perishes4 ,it is true that 
by conjectures we interpret even very   
small fragments of ancient poems4 ,but  
we do so only in so far as we claim the 
possibility of restoring approximately  
the entire poem in which the given      
fragment may live1 by which it may be   
restored to life4 ,likewise all the     
words lined up in dictionaries are as so
 many bleeding limbs of living          
discourses1 to which they must somehow  
or other be ideally reconnected1 if we  
are to understand what they really were 
and what functions they had4            
,multiplicity of parts in things of the 
spirit is only apparent3 it must be     
reduced to indivisible unity1 from which
 every element of the multiplicity      
derives its origin1 its substance1 and  
its life1 so that we may give to it a   
real meaning and a foundation4  ,nor is 
this the only unity possessed by the    

things that are assumed to be spiritual4
 ,we have already considered the unity  
whereby1 for example1 the words of a    
poem cannot be separated from the poem  
itself1 in which each of them acquires a
 particular accent1 a particular        
expression1 and therefore a particular  
individuality4 ,we shall now consider   
another unity4 ,he who really perceives 
a poem is not confronted by an          
observable thing1 compact if you will1  
unseverable and united1 but none the    
less independent of human personality4  
,poetry is only understood when in the  
flowing unity of its verses and in the  
continuous rhythm of its words we grasp 
a sentiment in its development1 a soul's
 throb in a moment of its life1 a man1 a
 personality4 ,the poetry of ,dante is  
very different from that of ,petrarch1  
because each is the expression of a     
powerfully distinct personality4 ,any   
composition of these poets is understood
 and enjoyed only when we feel in it the
 personal accent which distinguishes one

 poetical personality from the other4 ,a
 poet without individuality has no      
significance whatsoever1 and therefore  
no existence as a poet4 ,but the real   
artist leaves his imprint more or less  
markedly in all his productions1 so that
 in every given instance1 over and      
beyond the variety of the subject       
matter1 we feel the living soul of the  
poet4 ,a poem then is the poet2 it is a 
person and not a thing4 ,and the same   
can be said1 as we can easily see1 of   
all things that are commonly called     
spiritual4  ,but in addition to things  
material1 it seems that there are       
immaterial ones which do not pertain as 
one's own to any particular person4 ,the
 ideas of which we had occasion to speak
 before1--immaterial entities1 not      
perceptible by the senses1 but thinkable
 by the intellect1 and which severally  
correspond to all sorts or species of   
the various material things1--were once 
conceived as things by philosophers1 and
 they are still so conceived to-day by  

the majority of men4 ,it is not         
requisite that one actually think them2 
it is sufficient that they be in        
themselves thinkable4 ,as a matter of   
fact1 they may or may not be thought1 no
 differently therefore from any of the  
material objects which are not created  
by our senses1 but must already exist in
 order that our senses may perceive     
them4 ,these ideas are many1 in a manner
 corresponding to the material objects2 
and they are all different4 ,they       
mirror1 so to speak1 the multiplicity of
 material things in whose semblance and 
likeness they were devised4 ,there are  
horses in nature1 and there is the idea 
of the horse by which we are able to    
recognise all the animals that belong to
 that species4 ,there are dogs1 and     
there is the dog which we rediscover in 
every one of them4 ,and there are       
flowers and the flower2 and pinks1      
roses1 and lilies1 as well as the pink1 
the rose1 and the lily2 and likewise    
iron1 copper1 silver1 gold1 lime1 water1

 and so on1 to infinity4 ,it is         
impossible to set a limit to ideas1     
because it is not possible ever to stop 
dividing1 distinguishing1 subdividing   
that nature which unfolds itself        
throughout space4  ,this boundless      
multitude of ideas1 through which our   
mind can rove1 surely has no spatial    
extension4 ,but because of the necessity
 of conceiving any multitude as existing
 in some kind of space1 it was thought  
proper to posit an ideal space in       
addition to the physical one4 ,in other 
words1 metaphorical dimensions were     
added to dimensions properly so called4 
,but whether spatially or not1 we strive
 to conceive ideas as many1 each one of 
them existing by itself1 and susceptible
 of being thought independently of the  
others4 ,in reality however we never    
succeed in thinking them except as bound
 together and forming a system1 in such 
a way that no single one of them can be 
thought except by thinking the others   
with it4 ,take man as an instance3 each 

one of us has intuitively the idea of   
man1 but this idea is not possessed like
 a word of which we may not even know   
the meaning4 ,in thinking the idea we   
must think something which is its       
content4 ,if we know what man is1 we    
must be able to attribute a content to  
the idea of man4 ,we may say1 as the    
ancients did1 that man is the laughing  
animal1 or the speaking animal1 because 
he is the only animal capable of        
expressing the emotions of his soul by  
laughter or by the inflection of his    
voice2 because1 in other words1 he is   
the only animal who is conscious of what
 goes on within him4 ,or perhaps we     
might say that man is the reasoning     
animal1 and we think this idea when we  
have thought the idea of animal and the 
idea of reason4 ,but can the idea of    
animal be thought by itself alone8 ,it1 
as well as the idea of reason1 must have
 a content2 that is1 each must be       
connected with other ideas1 without     
which it would be deprived of all       

consistency4  ,and so the mind that     
begins to think one single idea is      
compelled1 almost dragged1 to pass on to
 another1 then to a third1 and so on    
indefinitely4 ,it finds itself in the   
condition of the man who tried to grasp 
a single link of a chain1 just one1 and 
found that he could not have it except  
on condition of taking the whole chain4 
,so it is with ideas4 ,we may not be    
capable of encompassing all of them in  
one single thought2 but whenever we try 
to fix any one of them in our mind1 it  
presents itself to us as a knot in which
 many other ideas are interlaced1       
twisted1 and entangled4 ,they form an   
infinite chain1 in which it is not      
possible to think the first link or the 
last one1 because the beginning is      
welded to the end1 and we turn and turn 
and never reach the last4 ,is not this  
the nature of the ideas as we see them1 
as they constitute the field from which 
we must harvest all our possible        
thoughts8  ,ideas are not1 therefore1 a 

true multiplicity1 because they are not 
things1 either material or ideal1 and   
because they do not occupy any space    
whatsoever4 ,our imagination may present
 them to us as so many lights of an     
ideal sky2 but our intelligence warns us
 that they cannot be separated one from 
the other and placed side by side4 ,as  
,i have already said3 when we think one1
 we think them all4 ,or in any event we 
should1 if we had mastered all that     
there is to be known4 ,so that to our   
thought ideas appear as constituting one
 unique whole1 a unity1 that something  
which we call science1 truth1 knowledge4
 ,they are not a multitude1 for the     
simple reason that in multiplicity they 
would be unthinkable4 ,their connection 
with and participation in an absolute   
unity come from the fact that they are  
the object of thought1 and are therefore
 submitted to its activity1 whereby they
 are ordered1 correlated1 organised1    
unified4 ,in order that we may say that 
one idea contains another1 or many      

others1 we must analyse this first idea 
and define it4 ,this first idea must be 
distinguished from the others1 and they 
likewise among themselves4 ,it is not   
therefore sufficient to say that there  
are these ideas1 motionless1 inert1     
lifeless1 as they necessarily would be  
if they existed per se1 as objects of   
mere possible contemplation4 ,there must
 also be some one to analyse them1      
define them1 and distinguish them4 ,it  
is not enough to have the material of   
thought1 we need thought also to mould  
and fashion this material1 turn it      
effectively into thought stuff1 reduce  
it to something susceptible of being    
thought4 ,ideas as things would in no   
way be related among themselves4 ,but   
they do have that relationship which is 
generated by thought as it thinks them4 
,thought generates this relationship not
 as a fixed one1 as would be the case if
 it were inherent in the things         
themselves2 but as a relationship which 
is being formed by degrees1 and which is

 continuously changing and developing4  
,no ideal1 abiding science1 existing    
only as the object of a vague phantasy1 
can therefore result from this          
relationship4 ,it constitutes instead a 
science which is ever re-formed and is  
never formed2 it gives to the ideas an  
ever renewed aspect3 it matures them1   
elaborates them1 perfects them1 by      
concentrating on each one of them the   
constantly increasing light of the      
system into which it closely binds them4
  ,ideas1 then1 as we really think them1
 are not a minutely fractioned and      
scattered multiplicity4 ,nor are they a 
mass of concurrent elements4 ,they are  
,thought as it becomes articulate1 and  
gains distinctness by these many ,limbs1
 by these ideas1 which exist1 all of    
them1 in the process by which they are  
gradually formed1 developed1 and        
complicated1 and arrayed in an order    
which is constantly being renewed and   
which is never definitely perfected4    
,there are not then many ideas2 there is

 one ,idea1 which is ,thought4 ,only in 
a metaphorical sense can we consider    
them as things2 and1 properly speaking1 
they are the human person itself as     
actualised in thought1 which is busily  
occupied in the construction of         
knowledge4 ,they are an indivisible     
unity1 in which each idea is found      
collaborating with every other one so as
 to answer the questions which ,thought 
constantly propounds4 ,they are the     
human person1 not the persons2 for we   
have already concluded that only in an  
abstract sense is it possible to speak  
of many persons2 concretely there is but
 one universal ,person which is not     
multiplicable4  ,there are not1 then1   
going back to our original division1    
persons and things1 material and        
spiritual4 ,at the most there is one    
person1 ,man1 and there are the material
 things which constitute this nature1 as
 it occupies space1 and in which we too 
believe we have a place1 in as much as  
we consider ourselves beings of nature4 

,nothing beyond this can be conceived3  
on one side a sole immultiplicable      
reality1 on the other a manifold        
reality1 indefinitely divisible4  ,here 
we might perhaps stop considering the   
special interest that called forth this 
inquiry4 ,for no one could possibly     
suppose for a moment that culture could 
be placed in the midst of material      
things rather than in the spiritual     
reality which is a person4 ,however1    
since the intimate nature of this       
spiritual reality which we call culture 
is not yet clearly revealed1 we must    
continue our investigations1 and give   
more attention to this division which   
for a moment we thought might be final4 
,i mean the division of the world into  
persons and things3 the equipoise of    
spirit and matter4  ,do we really think 
this matter as we say we do1 and which  
we believe we are justified in opposing 
to the spirit1 in as much as the spirit 
is unity or universality1 and matter1 in
 its entirety1 in every one of its      

parts1 in everything1 is an indefinite  
multiplicity8 ,matter can in truth be   
thought only on condition that it be    
possible to think multiplicity1 that    
pure multiplicity which is the          
characteristic quality of matter4  ,what
 then is the meaning of multiplicity8   
,in absolute terms we call multiple that
 which consists of elements each one of 
which is quite independent of all the   
others1 and absolutely devoid of any and
 every relationship with them4 ,the     
materialist conceived the world as an   
aggregate of atoms1 separated one from  
the other and having no reciprocal      
relevance of any sort whatsoever4 ,in   
the world of pure quantity1 which is the
 same as absolute multiplicity1         
mathematical science claims the         
knowledge of units indifferent to their 
nexus1 and therefore susceptible of     
being united and separated1 of being    
summed up and divided1 without any      
alteration taking place within the      
individual unit itself4 ,numerical units

 are therefore pre-eminently irrelative4
  ,but the concept itself of the        
multiplicity of irrelative elements is  
an absurd one4 ,in order that we may    
conceive many unrelated elements we     
must1 to start with1 be able to conceive
 a couple of such elements4 ,let us take
 ,a and ,b1 absolutely unrelated1 and   
such that the concept of one will       
contain nothing of the other's1 and will
 therefore exclude it from itself4 ,if  
,a did not so exclude ,b1 something of  
,b would be found in ,a1 and we could no
 longer speak of the two elements as    
irrelative4 ,irrelativity means         
reciprocal exclusion1 a capacity by     
which each term is opposed to the other1
 and prevents the other from having     
anything in common with it4 ,without    
this reciprocal action whereby each term
 turns to the other and excludes it from
 itself1 establishing itself as a       
negation of it1 there would be no       
irrelativity4 ,but this action by which 
each term is referred to the other so as

 to deny it1 what is it but a           
relationship8 ,every effort therefore   
tending to break up reality into parts  
completely repugnant amongst themselves1
 mutually excluding one another1 and    
therefore reciprocally indifferent1     
results in the very opposite of what was
 intended1 viz43 the relative in place  
of the irrelative1 unity instead of     
multiplicity4  ,neither duality nor     
multiplicity is conceivable without that
 unity whereby the two engender that    
whole in which the two units are        
connected1 even though they mutually    
exclude one another3 without that unity 
which fuses and unifies every           
multiplicity determined in a number1    
which correlates among themselves the   
units which constitute the number4 ,we  
could strip multiplicity of all unity   
only by not thinking it4 ,but then in   
the gloom of what is not thought1       
multiplicity truly enough would not be  
unity1 but it would not even be         
multiplicity1 because it could not be   

anything at all4 ,or1 if we prefer1 it  
would be absolutely unthinkable4        
,thought then establishes relationships 
among the units of the multiple1 and    
thus constitutes them as the units of   
the manifold1 and as forming            
multiplicity4 ,it adds and divides1     
composes and decomposes1 and variously  
distributes1 materialising and          
dematerialising1 so to speak1 the       
reality which it thinks4 ,for it        
materialises the reality when it        
conceives it as manifold3 but it can    
conceive it as such only by unifying it1
 and therefore by dematerialising it and
 reabsorbing it into its own spiritual  
substance4  ,matter is a manifold       
reality1 without unity4 ,what it is we  
already have seen3 a material reality1  
and as such divisible into parts1 placed
 in the world in the midst of a         
congeneric multitude4 ,now1 since pure  
multiplicity is not conceivable except  
on condition that we abstract from that 
relationship to which the reciprocal    

exclusiveness of manifold elements is   
reduced1 it is evident that matter and  
things are abstract entities4 ,thought  
stops to consider them1 and regards them
 as existent1 only because it withdraws 
the attention from that part of itself  
which it contributes to the making of   
the object represented4 ,thought        
therefore prescinds from that unity     
which material things could not by      
themselves contain1 but from which it is
 impossible to prescind absolutely      
unless we wish to be reduced to an      
absurd conception4  ,objective things   
then1 the world of matter itself which  
we are wont to oppose in equipoise to   
the person1 are in truth not separable  
from it4 ,for matter has its foundation 
in thought by which the personality is  
actualised4 ,things are what we in our  
own thought counterpose to ourselves who
 think them4 ,outside of our thought    
they are absolutely nothing4 ,their     
material hardness itself has to be lent 
to them by us1 for it ultimately is to  

be resolved into multiplicity1 and      
multiplicity implies spiritual unity4   
,this then is the world3 an infinity of 
things all of which have however their  
root in us4 ,not in us as we are        
represented ordinarily in the midst of  
things2 not in the empirical and        
abstract us which feeds the vanity of   
the empty-headed egoist1 of him who has 
not the faintest notion of what he      
really is1 who can therefore think of   
himself only as enclosed within the     
tight husk of his own flesh and of his  
particular passions4 ,no6 they are      
rooted in that true us by which we      
think1 and agree in one same thought1   
while thinking all things1 including    
ourselves as opposed to things4 ,and he 
who fails to reach this profound source1
 this root from which all reality       
receives its vitalising sap1 may indeed 
get a blurred glimpse of a blind1 inert1
 material mechanism1 but he cannot even 
fix and determine this mechanism4 ,he   
cannot upon further reflection stop at  

the conviction that it is in truth1 as  
it appears in semblance1 something real1
 for it reveals itself to him as so     
absurd as to become unthinkable4 ,the   
world then is in us2 it is our world1   
and it lives in the spirit4 ,it lives   
the very life of that person which we   
strive to realise1 sometimes satisfied  
with our work1 but oftener unsatisfied  
and restless4 ,and there is the life of 
culture4  ,it is not possible to        
conceive knowledge otherwise than as    
living knowledge1 and as the extolment  
of our own personality4 ,this is our    
conclusion4 ,we shall1 later on1 derive 
from it two corollaries that are very   
important for teachers1 in as much as   
they bear directly on the problems of   
education4   ,,footnotes3    #b ,i      
,promessi ,sposi 7,the ,betrothed74     
,,chapter ,,vi  ,,the ,,attributes ,,of 
,,culture   ,from the concept of the    
spirituality of culture1 we derive all  
the fundamental propositions of         
pedagogy4 ,but in as much as this       

conception of culture coincides with    
that of personality1 or of the spirit1  
it is evident that all the fundamental  
propositions of the philosophy of the   
spirit are also derived from it4 ,in    
fact1 we separate pedagogy from the     
philosophy of the spirit only because of
 didactic convenience4 ,to determine1   
then1 the attributes of culture1 by     
which education becomes actual1 we have 
but to consider the nature of the spirit
 and endeavour to define its attributes4
 ,this way we must follow if we are ever
 to acquire a thorough comprehension of 
the principles of the several theories  
of education1 principles which are but  
the laws immanent to the life of        
education itself in its effective       
development4  ,the assertion that       
culture is the human spirit means       
nothing unless we first define this     
spirit and understand its attributes4   
,we cannot possess a concept which is   
not determined2 and the determinations  
of a concept are the constituent        

attributes of the reality which we      
strive to conceive1 and which is not    
thinkable if deprived of any of these   
attributes4 ,the following example1     
appropriate even though trite1 will make
 my meaning clearer4 ,physical bodies   
cannot be conceived without also        
conceiving gravity4 ,gravity is then an 
attribute of the physical body1 and as  
such it determines the concept of it4   
,in the same way1 to conceive the spirit
 is to embrace with thought the concepts
 which are absolutely inseparable from  
the concept of the spirit4  ,this       
inquiry into the nature of the          
attributes of culture1 though it        
constantly progresses towards a         
satisfactory solution1 yet seems at     
times to be losing ground on account of 
the ever-increasing difficulties that   
beset its advance4 ,it is true1 no      
doubt1 that human thought1 driven by the
 irresistible desire to know itself1 has
 made some headway towards mastering the
 concept of itself4 ,philosophy has     

indeed progressed1 and the modern world 
can proudly point to truths unsuspected 
by the thinkers of antiquity4 ,but the  
assiduous and prolonged toil of thought 
engaged in this task has at all moments 
disclosed new difficulties2 it has ever 
been busy sketching new concepts which  
subsequently prove immature and in need 
of further elaboration1 and has been    
pushing its investigations to such      
depths as to make it difficult to follow
 its lead without sometimes going       
astray1 without frequently stopping in  
utter weariness at the roadside4  ,men  
talk learnedly nowadays of the human    
spirit1 but with a doctrine which is    
often insufficient or1 as we say1 not up
 to date4 ,they have stopped at one of  
those wayside concepts where thought no 
doubt passed and temporarily halted1 but
 from which it moved on towards a more  
distant goal4 ,for while this long      
history of the endeavours by which man  
struggles onward towards the            
understanding of his own nature is the  

basis on which modern philosophy builds 
its firm concept of the spirit1 yet for 
those who have not attained the vantage 
ground of this modern philosophy1 this  
history is unfortunately a very         
intricate maze2 it is the bewildering   
selva selvaggia ed aspra e forte#c  from
 which it is difficult ever to issue4   
,and therefore it is much easier1 as    
,dante once remarked1 to teach those who
 are completely ignorant than those who 
have a smattering of philosophy4 ,but   
to-day culture is so intimately         
connected with philosophical speculation
 that the greater part of educated men  
profess this or that system without     
being aware of it4 ,and when such men do
 take up the study of philosophy per se1
 they no longer possess the mental      
ingenuousness1 the speculative candour1 
which would enable them to grasp the    
obvious1 evident1 incontrovertible truth
 of the most profound philosophical     
proposition4  ,this inquiry then is     
difficult4 ,it demands either a long1   

methodic1 laborious study of the history
 of philosophy conducted with critical  
vigour1 or that unyielding tenacity of  
the mind which is the surest sign of    
sound spiritual character2 that         
steadfast firmness by which man1 once in
 possession of a clearly irrefutable1   
truly fundamental truth1 rigorously     
excludes from his soul all the          
allurements of prejudice1 all           
convictions formerly entertained1 even  
though extremely plausible1 if they     
contradict his ,truth4 ,for he trusts   
that these perplexities1 these          
difficulties which he is not now in     
condition to explain1 will be removed in
 virtue of that very thought to which he
 has confidently committed himself4     
,this unflinching resolve is the courage
 of the philosopher1 who has never      
feared to brave common sense1 and       
single-handed to marshal against the    
multitude the array of his seemingly    
absurd assertions1 which however1 in the
 progress of their reciprocal           

integrations1 have subsequently         
contributed to redeem this very         
multitude from error1--from that error  
which is intellectual misery1 social    
wretchedness1 economic1 political1 and  
moral destitution4 ,because of this     
inflexible firmness the philosopher has 
never dreaded that boundless solitude1  
that thin atmosphere to which he is     
uplifted by thought1 and where at first 
he has the sensation of fainting away   
into the rarefied air4  ,we must then   
muster up courage and relinquish all the
 ideas which we once accepted1 even     
though they still tempt us with         
superficial glitterings of truth1 when  
once they have proved themselves to be  
in contradiction with experience4 ,for  
,i too hold experience to be the        
touchstone of all our thoughts1         
philosophy not excluded4 ,but ,i insist 
that we be careful lest we confound the 
mockery of the first puppet that dupes  
our imagination with genuine experience2
 that in as much as every man speaks of 

experience in exclusive accordance with 
whatever concept he has been able to    
form of it1 we too determine beforehand 
what our conception of it is4 ,now ,i   
say that no concept of experience can be
 validly entertained which does not take
 into account that truth which presents 
itself to us as truly fundamental and   
therefore to be used as an indispensable
 basis for all subsequent conceptual    
constructions4  ,such fundamental truth 
we have previously attained when we     
established that ,we are not what we    
seem to be in the dim empirical         
representation of our personality1 a    
thing among things4 ,our ,self is the   
deeper one by means of which we see all 
things in whose midst our other self too
 is discernible4 ,the reality of this1  
our deeper self which cannot be         
conceived as a thing1 without which     
nothing can be conceived1 in the same   
way that the trunk1 the branches1 and   
the boughs are not possible without the 
root from which the tree issues1 is a   

truth which we may never grasp1 but if  
we do1 we shall forever be compelled to 
see in it the source of all other       
possible truths1 including the concept  
of experience4 ,for once we have        
securely mastered it1 we will be        
convinced that it is impossible to      
conceive whatever is considered and     
thought of as constituting this world   
otherwise than as this world which we   
see1 which we touch1 and which1 in      
short1 we look upon as the contents of  
our experience3 and that it is also     
impossible to conceive this experience  
without referring it to us who have it  
not as an object of possession but as an
 activity which we exercise4 ,so that   
nothing1 absolutely nothing1 can be     
thought when the relationship between   
things and experience1 and again the    
rapport between experience and ourselves
 is obtained1 without thinking the deep 
reality of this our self4 ,we may again 
close our eyes to this reality or hold  
it in abeyance1 but we can do so only   

after we have effaced every notion of   
the two relationships just mentioned1   
and when we again have immersed         
ourselves in the mystery of things1 in  
the gloom of their apparent independent 
existence1 of their ever self-defeating 
multiplicity4  ,against this reality of 
the profound us which is the genuine    
spiritual reality1 there are innumerable
 and awe-inspiring difficulties4 ,they  
are difficulties that so violently      
oppress our minds and our hearts as to  
dismay us1 and almost force us to give  
up this concept of a reality on which   
all other realities depend1 and which   
cannot but be one alone1 and infinite1  
and really universal4#d ,alone1 because 
in it all opposites must coincide3 the  
good and the evil1 what is true and what
 is false1 life and death1 peace and    
war1 pleasure and pain1 yours and       
mine1--all things1 in short1 that we    
have been obliged to sunder and         
distinguish in order to take our        
bearings and meet the exigencies of     

life4 ,formidable difficulties indeed6  
,and they are the problems of           
philosophy4 ,it would be childish and   
senseless to dispose of them by ignoring
 that concept from which they derive4   
,it is the philosopher's task1 it is the
 strict duty of human thought to face   
the problems as they rise out of the    
positions which it has captured in its  
onward march4 ,for to yield ground1 to  
turn the back to a truth which has been 
demonstrated to be indispensable1 that  
is impossible4  ,those who wish to      
orient themselves in the world to-day   
must1 before all1 cling to this3 that   
the basis of every thinkable reality is 
our spiritual reality1 one1 infinite1   
universal1--the reality which unites us 
all in one sole spiritual life2 the     
reality in which teacher and pupils meet
 when by their reciprocal comprehensions
 they constitute a real school4  ,what  
then is this one1 infinite1 universal   
reality8 ,is this question truly        
unanswerable as it seems to be1 as it   

has often in the past been declared to  
be8 ,for1 it has been argued1 in order  
to give an answer1 whether here or      
elsewhere1 we must somehow think the    
reality to which the answer is referred4
 ,we must think it and therefore        
distinguish it from all the others1 and 
so presuppose it as one existing among  
many and as forming with them a         
multiplicity2 and this is the very      
opposite of that reality which we are   
striving to think4 ,or1 in other words1 
when we try to say what the subject is1 
we must1 somehow1 set it as the object1 
and thus convert it into what is the    
opposite of the subject4 ,or again3 the 
subject cannot think itself1 because if 
it did1 it would split into the duality 
of itself as thinking and itself as     
thought1 and what is thinking is not    
what is thought4 ,but all these         
objections together with many others of 
the same force that are ordinarily      
raised against radical idealism have but
 one single defect2 which is such1      

however1 as to make it hopeless for the 
idealist ever to succeed in being       
understood by those that resort to this 
kind of argument4 ,these opponents1     
strangely enough1 miss the most         
elementary meaning of the terms with    
which they claim to be familiar4 ,they  
fail to see that when the idealist says 
subject1 he cannot possibly mean by it  
one abstract term of the relationship   
subject-object1 which1 because of this  
very abstractness1 is devoid of all     
consistency4 ,the ego is called subject1
 because it contains within itself an   
object which is not diverse but         
identical with it4 ,as a pure subject it
 is already a relationship2 it is       
self-affirmation and therefore          
affirmation of an object1 but of an     
object1 be it remembered1 in which the  
subject is not alienated from itself2 by
 which1 rather1 it truly returns to     
itself1 embraces itself1 and thus       
originatively realises itself4 ,in order
 to be ,i1 ,i must know myself1 ,i must 

set my own self in front of myself4     
,only thus ,i am ,i1 a personality1 and 
subject1 the centre of my world or of my
 thought4 ,for if ,i should not         
objectify myself to myself1 if in the   
endeavour to free myself completely from
 all objectivity1 ,i were to retreat    
into the first term1--a purely abstract 
one1--of this relationship by which ,i  
posit myself1 ,i should remain on the   
hither side of this relationship1 that  
is of that very reality in which ,i am  
to realise myself4 ,so then by this     
inner objectification the subject does  
not at all depart from itself4 ,it      
rather enters into its own subjectivity1
 and constitutes it4 ,surely man may1   
,narcissus-like1 make an idol of his own
 self3 he may worship himself in a fixed
 semblance already determined and       
crystallised4 ,but in so doing1 he      
materialises himself1 makes his person  
into a thing1 looks away from his true  
spiritual life1 misses                  
self-consciousness1 averts his thought  

from his own intimate being4 ,this      
self-conversion from person into thing  
takes place1 not when we think of       
ourselves1 but rather when we fail to do
 so4  ,philosophy then1 as the thinking 
of the ,spirit in its absolute          
subjectivity1 is the ,spirit's own life4
 ,for the spirit lives by constituting  
itself as the ego1 and it does this by  
thinking itself1 by acquiring           
consciousness of itself4 ,and while     
philosophising then1 we cannot but ask  
what is this one infinite universal     
reality which is our ,self and is called
 the spirit4 ,we cannot dispense with   
this inquiry into the attributes of the 
spirit1 which is at the same time the   
inquiry into the attributes of culture4 
,the examination of the possibility of  
this investigation has carried us1      
without our being aware of it1 into the 
very midst of the inquiry itself4 ,for  
what we considered as an elementary     
meaning of the word spirit1 the ego1    
which is not something in unrelated     

immediacy1 but which constitutes itself1
 posits itself1 realises itself in that 
it thinks itself and becomes            
self-consciousness1--this is also the   
ultimate characteristic which can be    
assigned to the spirit1 or to man       
himself1 that is1 to what in man is     
essentially human4 ,if we examine all   
the other differences that have been    
assigned or could be found by which the 
spirit is distinguishable from things1  
we shall find1 after due reflection1    
that they all cease to have a real      
meaning as soon as we neglect the most  
profound characteristic of spiritual    
reality1 viz41 that this reality is     
generated by virtue of consciousness4   
,every form of reality other than       
spiritual1 not only is presented to     
thought as not conditioned by           
consciousness1 but seems to afford no   
possibility of being thought 7in        
relation to consciousness7 otherwise    
than as conditioning this very          
consciousness4 ,and when we say of the  

spiritual being that it does not know   
what it is1 that it is not acquainted   
with itself1 that it therefore remains  
concealed from itself1 we conceive then 
its spiritual being in a manner         
analogous to that by which we conceive  
material or bodily being1--externally   
visible1 but internally unknown4 ,and we
 say that the individual fails to grasp 
his own moral nature1 because in fact we
 make this moral being into something   
natural1 similar to that which is       
attributed to each one of the things    
that the spirit sets in opposition to   
itself4  ,but the spirit has no nature  
of its own1 no destiny to direct its    
course1 no predetermined inevitable lot4
 ,it has no fixed qualities1 no set mode
 of being1 such as constitute1 from the 
birth to the death of an individual1 the
 species to which it belongs1 to whose  
law it is compelled by nature to submit1
 whose tyrannical limits and bounds he  
can never trespass4 ,the spirit1 we have
 seen1 cannot but be conceived as free1 

and its freedom is this privileged      
attitude to be what it wants to1--angel 
or beast1 as the ancients said2 good or 
evil1 true or false1 or1 generally      
speaking1 to be or not to be4 ,to be or 
not to be man1--the spirit1 that which  
he is1 and which he would not be if he  
did not become4  ,man is not man by     
virtue of natural laws4 ,he becomes man4
 ,by man ,i do not mean an animal among 
animals1 held to no accounting of his   
deeds1 who comes into the world1 grows1 
lives1 and dies1 unaware4 ,man from the 
time he considers himself such1 and in  
so far as he considers himself such1    
becomes through his own efforts4 ,he    
makes himself what he is the first time 
he opens his eyes on his inner          
consciousness and says ,i1--the ,i which
 never would have been uttered1 had he  
not been aroused from the sluggish      
torpor of natural beings 7such as our   
phantasy represents them7 and had not   
started thinking under his own power and
 through his own determination4  ,this  

freedom which is man's prerogative      
offers merely an external view1 has a   
very hazy consistency1 and appears as   
something illusory1 only because we do  
not define it exclusively as autonomous 
becoming or self-making4 ,for in fact   
becoming is ordinarily understood in a  
way which does not admit of being       
considered as man's prerogative4 ,does  
not every living being become8 ,the     
plant vegetates only because it too has 
an inborn potency by which it is forced 
from one stage of development to the    
next1 from which in this process it     
acquires the mode of being which is     
peculiarly its own1 which it did not    
have before1 which no other being could 
from the outside have conferred upon it4
 ,and yet the plant is not a person but 
a thing3 it is not spirit1 but a simple 
object1 and as such it is endowed with a
 definite nature and moved by a definite
 law1 which is the very antithesis of   
the freedom which is peculiar to the    
spirit4  ,i might without further       

thought say that this conception of     
becoming1 referred to the plant as a    
plant1 is improper1 that in reality the 
plant does not become for the very      
reason that we deny it its freedom4 ,but
 ,i shall begin by stating that the     
becoming which we attribute to the      
spiritual reality must be specified and 
determined with greater accuracy1 if we 
are to consider it as the characteristic
 of this reality4 ,when so specified and
 determined1 it will be found to        
coincide with the conception of freedom4
 ,becoming1 then1 can be taken in two   
ways1 which for brevity's sake we shall 
call the autonomous and the             
heteronomous4 ,that is1 the being which 
becomes may have the law of its becoming
 either in itself or outside of itself4 
,becoming covers such cases as1 for     
example1 the filling of a vessel into   
which a liquid is poured4 ,but this     
becoming takes place in a manner which  
has its law in the person that fills the
 vessel2 and the filling therefore may  

be considered not so much a becoming as 
the effect of a becoming1 that is1 as   
the result of that act which is being   
performed by man4 ,an heteronomous      
becoming is to be traced back to the    
becoming of the cause which produces it4
 ,the plant vegetates1 and its          
vegetation is a development1 a becoming4
 ,but could it grow without the rays of 
the sun1 the moisture of the soil8 ,the 
plant vegetates in consequence of its   
nature1 that nature which in accord with
 our ordinary way of considering plant  
life it possessed from the time it was a
 green blade just sprouting2 nay1 from  
the time it was a seed in the ground1 or
 rather when it was as yet in the plant 
that produced the seed1 or better still 
when it was in its infinitely remote    
origin4 ,it is evident therefore that we
 cannot think of the law of becoming as 
residing1 so to speak1 within a given   
plant4 ,whether we call it nature or    
name it ,god1 this law transcends the   
becoming of the plant1 its heteronomous 

becoming as we called it1 and is        
properly the becoming of something else4
 ,but the becoming of man is autonomous4
 ,if he becomes intelligent1 that is1 if
 he understands1 he does so through a   
principle which is intrinsically his    
own2 for no man can be made to          
comprehend what he himself will not     
grasp4 ,if he becomes good1 his         
perfected will can in no manner         
whatsoever be considered as determined  
by an outside cause1 without at the same
 time being thereby deprived of all that
 is characteristic of goodness4  ,but in
 stating that man's becoming is         
autonomous 7or true7 we have simply     
formulated a problem without giving it a
 solution4 ,what does this autonomous   
becoming consist in8 ,simply to notice  
its existence would never help us to    
understand it4 ,every fact is           
intelligible only as an effect of a     
cause4 ,and a cause is a cause on       
condition that it be a thing other than 
the effect4 ,in order to understand the 

autonomous becoming or freedom of the   
spirit1 we must not consider it as a    
fact1 that is1 as something done4 ,a    
thing made presupposes the making2 and  
from the deed we must rise to the doing1
 but to a doing which shall not itself  
be a thing done1 a fact1 and similar    
therefore to the doings which we witness
 as mere spectators4 ,the doing in which
 our autonomous becoming is detected is 
that one of which ,we are not spectators
 but actors1 we the spectators of every 
other doing1 we as the thinking         
,activity4  ,this then is the becoming  
which rigorously may be called          
autonomous3 the one which we know not as
 spectators but as actors1 which comes  
forth as that reality which is produced 
by the act of knowing1 and therefore is 
not known because it exists1 but exists 
because it is known1--our existence4 ,it
 is the existence of us who know1 for   
example1 that ab1 and who are such only 
in so far as we know and are conscious  
of knowing that ab1--of us who suffer or

 rejoice1 and who cannot be in this or  
that state except by knowing it1 so that
 no cause could reduce us to such a     
state1 unless we were conscious of such 
a cause and felt its valid application  
to us1--of us1 above all1 who are not   
ourselves unless we apperceive          
ourselves1 by reflecting upon ourselves1
 and thus acquiring existence as a      
personality1 as human                   
self-consciousness1 as thought4 ,thought
 in opposition to nature1 with which it 
is constantly contrasted1 is nothing but
 this self-reflection which establishes 
the personality1 and that reality which1
 absolutely1 is not1 but becomes4 ,every
 reality other than thought becomes     
relatively2 and its becoming is         
intelligible simply as the effect of    
another becoming4 ,only thought1 only   
the ,spirit1 is absolute becoming1 and  
its becoming is its liberty4  ,but      
whether it be called freedom or         
becoming1 the important thing is to     
avoid the mistake1 which was general in 

the past and is still very common       
to-day1 of separating this attribute of 
the spirit from the spirit itself1 thus 
failing to understand exactly what is   
properly called the attribute4 ,for     
example1 we say that the triangle is a  
three-sided plane figure1 and we seem to
 be able to distinguish and therefore to
 separate logically the idea of triangle
 from the idea of three-sided plane     
figure4 ,but a little reflection will   
make it evident that in thinking the    
idea of triangle1 we think nothing      
unless we at least think the plane      
trilateral figure4 ,so that we do not   
really have two ideas1 which however    
closely connected may yet be separated  
to be conjoined again3 what we have is  
one single idea4 ,and such is the       
agreement of the becoming and of the    
spirit1 and in general of every         
attribute and of the reality to which it
 belongs4 ,when we begin inquiring      
whether the spirit is free or not1 we   
set out on an erroneous track which will

 take us into a blind alley with no     
possibility of exit4 ,all the           
unsurmountable difficulties encountered 
at all times by the advocates of the    
doctrine of freedom arise in fact from  
the error of first thinking the spirit  
7or whatsoever that reality may be for  
which freedom is claimed7 and of        
subsequently propounding the question of
 its properties4 ,for the spirit is free
 in as much as it is nothing else than  
freedom2 and the spirit becomes in as   
much as it is nothing else than         
becoming1 and this becoming cannot      
therefore be considered as the husk     
enveloping the kernel--the spirit4      
,there is no kernel to the spirit3 it is
 in no manner comparable to a moving    
body in which the body itself could be  
distinguished from motion1 and would    
admit therefore of being thought as in a
 state of rest even though rest is      
considered impossible4 ,the spirit1     
continuing our simile and correcting it1
 is motion without a mass1--a motion    

surely that cannot be represented to our
 imagination1 for the very reason that  
motion is peculiar to the body and does 
not belong to the spirit2 and           
imagination is the thought of bodies1   
and not of the thought which thinks the 
bodies4 ,this idea of motion without a  
mass1 baffling as it is to our          
imagination1 is perhaps the most        
effective warning that can be given to  
those who wish to fix in their minds the
 exact concept of the nature of the     
spirit4 ,in order to avoid new          
terminology not sufficiently            
intelligible and therefore unpractical1 
we may resort to material expressions1  
and speak of the nature of the spirit as
 of a thing which becomes1 and use such 
words as kernel and husk4 ,but we must  
never lose sight of the fact that this  
manner of speaking1 which is appropriate
 for things1 is not suitable for the    
spirit1 and can be resorted to only with
 the understanding that the spirit is   
not a thing1 and that therefore its     

whole being consists solely in its      
becoming4  ,we are now in a position to 
understand the meaning of the           
spirituality of culture1 that is1 of the
 reduction of culture to the human      
personality obtained in the preceding   
chapter1 as well as the pedagogical     
interest of this reduction4 ,culture1 as
 the entire content of education1       
because it must be sought within the    
personality1 and because it resolves    
itself into the life of the spirit1 is  
not a thing1 and does not admit of being
 conceived statically either in books or
 in the mind3 not before nor after it is
 apprehended4 ,it does not exist in     
libraries or in schools1 or in us before
 we go to school1 or while we still     
remain within its walls1 or after our   
nourished minds have taken leave of it4 
,it is in no place1 at no time1 in no   
person4 ,culture is not1 because if it  
were1 it would have to be some thing1   
whereas by definition it is the negation
 of that which is capable of being      

anything whatever4 ,it is culture in so 
far as it becomes4 ,culture exists as it
 develops1 and in no other manner4 ,it  
is always in the course of being formed1
 it lives4  ,but to understand this     
life1 and in order to grasp more firmly 
this idea of culture which is a         
spiritual banner to rally educators1 ,i 
must again bring up a certain           
distinction4 ,culture1 ,i said1 lives   
7that is1 it is culture7 when it is     
endowed with a life that is entirely    
different from the life which           
biologically animates all living beings1
 ourselves included4 ,the difference can
 be stated as follows3 in the case of   
every other life1 we can assert its     
existence in so far as we have knowledge
 of it either directly or indirectly4   
,it is always1 however1 different from  
us and from our knowing it2 so much so  
that the possibilities of going astray  
are very great4 ,but for the life of    
culture1 which is the life of our       
spirit1 we have no need of being        

informed by the experience of others1 or
 even of ourselves4 ,we live it4 ,it is 
our very thought1--this thought which   
may indeed err in respect to what is    
different from itself1 as not tallying  
with it2 but which cannot possibly      
deceive us in regard to itself1 since it
 is unable not to be itself4 ,the life  
of culture is not a spectacle but an    
activity4 ,nor is it activity for some  
and a spectacle for others4 ,culture is 
never a show for any one4 ,no person can
 ever know for his fellow being4 ,what1 
for me1 ,aristotle knows1 is what ,i    
know of ,aristotle4  ,culture1--this    
untiring activity which never for a     
moment turns into a spectacle for any of
 us1 which ever therefore demands effort
 and toil1--could not avoid becoming a  
show and being made up into a thing1    
could not escape the danger of dying as 
culture by degenerating into something  
anti-spiritual1 fruitless1 and material1
 if1 while yet being activity1 it were  
not at the same time in some way a      

spectacle to itself4 ,this point demands
 careful consideration4 ,it is not      
sufficient to say that culture1 that    
thought is life1 and not the thought of 
life4 ,we will not attain the conception
 of culture by merely contrasting1 as we
 have done1 our life1 the life we lead  
as actors1 with the life of others which
 we behold as spectators1 or by opposing
 the life of ourselves as thinking      
beings to the life we possess as organic
 beings1 to the life of our senses by   
which we are on a par with the other    
animals4 ,the life of thought1 in its   
peculiar inwardness and subjectivity1 is
 still conceived to-day by powerful     
thinkers1 by analogy with life in a     
biological sense1 as irreflective and   
instinctive1 or1 as they say1 as simple 
intuition4 ,but thought which though    
living is irreflective becomes indeed an
 active performance1 a drama without    
spectators1 but it also remains as a    
drama represented for spectators who are
 absent1 and who should be informed of  

those things which direct experience had
 not placed before their eyes4 ,and it  
is difficult to surmise who would impart
 to them this information if the house  
were empty4  ,in other words1 ,i mean to
 say that this would-be intuitive life  
of thought1 fading away into the        
subconscious1 melting into the          
naturality of the unconscious1 is1 like 
every form of natural life effectually a
 stranger to thought 7that is conceived 
as a stranger to thought71 an object and
 nothing more than an object of thought1
 and therefore incapable of ever being a
 subject1 of ever having value as       
subject1 that is1 as thought itself4    
,for that reason we can never           
effectively think it2 for never can we  
truly think any thing which is natural  
and thought of as natural4 ,who can say 
what the life of the plant is8 ,to posit
 nature by thought is to posit something
 irreducible to thought and therefore   
unthinkable4 ,this perhaps would not    
necessarily be a serious drawback for   

the life itself of thought if we lived  
it4 ,for would it not be sufficient to  
live it8 ,why insist on thinking its    
life8 ,why demand a head1 so to speak1  
as a hood for the head8 ,but there is a 
drawback1 and a serious one1 as a result
 of the fact that this life itself of   
thought does not now1 never will in the 
future1 come before us as that          
irreflective life which it is claimed to
 be3 it comes to us as a philosophy     
which recommends it and advocates it as 
the only possible life of thought4 ,in  
fact1 in order to be able to speak of   
this life1 we must first think it4 ,but 
how could we think it1 if the only      
possible life was that one which we     
intend to think1 and not the one with   
which we think this irreflective life8  
,so then1 in order that this life of    
ours 7truly1 intimately1 spiritually    
ours7 may not be confounded with the    
life of natural things1 with that       
pseudo-life which is only an apparent   
becoming1 an effect of another becoming 

by which it is transcended1 it is not   
sufficient1 as ,i started out to say1 to
 call it a drama and not a spectacle4   
,as a result of more careful            
determinations we may now say that it is
 not another man's spectacle1 but our   
drama which is at the same time our     
spectacle too4 ,in it the actors play to
 themselves4 ,it is self-conscious      
activity4 ,it is activity perpetually   
watching over itself4  ,and again3 ,just
 as the becoming of the spirit would    
cease to be that one sole becoming which
 it actually is1 were we to distinguish 
the spirit from its becoming1 so the    
consciousness of spiritual activity     
would also become unintelligible if we  
were to distinguish1 as philosophers    
insistently do1 between activity and    
awareness1 between the performance and  
the show4 ,the distinction here too     
arises from referring to the spirit1 the
 mode of thinking which is suited for   
the thinking of things4 ,in the sphere  
of things1 doing is one thing1 watching 

the thing as it is done is another4 ,but
 to us the spirit's becoming has shown  
itself to be the very negation of this  
distinction between actor and spectacle1
 so that in saying that the actor is his
 own spectator we cannot introduce1     
within the unity in which we had taken  
refuge1 the dualism which is excluded   
from the concept of the spirit4 ,i have 
spoken of motion without mass1 turning a
 deaf ear to the claims of our          
imagination4 ,now ,i shall add something
 that clashes even more violently       
against the laws which govern our       
image-making2 and ,i shall do so in     
order to make it very clear that the    
spirit does not live in the world of    
things which is swept over by our       
imagination4 ,i shall now call the      
spirit a gazing motion4 ,the spirit's   
acting--its eternal process1 its        
immanent becoming--is not an escort to  
thinking1 but the very thinking itself1 
which is neither cause nor effect3      
neither the antecedent nor the          

consequent1 nor yet the concomitant of  
the action by which the spirit goes on  
constantly impersonating itself4 ,it is 
this very acting4  ,in accordance with  
the popular point of view which1 as ,i  
have said1 is shared by great           
philosophers1 a distinction is made     
between the spirit considered as will   
and the spirit regarded as intellect1 or
 as consciousness1 or as thought1 or    
whatever term may be used to indicate   
the becoming aware of this spiritual    
activity4 ,but if the spirit in that it 
wills did not also think1 we should be  
thrust back to the position which we    
have shown above to be untenable1 and be
 forced to admit that the irreflective  
life of the spirit cannot be fused with 
the reflective life1 and is therefore   
unaccountable and unthinkable4 ,the will
 which qua will is not also thought1 is 
in respect to thought which knows it a  
simple object1 a spectacle and not a    
drama4 ,it is nature and not spirit4    
,and a thought which qua thought is not 

will1 is1 in respect to the will which  
integrates it1 a spectator without a    
spectacle4 ,if there is to be a drama1  
and a drama which is the spirit1 it is  
inevitable that the will be the thought1
 and that the thought be the will1 over 
and beyond that distinction which serves
 if anything to characterise the        
opposition between nature and spirit4   
,should we1 returning to our comparison1
 demand of that motion which is spirit a
 moving mass2 should we1 grounded on the
 naive and primitive conception which   
identifies knowing with the seeing of   
external things1 demand within the      
sphere of the spiritual activity itself 
a doing in which knowing should find its
 object all ready made1 we should       
continue to wander helplessly in the    
maze of things1 and to grope in the     
mystery of the multiplicity of things1  
which are many and yet are not many4 ,we
 would be turning our eyes away from the
 lode star which is the supreme concept 
of the spirit1 and thereby show         

ourselves incapable of rising to that   
point of view which is the peculiar one 
of culture4  ,culture1 as the spirit's  
life1 which is a drama and              
self-awareness1 is not simply effort and
 uneasy toil1 it is not a tormenting    
restlessness which we may sometimes     
shake off1 from which we would gladly be
 rescued4 ,nor is it a feverish         
excitement that consumes our life-blood 
and tosses us restlessly on a sick-bed4 
,the spirit's life is not vexation but  
liberation from care4 ,for the greatest 
of sorrows1 ,leopardi tells us1 is      
ennui1 the inert tedious weariness of   
those who find nothing to do1 and pine  
away in a wasting repose which is the   
very antithesis of the life of the      
spirit4 ,the negation of this life1--the
 obstacles1 the hindrances1 the halts it
 encounters1--that is the source of woe4
 ,but life with its energy is joy2 it is
 joy because it is activity1 our        
activity4 ,another man's activity as the
 negation of our own is troublesome and 

exasperating4 ,the music which we enjoy 
7and we are able to enjoy it by being   
active7 is our enjoyment4 ,but the      
musical entertainment in which we have  
no part disturbs us1 interferes with our
 work1 irritates us4 ,our neighbour's   
joys in which for some reason we are    
unable to participate awaken envy in us1
 gall us1 bring some manner of          
displeasure to our hearts4  ,culture1   
then1 as life of the spirit1 is effort1 
and work1 but never a drudgery4 ,it     
would be toilsome labour if the spirit  
had lived its life before we began to   
work2 if this life had blossomed forth1 
and had realised itself without our     
efforts4 ,but our effort1 our work is   
this very life of the spirit1 its       
nature1 in which culture develops4 ,work
 is not a burdensome yoke on our will   
and on our personality4 ,it is          
liberation1 freedom1 the act by which   
liberty asserts its being4 ,work may    
sometimes appear irksome because the    
freedom of its movement is checked by   

certain resistances which have to be    
overcome and removed4 ,but in such cases
 it is not work which vexes us1 but     
rather its opposite1 sloth1 against     
which it must combat4 ,it follows then  
that the more intensely we occupy       
ourselves1 the less heavily we are      
burdened by pain4 ,for as our efforts   
redouble and the resistance is          
proportionately reduced1 the spirit1    
which perishes in enthralment1 is       
enabled to live a richer life4  ,culture
 then is the extolment of our being1 the
 formation of our spirit1 or better1 its
 liberation and its beatification4 ,as  
the realisation of the spirit's own     
nature1 it is opposed to all suffering  
and is the source of blissfulness4 ,but 
it must not be regarded as the fated1   
inevitable working out of an instinctive
 principle1 or a natural law4 ,the      
building of a bird's nest1 which is the 
necessary antecedent to generation and  
reproduction1 cannot be looked upon as  
work2 and it is fruitless to try to     

guess whether this act is a cause of    
pleasure to the bird or a source of     
suffering4 ,instinct leads the          
individual to self-sacrifice on behalf  
of the species4 ,but not even this fact1
 vouched for solely by external         
inferences1 authorises us to conclude   
that the fulfilment of an instinctive   
impulse is actually accompanied by pain4
 ,so that it seems wiser to keep off    
this slippery surface of conjecture4 ,it
 will be sufficient to note here that an
 action prompted by instinct1 conceived 
as merely instinctive and thoroughly    
unconscious of the end to which it is   
subservient1 is in no way to be compared
 with man's work4 ,human occupation is  
personality1 will1 consciousness4 ,the  
animal does not work4 ,but culture we   
have said is work4 ,for it is liberty1  
self-formation1 with no existence       
previous to the process2 whereas the    
laws which govern the development of    
natural being pre-exist before the      
development itself4 ,culture exists only

 in so far as it is formed1 and it is   
constituted solely by being developed4  
,and what is more1 as we shall see in   
the next chapter1 culture does not even 
count on a pre-existing external matter 
ready to receive its informing imprint4 
,to conclude then3 culture is 7in its   
becoming7 only to the extent that the   
cultivated man feels its worth1 desires 
it1 and realises it4 ,it is a value1 but
 not in the sense that man first        
appreciates it and subsequently looks   
for it and strives to actualise it4 ,the
 value which man assigns to culture is  
that which he gradually goes on         
ascribing to his own culture1 and whose 
development coincides with the          
development of his own personality4     
,what we ought to want is exactly what  
we do want2 but we want just that which 
we ought to4 ,the ideal1 not the        
abstract1 inadequate1 and false one1 but
 the true ideal of our personality1 is  
that one toward whose realisation we are
 actually working4 ,and the ideal of our

 culture is that self-same one towards  
which our busy person remains turned in 
the actuality of its becoming4 ,but work
 implies a programme1 and spirit means  
ideal2 and when we speak of culture we  
signify thereby the value of culture1 of
 a culture which as yet is not but which
 must be4 ,life is the life of the      
spirit as a duty1--as a life which we   
live1 feeling all along that it is our  
duty to live it1 and that it depends on 
us whether it exists or not4 ,and       
culture could not re-enter as it does in
 the life of the spirit1 if it too were 
not a duty1 that is1 if it were not this
 culture to whose development our       
personality is pledged4 ,so interpreted1
 culture1 far from being a destiny to   
which we are bound1 is the progressive  
triumph of our very freedom4 ,on these  
terms only1 culture is a growth1 and the
 spirit a becoming4  ,this attribute1   
which is an ethical one1 is not added to
 the attribute of ,becoming any more    
than becoming was superadded to freedom4

 ,for just as ,becoming develops the    
concept of freedom1 so does the ethical 
develop and accomplish the concept of   
becoming4 ,freedom is never true liberty
 unless it is a process1 an absolute    
,becoming2 but ,becoming can only be    
absolute by being moral4 ,and it is     
therefore impossible to speak of        
learning which is not ethical4  ,it has 
often been repeated for thousands and   
thousands of years that knowledge is    
neither good nor bad2 that it is either 
true or false4 ,but is the ,true a      
different category from the ,good8 ,are 
they not rather one sole identical      
category8 ,truth could be maintained in 
a place quite distinct from the grounds 
of morality1 only so long as the world  
clung to that conception of truth which 
was the agreement of the subject with an
 assumed external object4 ,but now by   
truth we understand the value of thought
 in which the subject becomes an object 
to itself and thus realises itself2 and 
in clarifying this new conception of    

truth1 we discover that morality is     
identical with it4 ,for knowing is      
acting1 but an acting which being       
untrammelled conforms with an           
ideal--,duty4 ,and in this manner we    
explain to ourselves why the mysterious 
and inspired voice of conscience has at 
all times admonished man to worship     
,truth with that same intense           
earnestness1 with those same scruples1  
with that identical personal energy1    
which we devote to every phase of our   
moral mission4 ,the cult of truth is in 
fact what we otherwise call and         
understand to be morality1 namely1 the  
formation of our personality1 which can 
be ours only by belonging to all men1   
and which1 whether or not ours1 is not  
immediate1 not a given personality1 but 
rather one which is intent on           
self-realisation1 on that sacred and    
eternal task which is the ,good4  ,if we
 now feel culture to be free1 to be a   
process1 and an ethical one at that1 we 
have succeeded in grasping its          

spirituality1 and we are in a position  
therefore to proceed with security on   
that way which opens before the         
educator's eyes1 as he intently goes    
about his work of creation1 or1 if you  
so wish to call it1 his task as a       
promoter of culture4   ,,footnotes3     
#c ,forest savage1 rough1 and           
stern4--,dante1 ,inferno1 i4 #e4    #d  
,many speak of the universal and say    
that they conceive this       universal 
as concrete and immanent4 ,few1 however1
 effectively fix       their thought on 
that universality which alone is such1  
which       alone can be such1 which has
 nothing outside of itself1 not even    
the particular1 and which is ideal on   
condition that the idea to       which  
it belongs be reality itself in all its 
determinateness4 ,and       so in       
speaking of universal and of individual 
we must remember       that the latter  
cannot be anything without being the    
former1 since       indeed the universal
 is not a merely abstract idea1 but     

reality1       the reality of thought4  
,therefore ,i have here used the        
expression       really universal4--,g4 
,g4     ,,chapter ,,vii  ,,the ,,bias   
,,of ,,realism   ,educators of the      
modern school are bent on transforming  
its methods and institutions on the     
basis of the conception set forth in the
 previous chapters4 ,the subtle         
discussions required to make this       
conception clear must have convinced the
 reader that this work of educational   
reform could only succeed if preceded by
 such philosophical doctrines as have   
recently been evolved in ,italy and are 
now becoming the accepted faith of the  
newer generation4 ,to this new belief   
the school must be converted1 if it is  
ever going to conquer that freedom which
 has been its constant aspiration1 and  
which seems to be an indispensable      
condition for its further growth4  ,the 
faith of the modern man cleaves to a    
life conceived and directed             
idealistically4 ,he believes that       

life--true life--is man's free creation2
 that in it1 therefore1 human aims      
should gain an ever fuller realisation2 
and that these aims1 these ends will not
 be attained unless thought1 which is   
man's specific force1 extends its sway  
so as to embrace nature1 penetrate it1  
and resolve it into its own substance4  
,he believes that nature1 thus turned   
into an instrument of thought1 yields   
readily to its will1 not being per se   
opposed or repugnant to the life and    
activity of the spirit1 but rather      
homogeneous and identical with it4 ,he  
believes1 moreover1 that this sway can  
only be obtained by amplifying1         
strengthening1 and constantly           
potentiating our human energy1 which    
means thinking1 knowing1 self-realising2
 and that self-realisation is not       
possible unless it is free1 unless it be
 rescued from the prejudice of          
dependence upon external principles1 and
 unless it affirms itself as absolute   
infinite activity4 ,this is the ,kingdom

 of ,man prophesied at the dawn of      
modern thought4 ,this is the work which 
science1 art1 religion1 not less than   
political revolutions and social        
reforms1 have gradually been            
accomplishing and perfecting in the last
 three hundred years4 ,this new         
spiritual orientation has to a certain  
extent influenced teaching2 and though  
without a general programme of          
substantial reforms1 the ideal of       
education has been transformed along    
idealistic lines4 ,this transformation1 
strange to say1 has been effected in    
part by means of institutions which have
 arisen as a result of the recent       
development of industrial life and of   
the corresponding complexity in economic
 and social relations4 ,these schools1  
because of their names1 seem to be quite
 removed from the idealistic tendencies 
of modern civilisations4 ,whether they  
be called technical1 business1 or       
industrial schools1 they seem to be and 
are in fact the result of a realistic   

conception of life4 ,but such realism1  
we must remember1 is far from being     
opposed to our idealism1 and should not 
be compared with the realism which we   
have objected to4 ,we should rather     
consider it as the most effective       
demonstration of the idealistic trend of
 our times4 ,for these institutions are 
founded on the theory that knowledge    
increases man's power in the world by   
enabling him to overcome the obstacles  
by which nature1 if ignored and unknown1
 would hinder the free development of   
civilisation in general1 and of those   
individuals in particular in whom and   
through whom civilisation becomes       
actual4  ,realism1 on the other hand1 as
 the opposite of the idealistic         
conception of life and culture1 was     
shown to be based on a conception of    
reality which exists totally outside of 
human thought and of the civilisation   
which is produced by it1--of a reality  
existing per se in such a way that no   
end peculiar to man1 no free human life1

 can be conceived which will have the   
power of bending this reality toward    
itself1 of resolving it within itself4  
,this realistic point of view is not    
different from the outlook of the       
primitive man who1 awed by the might of 
nature1 kneels submissively before its  
invisible power1 which1 he thinks1      
controls these forces4 ,it is the       
accepted belief of the naive and dreamy 
consciousness of child-like humanity2   
but it is none the less a conception    
which is opposed to the course          
constantly followed by civilisation4    
,its dangers must be made very clear and
 its menace removed from the path of its
 triumphant enemy4 ,to overcome this    
realistic point of view in the field of 
education is the duty of teachers1 who  
must be in a position to recognise it1  
and to track it into whatever hiding    
places it may lurk4 ,i intend therefore 
in this chapter to point out some of the
 most notable realistic prejudices      
which1 though still tolerated by        

contemporary thought1 ought to be       
definitely stamped out1 if we are really
 convinced of the spiritual character of
 culture and of its essential           
attributes4  ,i shall here bring up     
again a consideration which ,i touched  
upon in the first chapter1--an idea     
which is the fundamental prejudice of   
the realistic theory of education in its
 antagonism to the profound exigencies  
of the free spiritual life which        
education should promote4 ,i mean the   
idea of ,science 7with a capital        
,s71--that ,science which is imagined as
 towering over and above the men who    
toil and suffer1 think and struggle in  
quest of its light and of its force2    
that ,science which would be so         
beautiful1 and majestic1 and impressive1
 were it not for the fact that it does  
not exist4 ,this ,science is looked upon
 as infallible1 without crises1 without 
reverses1 without vicissitudes of       
doctrines1 without parties1 and without 
nationality1--without history in short2 

for history is full of these baser      
occurrences2 and men1 without a single  
exception1 even the greatest of         
scientists1 even the lofty geniuses that
 have transformed or systematised       
knowledge1 are all in some measure prone
 to err4 ,the exceptions which are      
adduced to contradict this statement are
 so few1 so limited by restrictions and 
by hair-splitting distinctions1 that we 
can hardly allow them2 especially when  
we consider that even granting the      
infallible oracular character of some   
men's utterances1 the fact remains that 
his listeners must undergo the process  
of understanding him1 and in so doing   
they may go astray4 ,so that from       
superhuman unfailing verities1 we slip  
back instantly to human fallibility4    
,infallible ,science1 then1 is not      
known1 cannot be known to mankind2 for  
the simple reason that we who constitute
 it are subject to error1 and being     
ourselves prone to fail1 we expose      
science to the same danger4 ,if it does 

exist somewhere it surely is not in this
 world in which we live1 thinking1      
knowing1 and--creating science4  ,this  
mythical science1 unsullied and         
incorruptible1 segregated from all      
possible intercourse with thought1 ever 
soaring in the pure air of divine       
essences1 is yet the mother of a        
numerous offspring1 the parent of       
countless daughters as virginal and as  
infallible as the mother herself4 ,these
 are the particular sciences1 bearing   
various names1 but all of them equally  
worthy of the distinction of the capital
 ,s in the eyes of their realistic      
worshippers4  ,this mythology is taught 
in the schools which too often are      
called1 and without any figurative      
meaning1 the shrines of learning4       
,conceived as divinely superlative1 as  
something which1 though revealed        
historically by the successive          
discoveries of privileged minds1 is none
 the less sharply distinct from the     
history of humanity1 science descends   

into the school4 ,there it manifests    
itself as human knowledge1 and is       
communicated to the youthful minds eager
 to ascend to the heaven of truth4 ,and 
so the school comes to be looked upon as
 a kind of temple1 as the ,church where 
the inspired ,word of the ,sacred ,books
 is read and explained by those who have
 been chosen by the ,divinity to act as 
its interpreters1 as preachers of the   
,faith4 ,with this religious conception 
of the school we connect the mission of 
the educator1 whose task1 when not      
ridiculed and lampooned by the same     
scoffers who at all times have jeered at
 the teachers of divinity1 has been     
surrounded by a glamour of religiosity4 
,we see them encircled by that halo of  
distant respect which we naturally      
connect with those who1 acting as       
intermediaries between us and the deity1
 are themselves transfigured and        
deified4  ,the school then is looked    
upon as a temple in which the pupil     
receives his spiritual bread4 ,but not  

so the home which the boy must leave1   
that he may satisfy his mysteriously    
innate craving for knowledge4 ,not so   
the street1 where the small boys gather1
 drawn together by the irresistible need
 of pastime1 by the sweet desire of     
frolicsome companionship1 by the        
unconscious yearning after spiritual    
communion with the world which there    
makes its way into the child's mind far 
off from the classroom1 and lavishes    
upon it its own light1 its portion of   
thought1 its share of new experiences1  
and the joy of an ever renewed          
outpouring of sympathetic spirituality4 
,the custodian of this temple1 the      
schoolmaster1 is regarded as a divine1  
as the minister who imparts the         
consecrated elements of ,science1 who   
leads the pupil to the panem angelorum1 
as ,dante calls it4 ,but our fathers and
 mothers are not so regarded1--they who 
were the first custodians of a greater  
temple1 the world1 to whose marvels they
 gradually initiated our growing minds2 

they who by the use of speech taught us1
 without being aware of it1 infinitely  
more than the best of schools will ever 
be able to teach us in the future2 not  
our elder brothers to whom we always    
looked up in emulation1 and from whom1  
even more than from our parents1 we     
learned the thoughts and the words      
suited to our needs2 not our            
grandmother1 who long before our eager  
phantasy might roam through the printed 
pages1 gently led us into ,fairyland1   
and there1 in the enchantments of a     
magic world1 disclosed to us that       
humanity which books and teachers later 
in life were to re-evoke for us4 ,no6   
,there are no altars to ,science except 
in the ,schoolhouse1 and none but       
educators may minister to its cult4     
,this mythological lore is not merely a 
harmless form of imagery1 against which 
it might be pedantic to rebel4 ,it is a 
real superstition1 which has its roots  
deep down in the personality of the     
educator2 it adheres parasitically to   

culture1 climbs over its sturdy trunk1  
drains its sap1 weakens it1 deadens it4 
,for when we have stripped this         
conception of education of its          
mythological exterior1 there yet remains
 a clearly religious and realistic      
thought1 which is professed with firm   
adhesion of the mind and complete       
devotion of the soul1 as the inviolable 
norm of the whole activity which        
pertains to the object of this norm     
itself4 ,let us1 for example1 consider  
what is presupposed by the doctrine of  
methods1 the so-called methodology1     
which is an important part of didactics1
 and a very considerable section in the 
whole field of pedagogics4 ,the doctrine
 of methods comprises a general         
treatment1 which corresponds to what we 
called the ,mother-,science1 and a      
particular treatment for the individual 
sciences4 ,there is methodology of      
learning in general1 and there are      
methodics for the several disciplines1  
or at least for each group of           

disciplines1 into which learning is     
divided and subdivided in accordance    
with the logical processes adopted in   
any particular case1 or in accordance   
with the objects of these disciplines4  
,to each method of knowing1 considered  
in itself1 corresponds a teaching       
method1 so that there is one general    
didactic method1 and many special ones  
by which the general method is to be    
applied4  ,but what is the method of a  
science if not the logical scheme or the
 form of a certain scientific knowledge8
 ,and1 on the other hand1 what can be   
known as to the form of anything1 unless
 we have the thing itself before us in  
its form and with its contents8 ,in     
order to define the form of a science1  
and say1 for example1 that it is        
deductive in mathematics and inductive  
in chemistry1 we must first presuppose  
the existence of these sciences         
themselves4 ,but in them form is never  
anything indifferent to content2 it is  
the form of that content4 ,this is made 

clear if we consider the methodologies  
which logicians presume to define in the
 abstract1 and with no regard to the    
determined content of the corresponding 
sciences4 ,we notice that they are able 
to present a successful exposition and  
formulation only by fixing the meaning  
of each formula by the use of examples1 
thereby passing from the abstract to the
 concrete1 and showing the method to be 
within the concrete knowing out of which
 logic presumes to extract it4 ,in the  
same way every philosophical system has 
its method2 but whenever criticism has  
endeavoured to fix abstractly the method
 of a system1 in order then to show how 
it has been applied in the construction 
of the system itself1 it has been forced
 in every case to admit that the method 
already contained the system within     
itself1 that it was the system itself4  
,so that it would have no value         
whatsoever1 it could not even be grasped
 by thought in its particular           
determinateness1 if it were not         

presented as the natural form of that   
precise thought4  ,no harmful results   
would follow1 if this assumption merely 
implied the accepting of science and    
methods as existing by themselves       
previous to the learning of science by  
means of its respective method2 if it   
resulted merely in the failure to       
recognise the impossibility of          
conceiving science and methods as       
existing outside of the human mind where
 they actually do live and exist4 ,if   
this were all1 we should merely take    
notice of it as a speculative error     
which affected only the solution of the 
particular problem in which it appeared4
 ,but in the life of thought1 where     
everything is united and connected in an
 organic system1 every point of which is
 in relation to every other point1 there
 is no error limited to a single        
problem2 its effects are felt in the    
whole system1 and they react on thought 
as a whole4 ,and since thought is       
activity itself1--life's drama1 as we   

called it1--every error infects the     
entire life4 ,let us then consider the  
consequences of this realistic          
conception of methodology4  ,science1 we
 are told1 in its abstract objectivity  
is one1 immutable1 unaltered3 it is     
removed from the danger of error and of 
human fallibility1 and protected from   
the alternate succession of ignorance   
and discovery2 incapable therefore of   
progressing and of developing because it
 was complete from the very beginning1  
and is eternally perfect4 ,but such a   
,science is quite different from the one
 which grows in the life of culture1 and
 is the free formation of the human     
personality4 ,this one is ever changing1
 always admitting all possible          
transformations1 different from         
individual to individual1 and different 
also in the mind of the same person4 ,it
 lives only on condition that it never  
fix itself1 that it never crystallise1  
that it place no limits to its          
development2 it continues to be in      

virtue of its power to grow1 to modify  
itself1 to integrate itself and         
incessantly to develop4 ,science as     
culture1 as personality1 is free1       
perennially becoming1 stirred by ethical
 impulses1 multiple1 varied4 ,if we fix 
the method1 it indicates that we are    
dealing with science realistically      
considered as pre-existing1 and we can  
therefore have only one sole1 definite1 
immutable method1--one for everybody1   
and devoid of freedom1 not susceptible  
of development1 refractory to all moral 
evaluation4 ,we should have then a rigid
 law of the spirit1 as compelling as the
 laws of nature4 ,but by obedience to   
such a principle1 the spirit could not  
affirm itself3 such compliance is       
surrender and abdication1 not the       
realisation of some good4 ,the most that
 could be said of it is that perhaps it 
prevents or annuls an evil which        
alienates us from a primitive good which
 is not ours1 and not being ours cannot 
truly be good4  ,a fixed method forces  

the spirit into this hopeless dilemma3  
7#a7 ,either refuse to submit1 and thus 
save life at the cost of all that makes 
life worth living--propter vitam vivendi
 perdere causas 7which evidently would  
be the case1 if we consider that the    
spirit lives solely on condition that it
 recognise no pre-established laws1 that
 it be free from the bondage of nature1 
that it create its own law1 its own     
world1 freely2 and that1 on the other   
hand1 the cause of living1 what         
constitutes the worth of life1 is that  
enhancement of the spirit's reality     
which realises itself in science1 and   
therefore in the method of science74    
7#b7 ,or else submit1 and kill life in  
the effort to save its worth--propter   
causas vivendi perdere vitam 7which is  
absurd2 for what is the worth of life if
 there is no life874  ,however that may 
be1 the type of education that          
presupposes a certain ideal of knowledge
 previously constituted and ready to be 
imparted by the teacher to the pupil in 

conformity with some suitable method1   
must follow a method1 a unique one--the 
method of science1 and therefore of the 
teacher1 and therefore also of the      
pupil1 whether the latter is capable of 
it or not4 ,for it is tacitly assumed   
that sciencemethod2 scienceteacher2     
sciencepupil4 ,on the strength of these 
equations the common term science should
 suffice to identify the first method1  
which is the one of science in itself1  
with the last1 which is the method of   
science to be mastered by the pupil4    
,but the above series of equations is   
false1 because1 admitting the first1 the
 one namely on the basis of which we are
 now discussing1 neither the second nor 
the third is possible without passing   
from realistic to idealistic            
science1--two very different things1 as 
,i have shown4 ,even if we leave the    
teacher out of consideration1 we shall  
have to remember that the pupil learns a
 science by making it his own1--a       
fallible science1 which he may          

understand up to a certain point and no 
further4 ,it will be one of the many    
sciences which have no one given method1
 but many of them1 and the pupil can    
only avoid appropriating1               
individualising1 subjectivising science 
by following that way which is very     
broad1 very easy1 and1 alas1 only too   
well beaten1--the royal road of         
non-learning1 which is diligently upkept
 by all the schools which have to teach 
precise1 well-defined science1 and have 
a pre-established method by which to    
teach it4  ,but1 it might be objected1  
if science1 realistically conceived1 is 
a fictitious entity in no way           
corresponding to reality1 how is it     
possible to have a method which by its  
uniqueness and definiteness effectively 
corresponds to the unalterable unity of 
this non-existent science8 ,and what    
teacher would ever arbitrarily impose on
 his students such an abstract and      
mechanical method8 ,this is true enough2
 but man learns to compromise with all  

deities1 ,science included4 ,this       
divinity1 in order somehow to exist1    
must assume a few human traits without  
however renouncing her divine           
prerogatives4 ,the fact that ,apollo    
held no communion with the ,pythian     
priestess did not remove the oracular   
sanctity from the ,delphic response4    
,for man knows no deity other than the  
one which he is capable of conceiving   
with his soul1 just as he knows no other
 red besides the one which he sees with 
his own eyes4  ,science1 which he       
considers as an object existing in      
itself1 outside of his and other human  
minds1 and therefore endowed with       
absolute validity in all its branches   
and in the articulations of these       
branches1 is nothing but the science    
which he knows4 ,and he knows it because
 he has constructed it in the form in   
which he knows it3 fingit creditique4   
,but this absence of consciousness from 
the constructing1 and the consequent    
faith in the realistic value of science1

 determine the positions and the        
doctrines which produce the consequences
 ,i have deplored4 ,for he who          
establishes a school and enacts its     
regulations takes as a model his own    
science1 without at all being aware that
 it is only his own4 ,it becomes        
therefore the content of the institution
 and determines its method4 ,but a      
teacher who does not feel inclined to   
teach that given science and to adopt   
that special method creates his own     
ideal1 which is but the projection of   
his personal culture2 and unable to     
account critically for the intrinsic    
connection existing between his ideal   
and his personality1 he too fingit      
creditique4 ,he believes that the school
 authority has erred1 and that ,science1
 as he understands it1 must be kept     
distinct from the official doctrines4   
,but in his mind his science is not his 
own4 ,it is1 he is confident1 that      
,sovereign ,science which by his method 
and through his cult must enlighten the 

school over which he rules4 ,and so at  
the point of arrival where the realistic
 conception of methods must work1 it is 
found to be effective notwithstanding   
the rebuffs of reality1 and it works4   
,it works and it acts in the only way   
that it is possible for it to act1      
namely1 by going amiss4 ,it fails and   
will always continue to fail1 not so    
much because every pupil has his own    
personality and will have his own       
particular culture with its             
corresponding method1 but especially    
because whatever the number of the      
pupils in a school1 the human mind knows
 of no culture which is not also its own
 free development1 its autonomous       
ethical becoming4 ,a science1 which is  
supposed to exist before the spirit1    
becomes a thing1 and will never again be
 able to trace its way back to the      
spirit4 ,by presupposing science1       
teachers materialise the culture in     
whose development education consists2   
and this materiality of a culture known 

to teachers renders impossible that     
other culture which is unknown to       
teachers1 which is going to be not      
theirs1 but the pupils'1 for whom they  
work and in whose behalf the school was 
instituted4  ,methods1 programmes1 and  
manuals most conspicuously reveal the   
realistic prejudices of school          
technique2 and against these educators  
should constantly be on their guard4    
,for these prejudices have1 as ,vico    
would put it1 an eternal motive1 which  
at times seems to be definitely uprooted
 and completely done away with1 only to 
reappear1 alas6 in a different form and 
with an ever renewed lease of life4 ,the
 motive is the following3 ,the school is
 created when people are conscious of a 
certain amount of knowledge already     
attained1 well defined1 and recognised  
as valuable4 ,likewise man's value      
socially is estimated on the work done1 
and it is on the basis of this finished 
work that he is credited with the       
acquisition of a certain personality4   

,this is assuredly no longer a becoming 
but a being2 an existent thing1 already 
realised1 which1 though a contradiction 
in terms for those of us who have       
mastered the concept of the attributes  
of the spirit1 is not thereby condemned 
as accidental and disposed of once for  
all4 ,for it is also true that culture1 
personality1 science1--spiritual reality
 in short1--is a reality1 and true it is
 that when we know it1 we know it as    
already realised4 ,we may indeed have a 
very keen and lively sentiment of the   
subjectivity1 and inwardness1 and       
newness or originality of our culture1  
in which1 for example1 ,dante1 ,dante   
himself1 is our ,dante1 is ,we4 ,but yet
 this ,we looms before us as a truth    
which transcends our particular we4 ,it 
is truth2 it is science4 ,and before    
this divine ,truth1 before this         
,science1 we too fall on our knees1     
because it is no longer a mythology1    
but--our experience1 our life4  ,thus we
 think2 thus1 spiritually1 we live4 ,i  

meditate and inquire into the mystery of
 the universe unceasingly2 but in the   
background of my inquiry1 from time to  
time a solution appears1 a discovery    
which urges my exploring mind onward4   
,mystery itself is not mystery unless it
 be known as such1 and then it becomes  
knowledge4 ,inquiry is therefore at once
 a research and a discovery4 ,and this  
untiring activity1 which knows neither  
sleep nor rest1 is mirrored before its  
own eyes and lives in the fond          
contemplation of its reflected image1   
which image in its objectivity appears  
to it as fixed as it1 the activity1 is  
mobile4 ,and no man ever felt so keenly 
the humility and meanness of his powers1
 no one ever presumed so little of      
himself1 that he could not yet be drawn 
by his own nature to idolise himself1 to
 see himself before himself1 exactly as 
he is1 as what he cannot but be4 ,and on
 the other hand we cannot but affirm our
 immortal faith in the absolute truth of
 the ideals which impose upon us        

sentiments of humility4  ,the error     
which we must victoriously contend      
against is not this ingenuous and       
unconquered faith in the objectivity of 
thought 7which is also the objectivity  
of all things74 ,what we must fight     
against is mental torpor and the sloth  
of the heart1 which induce us to stop in
 front of the object as soon as we get  
it4 ,a deplorable failing indeed1 since 
the object is lost in the very act by   
which we grasp it1 and we must again    
resume our work and toil some more in   
order to attain it again4 ,for the      
object1 in short1 does exist1 but in the
 subject2 and in order to be a living   
and real object it must live on the life
 itself of the subject4  ,a textbook is 
a textbook3 when it was written1 and if 
its author was capable of thinking and  
of living in his thought1 it too was a  
living thing2 and a living thing1 that  
is1 spirit1 it will continue to be for  
the instructor who does not through     
indolence allow himself to believe that 

all the thinking demanded by the subject
 was done once for all by the author of 
the manual4 ,for the manual1 as a book  
intended for the teacher1 meant to be   
constantly awakened by teachers to an   
ever quickened life1 the life of the    
spirit1 can only be what the instructor 
makes it4 ,he1 therefore1 must have     
culture enough to read it as his book2  
he must be able to restore it to life1  
to re-create it by the living process of
 his personal thought4 ,this done1 he   
will have done but one-half of the work 
needed to transform himself from a      
reader into a teacher4 ,for his reading 
must lead up to the reading of the      
pupils2 and they ought not to be        
confronted with the finished product of 
a culture turned out1 all ready-made by 
the mechanism of the handbook4 ,so that 
we should now complete our previous     
statement1 and say that the teacher     
re-creates the book when he revives it  
in the mind of the one for whom the book
 was written2 when author1 teacher1 and 

pupil constitute but one single spirit1 
whose life animates and inwardly        
vivifies the manual1 which therefore    
ought not to be called1 as it is1 a     
hand-book1 but a spiritual guide for the
 mind4 ,unfortunately the oft-deplored  
indolence which freezes and stiffens    
spiritual life fastens the books to the 
hands of the teacher first1 and then to 
those of the pupils4  ,teachers should  
carefully watch themselves4 ,if the book
 begins to feel heavy in their hands1 it
 is a sign that it is becoming a burden 
on the pupils' minds4 ,it will end by   
stifling their mental life1 unless its  
oppressive dulness is dispelled by the  
reawakened consciousness of the         
instructor4 ,teachers should never for  
an instant become remiss in their loving
 solicitude for their school4 ,when     
their book1 the book they selected for  
their pupils1 as the means of imparting 
the culture for which the school stands1
 ceases to be the pupils' book1         
cherished by them as a thing of their   

own1 intimately bound up with their     
persons1 then it is high time to throw  
it away4 ,for the moment a book loses   
its power to attract it instantly begins
 to repel4 ,it then becomes an          
instrument of torture and a menace for  
the life of the youthful minds entrusted
 to the teachers' care4  ,dictionaries  
and grammars go side by side with       
handbooks1--instruments of culture that 
are only too often converted into       
engines of torture4 ,the abuse of these 
books1 especially noticeable in the     
secondary schools1 is not limited to    
them1 but is infecting primary          
instruction too1 and teachers should    
know what such books are1 and be        
enlightened as to their limitations4    
,otherwise the dictionary becomes the   
cemetery of speech1 and grammar the     
annexed dissecting room4 ,a lexicon is a
 burial ground for the mortal remains of
 those living beings which we call human
 words1 each one of which always lives  
in a context1 not because it is there in

 bodily company1 in the society of other
 words1 but because in every context it 
has a special signification1 being the  
form of a precise thought or state of   
mind1 as we may wish to call it4 ,a word
 need not be joined to other words to   
form that complex which grammarians call
 a sentence4 ,it may stand alone1 all by
 itself1 and constitute a discourse1 and
 express a thought1 even a very great   
thought4 ,the fiat of the book of       
,genesis is an example4 ,what is        
requisite is that the word1 whether by  
itself or with others1 should adhere to 
the personality1 to the spiritual       
situation1 and be the actual expression 
of a soul4 ,when joined to the soul a   
word1 which materially is identical with
 countless other words uttered by other 
souls1 and with the peculiar accents of 
the respective personalities1 reveals   
its particular expression1 is a         
particular word not to be ever compared 
with any of those countless ones        
materially identical with it4 ,the      

biblical fiat1 repeated by men who feel 
within them the almighty ,word of the   
,creator1 is constantly taking on new   
shades of meaning1 is always reinforced 
by richer tones1 and will always        
continue to do so1 as a result of the   
numerous ways that men have of picturing
 to themselves the deity1 and in        
accordance with the variety of          
doctrines1 phantasies1 and sentiments1  
or whatever other forms of activity may 
converge into the expression of a       
person's spiritual life4 ,so that if1   
abstractly considered1 it is the word   
that we read1 always the same1 in the   
sublime passage of ,genesis1 in reality 
it lives in an infinite number of forms1
 as though an infinite number of words4 
,but in dictionaries1 words are sundered
 from the minds1 detached from the      
context1 soulless and dead4 ,a good     
lexicon--and those that are put in the  
hands of pupils are seldom              
satisfactory--should always in some way 
restore the word to the natural context1

 enchase it1 so to speak1 in the jewel  
from which it was torn4 ,it should never
 presume to give meanings of abstracted 
words1 but ought to point them out as   
they exist historically in the authors  
who are deemed worthy representatives of
 the language or of the literature4     
,dictionaries so compiled do away partly
 with the objectionable abstractness1   
but are yet unable to conjure the dead  
from their tombs4 ,their weakness and   
insufficiency lie first of all in the   
fact that the true context of a word1 in
 which it lives concretely1 and from    
which therefore it draws its meaning1 is
 in reality not the brief phrase1 which 
is all that historical dictionaries can 
quote1 but rather the entire work of the
 author from which the quoted phrase    
derives whatever colours it may possess 
and its own peculiar shade4 ,and the    
whole work in turn can be understood    
only in connection with the boundless   
historical environments out of which it 
emerges1 in which it lives1 and where   

its thoughts receive their peculiar     
colouring and their special             
significance4 ,the insufficiency of the 
dictionary comes out even more clearly  
from another and more important         
consideration4 ,an historical dictionary
 of the ,italian language will1 for     
example1 tell us how ,machiavelli used  
the word virtue 7virtu71 and by the     
examples adduced we should see or       
perhaps surmise the meaning of that     
word1 the knowledge of which is not just
 mere erudition1 in as much as in the   
mind of the cultured reader the thought 
of ,machiavelli is restored to life1 and
 with it the concept which he was wont  
to express by the term virtue4 ,but     
idealistically speaking1 is this word   
,machiavelli's or is it ours1--a word   
belonging to us who are inquiring into  
his thoughts8 ,it is ours1 by all means1
 and for the reason that it belongs to  
our ,machiavelli4 ,unless we have then  
within us this our ,machiavelli1 it is  
useless for us to search for the meaning

 of the word in the dictionary4 ,in it  
surely we may find it1 but as a dead    
body to be resurrected only by          
remembering that its life is not in the 
printed page but in us1 and only in us4 
,in our life everything will have to be 
resuscitated that is to become part of  
our culture4  ,and the same applies to  
grammars4 ,as people conceive them and  
use them1 what are they if not a        
schematic arrangement of the forms by   
which words are joined so as to         
constitute speech8 ,and how can we cut  
the discourse to the quick and extract  
these schemes1 without at the same time 
destroying its life8 ,the scheme is a   
part of speech1 and it is a rule4       
,grammar is a series of rules regarding 
the parts of speech1 considered singly  
and collectively4 ,but the grammatical  
scheme--part of speech or               
rule--abstracts a generic form from the 
particular expression in such a way that
 the paradigm of a conjugation1 for     
example1 shall be the conjugation of    

many verbs but not of any determined    
one4 ,the rule governing the use of the 
conditional is in the same way referred 
to every verb which expresses a         
conditional act or occurrence1 but to no
 one verb in a peculiar manner4 ,but    
since no speech contains a verb which   
might present to us a verbal form which 
is not also the form of a determined    
verb1 nor a conditional which does not  
point with precision to the action or   
occurrence subordinated to a condition1 
it is evident that the scheme places    
before us1 not the living and concrete  
body of the speech1 but a dissected and 
dead part of this body4  ,i shall not   
here recall the controversies occasioned
 by the difficulties inherent in the    
normative character ordinarily          
attributed to grammatical schemes4 ,i   
shall simply note that a scheme becomes 
intelligible only if the example        
accompanies it2 and the example always  
turns out to be a living discourse1     
within which therefore we meet again the

 scheme1 but liberated from the presumed
 abstractness to which it had been      
confined by the grammarian4 ,and ,i     
shall merely add that the grammatical   
norm1 which in the realistic conception 
of grammar is presented as a rule1      
anteceding actual speech both in time   
and ideally1 has in reality no validity 
whatsoever excepting as a law internal  
to the speaking itself1 which brings out
 its normative force only in the act    
itself of speaking4 ,in spite of this1  
however1 the majority of people consider
 grammar as an antecedent to speech and 
to thought1 and therefore to the life of
 the spirit4 ,it appears to them as a   
reef on which the freedom of the        
personality must be driven in the course
 of its becoming1 bearing down as it    
does on a past which is believed to     
exist beneath the horizon of actuality  
and beyond the present life of the      
spirit4 ,to them grammar is legislation 
passed by former writers and speakers1  
prescribing norms for those who intend  

to use the same language in the future4 
,against this myth1 and the consequent  
idol of grammar worshipped as a thing   
which has not only the right1 but the   
means also1 of controlling and          
oppressing the creative spontaneity of  
speech1 teachers should be constantly on
 their guard1 if they feel bound to     
respect and protect the spirituality of 
culture4  ,neither grammar then1 nor    
rhetoric1 nor any kind of misguided     
preceptive teaching should be allowed to
 introduce into the school the menace of
 realism which lurks naturally in the   
shadow of all prescriptive systems4 ,a  
precept is a mere historical indication1
 a sign which points to something that  
was done as to something that had to be 
done then and is to be done now4 ,it was
 done and it was thought that it had to 
be done4 ,but what was done cannot be   
done over again1 and what was thought   
cannot again be thought4 ,life knows no 
past other than the one which it        
contains within its living present4 ,the

 precept has no value excepting as that 
precept which we in every single        
instance intuit1 and which we must      
intuit1 being spiritually alive and     
free1 as the peculiar form of our       
thought1 of our speaking1 of our doing1 
of our being1 in short1 which is our    
becoming4 ,if we look upon a precept as 
transcending this becoming1 and as an   
antecedent to it1 we misapprehend and   
therefore imperil our indwelling        
freedom1 which for us now ought to mean 
not simply the failure to foster the    
growth of the spirit1 but a deliberate  
attempt to hinder and thwart its        
development and to blight the function  
of culture4  ,one more prejudice of     
those imputed to realistic instruction  
must still be pointed out1 and it will  
be the last4 ,it is one of those        
time-worn devices whose history1        
extending over a thousand years1        
reflects the entire life of the         
school--the composition4 ,teachers      
expect and demand that a predetermined  

and definite theme1 as a nucleus of a   
thought organism1 as leit-motif1 so to  
speak1 of a work of art1 as a ruling    
principle for moral or speculative      
reflections1 be developed by pupils who 
may yet have never given the topic a    
single thought1 who may possibly be not 
at all attuned to that definite         
spiritual vibration1 who may in short be
 quite removed from the line along which
 the theme should be developed4 ,in the 
lower grades the line itself is marked1 
the entire contour is given1 and the    
pupil's mind is arbitrarily encompassed 
within this fixed outline4 ,these       
methods are now fortunately applied with
 diminished rigour and less crudely than
 before4 ,but the fact remains that in  
all classes the teacher either assigns a
 theme at random1 picking a topic from a
 casual reading or from among the whims 
of his rambling fancy1 or else he       
conscientiously and carefully studies   
the possibilities of a subject1 and     
develops it to a certain extent before  

he assigns it2 so that he naturally     
expects the pupil's treatment to conform
 to his own delineation2 and he values  
the composition in proportion as it     
approaches the rough draft which he had 
previously sketched in his mind4  ,here 
too1 as elsewhere1 we encounter the     
difficulty of a thought which is        
presupposed to thinking1 which therefore
 binds it1 strains it and racks it out  
of its healthy and fruitful growth2 for 
thought cannot live without freedom4    
,the dangers are many that beset us in  
the practice of theme-composition1 and  
not all of them of a merely intellectual
 character4 ,there is no intellectual   
deficiency which is not also at the same
 time a moral blemish2 and a course of  
exercises1 such as we have considered1  
not only jeopardises the formation of   
the intelligence by urging it along a   
line of false and empty artificiality to
 the postiche and the applique1 but it  
also1 and far more seriously1 threatens 
the moral character of the pupils in    

that it beguiles them into a sinful     
familiarity with insincerity1 which     
might perhaps become downright cheating4
  ,composition however in itself is not 
taboo for the idealist4 ,like grammar   
and every other instrument of the       
teaching profession it must be converted
 from the abstract to the concrete4 ,we 
should never demand of the pupil an     
inventiveness beyond his powers1 never  
unfairly expect of his mind what it     
cannot yet give4 ,the boy must not be   
given a subject drawn from a world with 
which he is unfamiliar4 ,but when the   
subject springs naturally from the      
pupil's own soul1 in the atmosphere of  
the school1 and as a part of the        
spiritual life which unites him to his  
teacher and to his classmates1 then     
composition1 like every other element of
 a freely developing culture1 is a      
creation and an unfailing progress4 ,for
 whatever has been frozen by the chill  
of realism1 and has been consequently   
made unfit for the life of the spirit1  

may again be revived in the warmth of   
the living intelligence of the concrete1
 and be thence idealistically fused with
 the spontaneous and vigorous current of
 spiritual reality4     ,,chapter ,,viii
  ,,the ,,unity ,,of ,,education        
,having exemplified the prejudices of   
realism in the phases that are most     
harmful to education1 ,i shall now      
proceed to discuss the fundamental      
corollary of the idealistic thesis as an
 effective remedy against the ravages of
 realism4 ,for1 as ,i have already      
shown1 the realistic conception of life 
and culture is by no means a minor error
 which could be corrected as soon as    
discovered4 ,originating in a primitive 
tendency which impels the human spirit  
on through a realistic phase before it  
can freely emerge into the loftier      
consciousness of self and power 7which  
is the conquest of idealism71 this error
 again and again crops out of even the  
most convinced anti-realistic           
consciousness4 ,so that if at any moment

 our higher reflection slackens its     
vigilance1 the error creeps back into   
the midst of our ideas1 gains control of
 our intelligence1 and resumes its      
former sway over thought4 ,it is not    
sufficient then to become aware of the  
faults of realism and of the prejudices 
in which it is mirrored2 we must1 in    
addition to all this1 strengthen in our 
minds the intuition of the spirituality 
of culture1 render it more subtle1 more 
accurate1 more certain1 and bring to it 
the energy of a faith which1 after      
taking possession of our souls1 shall   
become our life's character4  ,we must  
therefore look intently at the          
significance of that principle which    
identifies culture with man's           
personality1 notice its most important  
consequences1 and set these up as the   
laws of education1 since by education we
 mean the creation of a living culture  
which shall be the life of the human    
mind4 ,the first and foremost of these  
consequences1 the direct corollary of   

our proposition1 is the concept of the  
,unity of ,education4 ,though often     
referred to1 it has not yet been        
attained by pedagogical doctrines1 nor  
has it been the aim of the work of      
teachers4 ,neither theory nor           
practice--more intimately connected than
 is ordinarily supposed--shows as yet   
that this concept is understood and     
adequately appreciated4 ,it is opposed  
with full force by the realistic        
conception which1 keeping man distinct  
from his culture1 and materialising this
 culture1 naturally attributes to it1   
and to education in which it is         
reflected1 that multiplicity and        
fragmentariness which is the            
characteristic of things material4      
,this scrappiness of culture and of     
education is the error on which all the 
prejudices of realistic pedagogy are    
grounded4 ,it is the enemy that must be 
vanquished in the course of the crusade 
that has been preached by idealism in   
its endeavour to liberate instruction   

from the deadly oppression of mechanism4
 ,but in order to combat this foe we    
must first know it3 and we must gain a  
clear understanding of that unity of    
education which it antagonises with     
uncompromising opposition4  ,if we open 
a treatise on pedagogy or examine a     
schedule of courses1 if we look through 
a programme or stop to consider our     
every-day technical terminology1 we     
cannot help noticing that education is  
broken up by divisions and subdivisions 
ad infinitum1 exactly as though it were 
a material object1 which because        
material possesses infinite             
divisibility4 ,textbooks tell us that   
education is 7#a7 physical1 7#b7        
intellectual1 7#c7 moral4 ,then         
narrowing the subject down to one       
section1 the intellectual1 which for    
good reasons has been treated more      
carefully and sympathetically by        
traditional pedagogy1 we find some such 
subdivisions3 artistic1 scientific1     
literary1 philosophical1 religious1 etc4

 ,again1 artistic education will be     
split up into as many sections as there 
are arts1 and scientific instruction in 
the same way2 for pedagogy assigns to   
each branch of the classification its   
corresponding method of teaching4 ,it   
goes without saying that the sciences of
 any given branch are different among   
themselves1 and the study of botany1 for
 example1 is not the study of zoology4  
,and there are as many forms of culture 
to be promoted by education as there are
 sciences2 which is clearly shown by    
school announcements assigning to       
certain years1 and for definite days and
 hours1 the several courses of the      
curriculum1 that is1 the several        
educations4  ,it is taken for granted   
that ,education1 properly so called1    
will result from the ensemble of these  
particular educations--physical1        
intellectual1 moral1 etc41--each one of 
which contributes its share to the final
 result1 and is therefore a part of the 
entire education4 ,and each field       

produces certain peculiar results which 
it would be idle to demand of another   
section1 just as we never expect an     
olive grove to yield a crop of peaches4 
,every part1 self-contained and quite   
distinct from the rest1 absolutely      
excludes all other parts from itself4   
,therefore the subjects taught in a     
school are numerous1 and there must     
accordingly be specialised teachers4    
,and again each instructor must be      
careful not to mix up the several parts 
which compose his subject4 ,the teacher 
of history1 for example1 when he takes  
up the ,french ,revolution1 must forget 
the unification of ,italy1 and treat    
each event in order and in turn2 and the
 instructor of ,italian will take up the
 history of literature on a certain day 
of the week1 and devote some other hour 
to the study of the individual works    
themselves4  ,so also we never fail to  
distinguish and carefully separate the  
two parts of the teacher's work1 his    
ability as a disciplinarian and his     

skill in imparting information1 for it  
is an accepted commonplace of school    
technique that ability to teach is one  
thing1 and the power to maintain        
discipline is another4 ,it is one thing 
to be able to keep the class attentive  
to the discussion of a given subject1   
and quite another to treat this subject 
suitably for the needs and attainments  
of the pupils4 ,discipline is considered
 thus as a mere threshold2 the real     
teaching comes after4 ,for1 it is       
argued1 discipline has no cultural      
content2 it is nothing more than the    
spiritual disposition and adaptation    
which should precede the acquisition1 or
 if we so wish to call it1 the          
development of real culture1--a         
disposition which is obtained when      
respect for the authority of the teacher
 is ensured4  ,the recognition of that  
authority simply means the establishment
 of a necessary condition2 as for the   
real work of education1 that is yet to  
come4 ,and if we should stop at what we 

have called the threshold1 we should    
have no school at all4 ,there are       
teachers1 in fact1 who keep good        
discipline1 but who are yet unable to   
teach1 either through lack of culture or
 because they are deficient in methods4 
,all these are commonplaces to which we 
often resort without stopping to        
consider their validity4 ,and1 in truth1
 it is because of this lack of          
consideration that we are able to use   
them without noticing their absurdities 
and without therefore feeling the       
necessity of emending our ways4 ,this   
lack of reflection resolves itself into 
a lack of precision in the handling of  
these concepts4 ,they are formulated    
without much rigour with a great deal of
 elasticity1 and in the spirit of       
compromising with that truth against    
which they would otherwise too jarringly
 clash4  ,first of all1 no one has ever 
conceived the possibility of separating 
discipline from education4 ,what is     
often done is to distinguish discipline 

from that part of education which is    
called instruction1 and to consider the 
two as integrating the total concept of 
education4 ,mention is often made of the
 educational value of discipline4 ,but  
this kind of co-ordination of the two   
forms of education--discipline and      
instruction--and their subordination to 
the generic concept of education are    
more easily formulated than             
comprehended4 ,for if we should         
distinguish them simply on the grounds  
that one is the necessary antecedent of 
the other1 we should have a relationship
 similar to that which connects any part
 of instruction with the part which must
 be presupposed before it as an         
antecedent moment in the same process of
 development4 ,but the relationship     
which exists between any two parts of   
instruction cannot serve to distinguish 
from instruction a thing which is       
different from it4  ,we might wish1     
perhaps1 to consider as characteristic  
of this absolute antecedence the        

establishment of the authority without  
which teaching1 properly so called1     
cannot begin4 ,but the objection to this
 would be that every moment of the      
teaching process presupposes a new      
authority1 which can never be considered
 as definitely acquired1 which is       
constantly being imposed anew1 and which
 must proceed at every given instance   
from the effective spiritual action     
exercised by the teacher upon the pupil4
 ,in other words1 ,i mean to say that no
 teacher is able independently of the   
merits of his teaching to maintain      
discipline simply and solely on the     
strength of his personal prestige1 of   
his force of character1 or any other    
suitable qualification4 ,for whoever he 
may be1 and whatever the power by which 
at the start he is able to attract the  
attention of his pupils and to keep it  
riveted on his words1 the teacher as he 
begins to impart information ceases to  
be what he was immediately before1 and  
becomes to the eyes of his pupils an    

ever changing individual1--bigger or    
smaller1 stronger or weaker1 and        
therefore more or less worthy of that   
attention and that respect of which boys
 are capable in their expectance of     
spiritual light and joy4 ,the initial   
presentation is nothing more than a     
promise and an anticipation4 ,in the    
course of teaching this anticipation    
must not be disappointed1 this promise  
must be constantly fulfilled and more   
than fulfilled by the subsequent        
developments4 ,the teacher's personality
 as revealed at the beginning must be   
borne out by all that he does in the    
course of the lesson4 ,experience       
confirms this view1 and the reason of it
 is to be found in the doctrine now     
familiar to us of the spirit that never 
is definitely1 but is always            
constituting itself1 always becoming4   
,and every man is esteemed and          
appreciated on the strength of what he  
shows himself to be at any given moment1
 and in virtue of the experience which  

we continue to have of his being1--a    
being which is the development in which 
he realises himself4  ,so1 then1        
discipline is never enforced definitely 
and in such a way that the teacher may  
proceed to build on it as on a firm     
basis without any further concern4 ,and 
it is therefore difficult to see how we 
could possibly sever with a clean cut   
the task of keeping discipline from the 
duty of imparting instruction4  ,nor is 
it any more plausible to maintain that  
discipline1 though it may not           
chronologically precede instruction1 is 
its logical antecedent1 in the sense    
that there are at every instant of the  
life of the school both discipline and  
instruction1 the former as a condition  
of the latter4 ,the difficulty here is  
that if we assumed this1 we ought to be 
able to indicate the difference between 
the condition and the conditioned2 which
 difference1 unless we rest content with
 vague words1 is not forthcoming1 and   
cannot be found4 ,i maintain that were  

it possible for the teacher definitely  
to enthrone1 so to speak1 discipline in 
his school1 all his work were done4 ,he 
would have fulfilled his entire duty1   
acquitted his obligation1 and achieved  
the results of his mission1 whether we  
look upon this mission in the complex of
 its development1 or whether we consider
 it ideally in the instant of its       
determined act1 which is yet a process  
and therefore a development4 ,for what1 
in fact1 is discipline8 ,is it          
established authority8 ,but this        
authority is the whole of education4    
,for authority cannot be1 as ,i have    
explained before1 a mere claim3 it must 
become actual in the effective action   
performed by the educating personality1 
and this action is education4 ,and when 
this education consists1 for example1 in
 the imparting of a rule of syntax1     
education becomes actual when the pupil 
really apprehends that rule from his    
instructor exactly as it is taught to   
him1 and thus appropriates the teacher's

 manner of thinking and his intellectual
 behaviour on that special subject1 and 
acts and does as the teacher wants him  
to4 ,and from the point of view of      
discipline1 this is all we want at that 
moment4  ,if in the course of education1
 considered as a whole or at any        
particular moment of it1 we should      
separate discipline from instruction1   
now turning our attention to the one and
 now to the other1 we know from         
experience that we should never get     
anywhere4 ,as a matter of fact1 the     
distinction thrusts itself to the fore  
only when the problem of discipline is  
erroneously formulated by treating it   
abstractly4 ,for who is it that worries 
over discipline as such1 and as though  
it were a thing different from teaching8
 ,who is it that looks upon this problem
 as an insoluble one8 ,only the teacher 
who1 unable to maintain discipline1     
frets over it and failing to discover it
 where it is naturally to be found1     
desperately looks for it where it is    

not1 where it could not possibly be4    
,and so he is helplessly perturbed1 like
 the man who1 feeling upon himself the  
concentrated gaze of all the guests     
seated in a parlour1 is no longer able  
to walk across the floor2 it is the same
 difficulty and impediment we encounter 
every time we try to watch and study our
 movements4 ,in the same way the        
spontaneous outburst of eloquent        
sentiments that flow from the fulness of
 our hearts is checked by the endeavour 
to analyse them1 to study the words--to 
substitute art for nature4  ,the real   
teacher1 the naturally gifted teacher1  
never bothers about these puzzling      
questions of pedagogical discipline4 ,he
 teaches with such devotion2 he is so   
close spiritually to his pupils1 so     
sympathetic with their views2 his work  
is so serious1 so sincere1 so eager1 so 
full of life1 that he is never compelled
 to face a recalcitrant1 rebellious     
personality that could only be reduced  
by resorting to the peculiar means of   

discipline4 ,the docility of the pupils 
in the eyes of the able teacher is      
neither an antecedent nor a consequent  
of his teachings2 it is an aspect of it4
 ,it originates with the very act by    
which he begins to teach1 and ceases    
with the end of his teaching4           
,concretely1 the discipline which good  
teachers enforce in the classroom is the
 natural behaviour of the spirit which  
adheres to itself in the seriousness and
 inwardness of its own work4            
,discipline1 authority1 and respect for 
authority are absent whenever it is     
impossible to establish that unique     
superior personality1 in which the      
spiritual life of the pupils and of the 
teachers are together fused and united4 
,whenever the students fail to find     
their ideal in the teacher2 when they   
are disappointed by his aspect1 his     
gaze1 his words1 in the complex         
concreteness of his spiritual           
personality1 which does not rise to the 
ideal which at every moment is present  

in their expectations1 then the order of
 discipline is lacking4 ,but when this  
actual unity obtains--this unity which  
is the task of the teacher1 and the aim 
of all education--then discipline1      
authority1 and respect are present as   
never failing elements4  ,this          
pedagogical problem of discipline would 
never have arisen if immature reflection
 had not distinguished two empirically  
different aspects of human personality1 
the practical and the theoretical1      
whereby it would appear that man1 when  
he does things1 should not be considered
 in the same light as when he thinks and
 understands1 knows and learns4 ,from   
this point of view1 discipline of       
deportment is to be referred to the     
pupil as practical spiritual activity1  
while teaching aims at his theoretic    
activity4 ,the former should guide the  
pupil1 regulate his conduct as a member 
of that special community which we call 
the school1 and facilitate the          
fulfilment of the obligations which he  

has toward the institution1 toward his  
fellow-pupils1 and toward himself4 ,the 
latter1 on the other hand1 assuming the 
completion of this practical            
edification1 proceeds to the mental     
formation of the personality1 considered
 as progressive acquirement of culture4 
,discipline in this system appears to be
 the morals of the school4 ,i use the   
word morals in a very broad sense--just 
as morality might be considered as the  
discipline of society and of life in    
general4 ,for everybody1 it is argued1  
distinguishes between the character of  
man and his intelligence1 between his   
conduct and his knowledge4 ,the two     
terms may indeed be drawn together1 but 
they also exist quite apart4 ,so that a 
man devoid of character1 or possessed   
with an indomitable will for evil1 may  
nevertheless be extremely learned and   
shrewd1 or as subtle as the serpent2    
whereas a moral man1 through lack of    
understanding1 may become the sport of  
rogues1 and remain illiterate1 devoid of

 all1 even of the slightest             
accomplishments4 ,for will is one thing1
 they say1 and the intellect is another4
  ,the question of the abstractness of  
discipline impels us now to examine the 
legitimacy of this broader distinction1 
which does not simply concern the       
problems of the school1 but extends to  
the fundamental principles of the       
philosophy of the spirit4 ,under its    
influence1 contemporary thought attacks 
all the surviving forms of this ancient 
distinction between will and intellect1 
which rested on a frankly realistic     
intuition of the world4 ,the philosopher
 who crystallised this distinction1 and 
fastened it so hard that it could not be
 broken up completely in the course of  
all subsequent speculation1 was         
,aristotle4 ,a thoroughgoing realist1   
like all ,greek philosophers1 he        
conceived reality as something external 
and antecedent to the mind which thinks 
it and strives to know it4 ,when        
thought1 whose function is the knowing  

of reality1 is thus placed outside of   
this reality1 it is evident that the    
knowledge to which it aspired never     
could have been an activity which       
produces reality4 ,it was accordingly   
maintained that knowledge could not be  
more than a mere survey1 a view of      
reality 7intuition1 theory71 almost like
 a reflected image1 totally extrinsic to
 the essence of the real4 ,but since it 
was evident that man as spiritual       
activity does produce a world of his    
own1 for which he is praised if it is   
deemed good1 but blamed if it is judged 
bad1 it had to follow that there were   
two distinct aspects in human life3 one 
by which man contemplates reality1 the  
other by which he creates his own       
world1--a world1 however1 which is but a
 transformation of the true and original
 reality4 ,these two aspects are the    
will and the intellect4  ,it should not 
now be necessary to criticise this      
concept of a reality assumed to exist1  
in antecedence to the activity of the   

spirit1 and which is the sole support of
 this distinction between will and      
intellect4 ,we might say perhaps that   
though everything does indeed depend    
from the spirit1 and though all is      
spirit1 yet this completely spiritual   
reality is on one hand what is produced1
 the realisation of new realities       
7will71 but on the other hand it is but 
the knowledge of its own reality1 and by
 this knowledge gives no increment to   
its being4 ,however1 if we adopted this 
view1 we would slip back to the position
 we abandoned as untenable1 since a     
thought which propounds the problem of  
its essence and of the essence of the   
reality which it cognises can be but    
mere knowing4 ,for it is again faced by 
a reality--even though it has in this   
case been arbitrarily presumed identical
 with it--a reality which is as an      
antecedent to it1 and leaves to it only 
the task of looking on4 ,so we must     
conclude that the life of the spirit is 
never mere contemplation4 ,what seems to

 be contemplation--that consciousness   
which the spirit acquires of itself1    
and1 acquiring which1 realises          
itself--is a creation3 a creation not of
 things but of its own self4 ,for what  
are things but the spirit as it is      
looked at abstractly in the multiplicity
 of its manifestations8  ,we shall more 
easily understand that our knowing and  
our doing are indiscernible1 if we      
recall that our doing is not what is    
also perceived externally1 a motion in  
space caused by us4 ,this external      
manifestation is quite subordinate and  
adventitious4 ,the essential character  
of our doing is the internal will1 which
 does not1 properly speaking1 modify    
things1 but does modify us1 by bringing 
out in us a personality which otherwise 
would not have been4 ,this is the       
substance of the will1 which we cannot  
deny to thought1 if thought is1 as ,i   
have shown1 development1 and therefore  
continuous self-creation of the         
personality4  ,if intellect then and    

will are one and the same thing1 to such
 an extent that there is no intellect   
which in its development is not         
development of personality1 formation of
 character1 realisation of a spiritual  
reality1 we shall be able to understand 
that the ideas of two distinct spiritual
 activities1 as the basis of the        
ordinary distinction between moral and  
intellectual training1 are mere         
abstractions that tend to lead us away  
from the comprehension of the living    
reality of the spirit4 ,this distinction
 appears to me exceedingly harmful1     
nothing being more deplorable1 from the 
moral point of view1 than to consider   
any part of the life we have to live as 
morally indifferent2 and nothing being  
more harmful to the school than the     
conviction that the moral formation of  
man is not the entire purpose of        
education1 but only a part of its       
content4 ,it is indispensable1 ,i       
maintain1 that the educator have the    
reverent consciousness of the extremely 

delicate moral value of every single    
word which he addresses to his pupils   
and of the profoundly ethical essence of
 the instruction which he imparts to    
them4 ,for the school which gives       
instruction with no moral training in   
reality gives no instruction at all4    
,all the objections voiced on this score
 against education1 which we try to meet
 by adding on to instruction all that   
ought to integrate the truly educational
 function1 are the result of this       
abstract way of looking upon instruction
 solely as the culture of an intellect  
which in some way differs from the will1
 from character1 and from moral         
personality4  ,i wish here to call      
attention to one of the most            
controverted questions connected with   
popular education1 because it brings out
 very clearly the impossibility of      
keeping moral education distinct from   
intellectual instruction4 ,it is        
constantly asserted that the instruction
 of the common people1 that real        

education which is the main purpose of  
the modern state1 is not a question of  
mere reading and spelling2 that these do
 not constitute culture1 but are as     
means to an end1 and ought never to be  
allowed to take the place of the end to 
which they are subservient4 ,the school 
therefore1 if it cannot shape men1      
should at least rough-hew them and give 
them a conscience1 whereas now1 it      
teaches but often does not educate3 it  
gives to the learner the means of       
culture1 and then abandons him to his   
own resources4 ,the optimism of         
educators in the eighteenth century1    
their promise that marvels would come   
out of elementary instruction propagated
 and spread by popular schools devised  
for this purpose1 was constantly met in 
the course of the last century by an    
ever-growing mistrust of instruction    
generally restricted to the notion of   
mere instrumentality4 ,for in addition  
to other shortcomings it was felt that  
this instrument might be put to a very  

bad use2 that elementary learning might 
be a dangerous thing if it were not     
accompanied by something that           
instruction pure and simple cannot give1
 namely1 soundness of heart1 strength of
 mind1 and conscience strong enough to  
uphold intelligence by the vigorous and 
uncompromising principles of moral      
rectitude4 ,the hopefulness of that past
 optimism is fast yielding ground to the
 pessimistic denunciation of the        
insufficiency of mere instruction for   
the moral ends of life4  ,there is a    
serious error in this frequent          
indictment brought against mere         
instruction as a means of attaining what
 is called culture4 ,it proceeds from   
the attempt to separate something that  
was not meant to be separated4 ,what    
,god hath united together1 man shall not
 put asunder4 ,and1 in any event1 a     
separation as illegitimate as this is   
not possible4 ,superficially we may     
distinguish and apparently sunder       
instruction from moral training1 cut off

 the means from the end1 and separate   
the ability to read and write from what 
we are thereby enabled to read and      
write4 ,in fact the letters of the      
alphabet are taught without teaching the
 syllables which they compose1 and      
without the words that are made up of   
these syllables1 and the thoughts that  
are expressed by these words1 and man's 
life which becomes manifest and real in 
these thoughts4 ,the elementary school  
is in fact1 as it is in name1 the       
teaching of the elements4 ,reading1     
writing1 arithmetic1 all subjects called
 for by the school programme are taken  
up as mere elements with which the pupil
 is expected1 later on1 to compose his  
,book of ,life1 complete in all its     
sections4 ,but in the meantime it is    
thought unwise to burden his youthful   
mind with the weighty and complicated   
problems that can be solved only by the 
experience of a more mature life4 ,of   
course after he has gone forth from the 
school into the outer world the young   

man will look upon this elementary      
knowledge as the raw material of his    
future mentality4 ,as he carves out his 
path to this or that goal1 in accordance
 with his spiritual interests and in    
compliance with the contingencies of    
life1 he will avail himself of this     
initial instruction1 use it to further  
his progress towards this or that end1  
good or evil as the case may be4 ,for   
intellectual instruction1 it is argued1 
can be made subservient either to noble 
impulses or to base motives4  ,careful  
consideration1 however1 will show that  
the responsibility of a school for what 
is called moral insufficiency1 but is in
 reality educational defectiveness1     
cannot be removed by this kind of       
considerations4 ,the alphabet begins to 
be such when it ceases to be a series of
 physical marks corresponding to the    
sounds into which all the words of a    
language may be decomposed4 ,the        
alphabetic symbol is effectively such   
when it is a sound1 and it is sound when

 it is an image1 or rather a concrete   
form of an internal vibration of the    
mind4 ,the child begins to see the      
alphabet when he reads with it4 ,up to  
that time he simply draws images or     
inwardly gazes at the semblance of the  
picture he intends to draw1 but he does 
not read4 ,as soon as the symbol is     
read1 it becomes a word4 ,that is why   
every spelling book presents the letters
 in the syllables and the syllables in  
the words4 ,in this way they cease to be
 mere scrawls drawn on the paper1 and   
become thoughts4 ,they may be dim1      
vague1 and mysterious2 they may be      
sharply defined or they may blend and   
fuse into a suggestive haze2 but they   
are in every given instance thoughts    
that are being awakened in the mind of  
the child4 ,these thoughts have in them 
the power to develop1 to organise       
themselves and become a discourse4 ,from
 the simple sentences and the nursery   
rhymes of the primer1 they grow into an 
ever-richer significance4 ,from the     

sowing to the harvesting1 from the green
 stalk to the sturdy trunk1 it is one   
life and one sole process4 ,the mind    
that will soar over the dizzy heights of
 thought begins its flight in the humble
 lowlands4 ,and it first becomes        
conscious of its power to rise1 when the
 life of thought is awakened by the     
words of the spelling book4  ,the moment
 the child begins reading1 he must of   
necessity read something4 ,there is no  
mere instrument without the material to 
which it is to be applied4 ,the infant  
who opens his eyes and strives to look  
cannot but see something4 ,the picture1 
insignificant for the teacher1 has its  
own special colouring for the child's   
mind4 ,he fixes his gaze on it2 he draws
 it within himself1 cherishes it1 and   
fosters it with his fancies4 ,such is   
the law of the spirit6 ,it may be       
violated1 but the consequences of       
transgression are commensurate with the 
majesty of this law4  ,grammars too1    
like spelling primers and rhetorics and 

logic and every kind of preceptive      
teaching1 may be assumed as a form      
separated from its contents1 as         
something empty and abstract4 ,the child
 is taught for instance that the letter 
m in mamma does not belong to that word 
7we call it a word1 and forget that to  
him at least it is not a word but his   
own mother74 ,that letter m1 we tell    
him1 is found in other words1 mat1 meat1
 etc4 ,we show him that it is in all of 
them1 and yet in none of them4 ,we      
therefore can and must abstract it from 
all concrete connections1 isolate and   
fix it as that something which it is in 
itself--the letter m4 ,in the same      
manner we abstract the rule of grammar  
from a number of individual examples4   
,we exalt it over them1 and give it an  
existence which is higher1 and          
independent of theirs4 ,and so for      
rhetoric1 and so for logic4  ,but in    
this process of progressive abstraction1
 in this practice of considering the    
abstract as something substantial1 and  

of reducing the concrete and the        
particular to the subordinate position  
of the accessory1 life recedes and ebbs 
away4 ,the differences between this and 
that word1 between two images1 two      
thoughts1 two modes of thinking1 of     
expressing1 of behaving1 at first become
 slight1 then negligible1 then quite    
inexistent1 and the soul becomes        
accustomed to the generic1 to the empty1
 to the indifferent4 ,it knows no longer
 how to fix the peculiarities of things1
 how to notice the different traits of  
men's characters1 their interests1 their
 diverse values1 until finally it       
becomes indifferent and sceptical4      
,words lose their meaning2 they no      
longer smack of what they used to2 their
 value is gone4 ,things lose their      
individuality1 and men their            
physiognomies4 ,this scepticism robs man
 of his own faith1 of his character and 
personality4 ,the fundamental aim of    
education ceases to exist4 ,abstract    
education is no education at all4 ,it is

 not even instruction4 ,for it does not 
teach the alphabet as it really exists1 
as something inseparable from the sound1
 and from the word1 and from the human  
soul6 ,all it gives is a new            
materialised and detached abstraction4  
,the alphabet is real and concrete1 not 
abstract2 it is not a means but an end2 
it is not mere form but also content4   
,it is not a weapon which man may wield 
indifferently either for good purposes  
or for evil motives4 ,it is man himself4
 ,it is the human soul1 which should    
already flash in the very first word    
that is spelled1 if it is read          
intelligently4 ,and it ought to be a    
good word1 worthy of the child and of   
the future man1 a word in which the     
youthful pupil ought already to be able 
to discover himself1--not himself in    
general1 but that better self which the 
school gradually and progressively will 
teach him to find within himself4 ,so   
considered1 the alphabet is a powerful  
instrument of human formation and of    

moral shaping4 ,it is education4  ,for  
this reason the school must have a      
library1 and should adopt all possible  
means to encourage the habit and develop
 the taste of reading1 since the word   
which truly expresses the soul of man is
 not that one word1 nor the word of that
 one book4 ,a word or a book will always
 be a mere fragment of life1 and many of
 them therefore will be needed4 ,many1  
very many books1 to satisfy the         
ever-growing needs of the child's mind6 
,books that will spur his thought       
constantly towards more distant goals1  
and his heart and imagination with it4  
,thus the child grows to be a man4      
,instruction then which is not education
 is not even instruction4 ,it is a      
denuded abstraction1 violently thrust   
like other abstractions into the life of
 the spirit where it generates that     
monstrosity which we have described as  
material culture1 mechanical and devoid 
of spiritual vitality4 ,that culture1   
being material1 has no unity1 is        

fragmentary1 inorganic1 capable of      
growing indefinitely without in any way 
transforming the recipient mind or      
becoming assimilated to the process of  
the personality to which it simply      
adheres extrinsically4 ,this mechanical 
teaching is commensurate with things1   
and grows proportionately with them2 but
 it has no intimate relation with the   
spirit4 ,he who knows one hundred things
 has not a greater nor a different      
intellectual value from him who knows   
ten1 since the hundred and the ten are  
locked up in both in exactly the same   
way that two different sums of money are
 deposited in two different vaults4     
,what merit is there in the safe which  
contains the greater sum8 ,the merit    
would belong to the man who had         
accumulated the greater amount by a     
greater sum of labour1 for it would then
 be commensurate with work1 which is the
 developing process itself and the life 
of the human personality to which we    
must always have recourse when we       

endeavour to establish values4 ,for as  
we have seen1 nothing is1 properly      
speaking1 thinkable except in relation  
to the human spirit4  ,whether one reads
 a single book or an entire library1 the
 result is the same1 if what is read    
fails to become the life of the         
reader--his feelings and his thoughts1  
his passions and his meditation1 his    
experience and the extolment of his     
personality4 ,the poet ,giusti has said3
 ,writing a book is worse than useless1 
unless it is going to change people4    
,reading a book with no effect is       
infinitely worse4 ,of course the people 
that have to be transformed1 both for   
the writer and for the reader 7who are  
not two very different persons after    
all71 are not the others1 but first of  
all the author himself4 ,the mere       
reading of a page or even a word        
inwardly reconstitutes us1 if it does   
consist in a new throb of our           
personality1 which continuously renews  
itself through the incessant vibrations 

of its becoming4 ,this then is the      
all-important solution1--that the book  
or the word of a teacher arouse our     
souls and set them in motion2 that it   
transform itself into our inner life2   
that it cease to be a thing1 special and
 determinate1 one of the many1 and      
become transfused into our personality4 
,and our personality in its act1 in the 
act1 ,i say1 and not in the abstract    
concept which we may somehow form of    
it1--is absolute unity3 that moving     
unity to which education can in no wise 
be referred1 unless it is made identical
 with its movement1 and therefore       
entirely conformant to its unity4  ,the 
man whose culture is limited1 or1       
rather1 entirely estranged from the     
understanding of life1 is called homo   
unius libri4 ,we might just as well call
 him homo omnium librorum4 ,for he who  
would read all books need have a leaking
 brain like the perforated vessel of the
 daughters of ,danaus1--a leak through  
which all ideas1 all joys1 all sorrows1 

and all hopes1 everything that man may  
find in books1 would have to flow       
unceasingly1 without leaving any traces 
of their passage1 without ever forming  
that personality which1 having acquired 
a certain form or physiognomy1 reacts   
and becomes selective1 picks what it    
wants out of the congeries1 and chooses1
 out of all possible experiences1 only  
what it requires for the life that is   
suited to it4 ,we should never add books
 upon books ad infinitum6 ,it is not a  
question of quantity4 ,what we need is  
the ability to discover our world in    
books1--that sum total of interests     
which respond to all the vibrations of  
our spirit1 which assuredly1 as ,herbart
 claimed1 has a multiplicity of         
interests1 but all of them radiating    
from a vital centre4 ,and everything is 
in the centre1 since everything         
originates there4  ,education which     
strives to get at the centre of the     
personality1 the sole spot whence it is 
possible to derive the spiritual value  

of a living culture1 is essentially     
moral1 and may never be hemmed in within
 the restricted bounds of an abstract   
intellectual training4 ,there is in     
truth a kind of instruction which is not
 education2 not because it is in no way 
educative1 but because it gives a bad   
education and trains for evil4 ,this    
realistic education1 which is           
substantially materialistic1            
extinguishes the sentiment of freedom in
 man1 debases his personality1 and      
stifles in him the living consciousness 
of the spirituality of the world1 and   
consequently of man's responsibility4   
,the antithesis between instruction and 
education is the antithesis between     
realistic and idealistic culture1 or    
again1 that existing between a material 
and a spiritual conception of life4 ,if 
the school means conquest of freedom1 we
 must learn to loathe the scrappiness of
 education1 the fractioning tendency    
which presumes to cut off one part from 
the rest of the body1 as if education1  

that is1 personality1 could have many   
parts4 ,we must learn to react against a
 system of education which1 conceiving  
its role to be merely intellectualistic1
 and such as to make of the human spirit
 a clear mirror of things1 proceeds to  
an infinite subdivision to match the    
infinite multiplicity of things4 ,unity 
ought to be our constant aim4 ,we should
 never look away from the living1 that  
is1 the person1 the pupil into whose    
soul our loving solicitude should strive
 to gain access in order to help him    
create his own world4     ,,chapter ,,ix
  ,,character ,,and ,,physical          
,,education   ,the principle of         
educational unity which ,i have briefly 
tried to illustrate demands a further   
development in connection with the      
claims of physical culture4 ,for after  
we have unified moral and intellectual  
discipline in the one concrete concept  
of the education of the spirit1 whose   
activity cannot be cognitive without    
also being practical1 and cannot realise

 any moral values except through        
cognition1 it might yet seem that a     
complete and perfect system of education
 should aim at the physical development 
as well as at the spiritual4 ,for the   
pupil is not solely mind4 ,he has a body
 also2 and these two terms1 body and    
spirit1 must be conceived in such close 
connection and in such intimate         
conjunction that the health of the one  
be dependent on the soundness of the    
other4  ,before elucidating this        
argument1 we must voice our appreciation
 of the pedagogical principle by virtue 
of which the ancient ,greeks developed  
their athletic education1 and which     
since the ,renaissance has for a        
different motive been reintroduced into 
the theory of physical culture1--a      
theory which ,i do not at all oppose1   
but rather intend to reaffirm on the    
grounds of educational unity4 ,this     
pedagogical principle evidently         
originated in the mode of considering   
the function of the bodily organism in  

respect to the human mind1 since every  
time we scrutinise the interest that has
 always guided men in the field of      
education1 we find that at all times the
 aim of education has been the          
development of the mind4 ,nor could it  
have been otherwise2 for whether or not 
in possession of a clear understanding  
of his spiritual essence1 man           
spontaneously presents himself and is   
valued as a personality1 which affirms  
itself1 speaks even though dumb1 and    
says ,i4 ,education begins as a relation
 between master and slave1 between      
parent and children4 ,the slave and the 
son are not supported and cared         
for--educated--as simple brutes1 but as 
beings endowed with the same attributes 
as the master or the parent1 beings who 
are therefore able to receive orders or 
instructions and build their will out of
 these1--the will which those in        
authority wish to be identical with     
their own4 ,the superior commands and   
therefore demands2 the inferior obeys by

 replying1 and he replies in so far as  
he is a spiritual subject2 and this     
reply will become gradually better in   
proportion as he more fully actualises  
that spiritual nature which the master  
wishes to be closely corresponding to   
his own4 ,philosophy1 as well as naive  
and primitive mentality1 considers man  
to be such in so far as he is conscious 
of what he does1 of what he says1 of    
what he thinks2 and also in that he is  
able to present himself to others1      
because he has first been present to    
himself4  ,man is man in that he is     
self-consciousness4 ,even the despicable
 tyrant who brutally domineers over the 
wretch who is forced to submit to his   
overbearing arrogance1 even he wants his
 slave to be intelligent1 capable of    
guessing his thoughts1 and refuses to   
consider him as an unconscious tool of  
his whims4 ,the mother who tenderly     
nurses her sick child is indeed anxious 
for the health of the body over which   
she worries1 and she would like to see  

it vigorous and strong4 ,but that body  
is so endeared to her1 because by means 
of it the child is enabled to live      
happily with her2 through it his fond   
soul can requite maternal love by filial
 devotion2 or in it he may develop a    
powerful and beautiful personality      
worthy to be adored as the ideal        
creature of maternal affection4 ,if in  
the bloom of physical health he were to 
reveal himself stupid and insensate1    
endowed with mere instinctive sensuality
 and bestial appetites1 this son would  
cease to be the object of his mother's  
fondness1 nay1 he would arouse in her a 
feeling of loathing and revulsion4 ,it  
is this sense of loathing that we feel  
towards the brutes1 to the extent that  
we never can be sympathetically drawn to
 them1 and that we also feel for the    
human corpse from which life has        
departed2 for life is the basis of every
 psychological relation1 and therefore  
of every possible sympathy4  ,education 
is union1 communion1 inter-individual   

unification2 and unity is possible only 
because men spiritually convene4        
,matter1 we have seen1 nature1 things1  
the non-spirit is multiplicity4 ,as soon
 as the multiplicity of natural elements
 begins to be organised1 already in     
their organism spiritual activity shines
 forth4 ,in the spirit is the root and  
possibility of every unification4 ,it is
 spirit that unites men4 ,education     
therefore cannot be a social            
relationship and a link between men     
except by being a spiritual tie among   
human minds4 ,therefore it is now1 and  
has at all times been1 what it naturally
 ought to be1 education of the spirit4  
,but as we aim at the education of the  
spirit1 we may or we may not take care  
of the body2 or again we may take care  
of it in this or that way4 ,it all      
depends on what conception we have of   
the spirit4 ,the ancients made a great  
deal of physical culture1 and the ,greek
 philosophers of antiquity considered   
gymnastics to be the essential          

complement of music1 including in music 
all forms of spiritual cultivation4 ,the
 ancients never divided the spirit from 
the physical reality of man3 man as a   
whole 7body and psychic activity7 was   
conceived by them as a natural being    
subject to the mechanism which regulates
 and controls nature4 ,when ,greek      
psychology fell under the influence of  
that mystic outlook which is peculiar to
 religious belief1 the soul1 which was  
opposed to the body1 and which was      
looked upon as chained and emprisoned in
 the body1 was sharply distinguished    
from another soul4 ,that other soul was 
kept in contact with the materiality of 
all natural things1 and together with   
them was governed by the law of         
mechanical becoming1 that is1 of the    
transformations caused by motion by     
which all the parts of matter are       
bestirred4 ,this natural soul1          
susceptible of development1 and capable 
of gradually rising to the height of the
 other1 of the pure bodiless mind whose 

act is the contemplation of truth2 this 
soul imbedded in the body1 which does   
not therefore give to man a supernatural
 being1 but like all things of nature   
comes into the world1 grows and dies1   
incessantly passing from one mode of    
being to another1 this soul is the one  
that can and ought to be educated4 ,the 
soul which results from the organic     
process of the physical body1 and which 
in its development proceeds side by side
 with the transformations of the latter1
 could not be educated except in        
connection with the development and     
improvement of the body4 ,human thought1
 which then had not yet secured the     
consciousness of its own irreducible    
opposition to nature1--the              
consciousness1 in other words1 of its   
own essential freedom1--seeing itself   
immersed even as spiritual substance in 
the indistinctness of nature1 could not 
look upon education as upon a problem of
 freedom which can not admit of nature  
as limiting spiritual activity4 ,it was 

accordingly reduced to conceive this    
activity1 displayed in dealing with man1
 as being on the same plane with the    
other forms of activity which propose to
 deal with things of nature4 ,in a      
pedagogical naturalism of this sort1 the
 mind could not be the mind without also
 being body1 and therefore had to       
include physical development in its own 
process4  ,but with the advent of       
,christianity the spirit was sharply    
dissociated from nature4 ,the original  
dualism of law of the spirit and law of 
the flesh1 of grace and nature1 rescued 
man at the very beginning from the      
tyranny of merely natural things1 and   
announced a kingdom of the spirit which 
is not of this world4 ,and it is not in 
fact of this world1 if by world we mean 
what the word ordinarily implies1--the  
world which confronts us1 and which we  
can point out to ourselves and to       
others2 the world which1 being the      
object of our experience1 is the direct 
antithesis of what we are1 subject of   

experience1 free personality1 spirit1   
,christian humanity4 ,man1 in this      
,christian conception1 in this          
opposition to nature and to the         
experimental world1 overcomes what      
within his own self still belongs to    
nature1 subdues that part of him which  
because natural appears as the enemy of 
freedom and of the finality of the      
spirit2 as the seducer and the source of
 guilty wiles which clip the wing of    
man's loftier aspirations and weigh him 
down into a beast-like subjection to    
instinct4 ,he therefore tends to        
underrate physical education1 and       
sacrifices it to the demands of the     
spirit4 ,he does not completely neglect 
the question of the behaviour of man    
towards physical nature2 he could not1  
since his very dualism is possible only 
on condition that he correlate the two  
terms of the opposition4 ,but finding   
that his attempt to attain freedom and  
realise his spiritual destiny is        
thwarted by the natural impulses of the 

senses1 in which the life of the body is
 made manifest1 he decides to remove    
these hindrances and to clear the way   
which leads to spiritual salvation4 ,he 
does then take the body into            
consideration1 but simply to check its  
instincts and control its sensuous      
appetites4 ,by the discipline of        
self-mortification1 under the guidance  
of an unbending will1 he subdues the    
flesh1 and subjects it to the exigencies
 of the spirit4  ,evidently this        
subduing discipline is still physical   
exercise1 but in its own way4 ,the      
haircloth of ,st4 ,francis corresponds  
in fact to the club of ,hercules1 and   
serves the same purpose4 ,the monsters  
which are knocked down by the weapon    
which ,hercules alone could wield       
torment the saint of ,assisi also2 only1
 they are within him4 ,he even tames the
 wolf1 but without club or chains1 by   
the mere exercise of his gentle         
meekness4 ,these internal monsters are  
not1 properly speaking1 in the material 

body4 ,if they were1 the ,saint would   
not need to worry about them any more   
than about the earth under his feet or  
the sack on his shoulder4 ,but they are 
in that body which he feels2 they are in
 that soul which1 with the violence of  
its desires1 the din of its harsh and   
fiercely discordant voices1 distracts   
him from the ideal where his life is4   
,they are in that soul which thrusts so 
many claims on him1 that were he to     
satisfy them he would have to part      
company with his ,lady ,poverty1 and    
become once more the slave of things    
which are not in his power1--of wealth1 
which heaps up and blows away2 of       
,fortune1 which comes as a friend and   
departs as an enemy4 ,he would1 in other
 words1 return to a materialistic       
conception of life4 ,his ,lernaean hydra
 is in the depths of his heart1 where   
hundred-headed instinct1 with its       
hundred mouths1 tears the roots of his  
holy and magnanimous will1 eager to     
resemble the ,saviour in love and       

self-sacrifice4  ,this monster is       
strangled with the haircloth1 when the  
body is hardened and trained to         
self-denial1 to suffering1 to the       
repression of all animal passions which 
would keep man away from his goal4 ,this
 discipline1 far from debilitating the  
body1 gives it a new strength1 an       
endurance which enables man to live on a
 higher plane than he would if he       
followed natural impulses4 ,for this    
more difficult manner of living1 a      
robustness and a hardihood are requisite
 which are beyond the natural means of  
the body4 ,the system of physical       
culture which gives this stupendous     
endurance is called asceticism4  ,but   
this system is an abstract one4 ,man's  
life is not poverty1 since it is work   
and therefore wealth4 ,and the mind with
 its freedom cannot be conceived of as  
antagonistic to nature4 ,for as body and
 as sense1 in so far as we exist and    
know of our existence1 we belong to this
 nature4 ,antagonism and duality import 

the limitation of each of the opposed   
terms and exclude freedom which is not  
to be found within fixed limits2 for    
freedom1 as we have said1 means         
infinitude4  ,the spirit is free only if
 infinite4 ,it cannot have any          
obstructing barrier in its path4 ,it can
 be conceived as freedom only after it  
has overcome dualism1 and when in nature
 itself and in the body we see the      
effect of the activity of the spirit4   
,it has no need therefore of walls      
within which it might feel the necessity
 of cloistering itself in the effort to 
renounce the outer world4 ,this is not  
the way to conquer freedom4 ,a liberty  
won under such conditions would always  
be insecure1 constantly threatened1     
always beleaguered1 and therefore a mere
 shadow of freedom4 ,the spirit1 if it  
is free1 that is1 if it is spirit1 must 
be conterminous with thought1 it must   
extend its sway as far as there is any  
sign of life to the last point where a  
vestige of being can be revealed to it4 

,nothing thinkable can be external to   
it4 ,whatever presents itself to it1    
whether in the garb of an enemy or under
 the cloak of friendship1 can only be   
one of its creatures1 which it has      
placed at its own side1 or in front of  
itself1 or against itself4  ,this new   
pedagogical and philosophical view1     
first disclosed to ,humanism1 then      
enlightened by the genius of the        
,italian ,renaissance1 appears now to us
 in the full light of modern thought4   
,superficially it might seem identical  
with the classical and naturalistic     
outlook4 ,in reality1 however1 it has   
made its way back to it only in order to
 confirm and integrate the concept of   
,christian spiritualism and to bring out
 its truth4 ,greek athletics is the     
training of the body as an end in       
itself3 it surely serves the cause of   
the spirit1 but only in so far as the   
spirit is grafted on the trunk of the   
physical personality1 and to the extent 
that it is able to absorb all its vital 

sap1 thereby subjecting itself to       
generation and decay1 the common destiny
 of all natural beings4 ,the physical   
culture of the ancients is spiritual    
discipline1 only to the extent that for 
them the mind too is essentially body4  
,modern physical education1 at least    
from the time of ,vittorino da ,feltre1 
is spiritual formation of the body3 it  
is bodily training for the benefit of   
the spirit1 just as the mediaeval       
ascetic would have it2 but of a spirit  
which does not intend to bury itself in 
abstract self-seclusion away from the   
existential world1 of a spirit which    
passing beyond the cloister walls soars 
over the realm of nature1 induing it and
 subduing it instrumentally to its ends 
and as a mirror of its will4 ,so that   
for moderns1 too1 physical culture is   
spiritual education1 but for the reason 
that to us the body itself is spirit4   
,our science is not merely a speculation
 of ultra-mundane truths1 but rather a  
science of man and of man in the        

,universe1 and therefore also of this   
nature which is dominated and           
spiritualised by becoming known1 in the 
same way that every book that is read is
 spiritualised4  ,this concrete notion  
of a spirit which excludes nothing from 
itself gives concreteness to the        
,christian conception of physical       
discipline4 ,for it aims to turn the    
body into an obedient tool of the will1 
not however of that will which renounces
 the world1 but of that will which turns
 to the world as to the field where its 
battles are fought and won2 to the world
 which it transforms by its work1       
constantly re-creating it1 now modifying
 one part and now another1 but always   
acting on the entire system1 and        
renewing it as a whole in the intimate  
organic connection and interdependence  
of these parts2 to the world which      
forever confronts it in a rebellious and
 challenging attitude1 and which it     
laboriously subdues and turns into a    
mirror of its own becoming4  ,modern    

idealism and ancient naturalism both    
emphasise1 though for opposite motives1 
the importance of a positive education  
in distinction to the negative          
discipline inculcated by mediaeval      
asceticism4 ,we said that to-day we     
develop the body because the body is    
spirit4 ,this proposition runs counter  
to common sense4 ,but common sense as   
such cannot be respected by the thinker 
unless he first transforms its content4 
,our body1 we must remember1 is not one 
body out of many4 ,if it were actually  
mixed with and lost in the multitude of 
material things which surround it1 we   
could no longer speak of any bodies4    
,for all bodies1 as psychologists say1  
are perceived in so far as they modify  
ours and are somehow related to it4 ,or 
to put it in a different and perhaps    
better way1 all other bodies1 which we  
possess as contents of our experience1  
form a system1 a circle1 which has its  
centre2 and this centre is our body4    
,these first of all occupy space1 but a 

space which no one of us can think of or
 intuit otherwise than as a radiating   
infinity1 the centre of which we occupy 
with our body4 ,so that before we can   
speak of bodies1 we must first cognise  
our own4 ,it is the foundation and      
groundwork of all bodies4 ,justly1      
therefore1 the immanent sense1 profound 
and continuous1 which we have of our    
body1 and whose modifications constitute
 all our particular sensations1 was     
called the fundamental sentiment by our 
,italian philosopher ,rosmini4 ,for our 
body is ours only in so far as we feel  
it2 and we feel it1 at first1 confusedly
 or rather indistinctly1 without        
discerning any differentiated part4 ,we 
feel it as the limit1 the other1 the    
opposite1 the object of our             
consciousness1 which1 were it not       
conscious of something 7of itself as of 
something71 would not be consciousness1 
would not realise itself4 ,and it       
realises itself1 in the first place1 as 
consciousness of this object which is   

the body4 ,accurately1 therefore1 was   
the body defined by ,spinoza as objectum
 mentis1 as object of consciousness4    
,objectless consciousness is not        
consciousness2 and it is likewise       
obvious that the object of consciousness
 cannot be such without consciousness4  
,the two terms are inseparable1 for the 
reason that they are produced           
simultaneously by one and the same act1 
from which they cannot be detached and  
this act is the free becoming of the    
spirit4  ,our body1 this first object of
 consciousness1 as yet indistinct and   
therefore one and infinite1 is not      
really in space1 the realm of the       
distinct1 of the multiple1 of the       
finite4 ,it is within our own           
consciousness4 ,and it is only by       
recalling this inwardness that we are   
able to understand how it happens that  
we 7,we--spiritual activity7 act upon   
our body1 animating it1 sustaining it1  
endowing it with our vigorous and       
buoyant vitality2 constantly            

transforming it1 in very much the same  
way that we act on what we easily       
conceive to be our moral personality4   
,as we direct our thoughts1 and bringing
 them out of the dark into the luminous 
setting of our consciousness1 submit    
them to scrutiny and correction1 to     
elimination and selection2 when we      
stifle or feed the fire of our passions2
 when we cherish ideals1 nourish them   
with our own life's blood1 and sustain  
them with our unbending resolve2 and    
again when we quench them in the        
fickleness of our whims1 are we not     
constantly creating and variously       
reshaping our spiritual life1 making it 
good or bad1 that is1 eagerly and       
scrupulously intent on the quest of     
,truth or slothfully plunged in         
ignorance and forgetfulness8  ,but our  
body1 this inseparable companion1 which 
is our own self1 is no particular limb1 
which as such might be removed from us4 
,we remain what we are1 even though     
mutilated4 ,each part of our organism is

 ours1 in that it is fused in the sole  
and indistinguishable totality of our   
living being1--our heart and our brain1 
as well as the phalanx of a finger1 if  
perchance we should be unable to live   
without it1 and it therefore effectively
 constituted our being4 ,the distinction
 between organs that are vital and      
organs that are not is an empirical one1
 and relative to an observation which is
 true within the limits of ordinary     
occurrence4  ,if our body is the body   
which we perceive as ours1 it is this   
one or that one in accordance with our  
perception2 and this perception         
certainly is not arbitrary1 but our own1
 subjective1 to the point that1 in an   
abnormal way1 one may cease to be in    
possession of his body and thus to be no
 longer able to live in consequence of  
the loss of a finger1 or even of a hair4
 ,this hair then is a vital part1 not   
because it is a hair1 but because it has
 been1 insanely if you will1 assumed and
 absorbed in the distinct unity of our  

body4  ,i shall try to make my thought  
clearer by the use of an example4 ,the  
organ of organs1 as a great writer once 
said1 is the hand1 and we can look at it
 from two quite distinct points of view4
 ,we may place our hand on a table by   
the side of other hands1 the hands of   
persons sitting around us4 ,we see its  
shape1 its colour1 its size1 etc42 we   
compare it with the others1 and we      
almost forget it is ours1 because then  
we do not1 in act1 distinguish it from  
the remaining ones4 ,in these           
circumstances1 it is evident that our   
hand is in our consciousness as a       
material object1 separated from every   
essential relationship with us--with us 
as we are in the act of looking and     
comparing4 ,this is the external point  
from which we may view our hand4 ,but   
there is another one3 the hand that     
picks up the pen as we are about to     
write is truly our hand1 the instrument 
of which we avail ourselves in order to 
ply another tool which is needed for our

 work4 ,in these circumstances our right
 hand1 instead of being for us one in   
the midst of many1 as it was in the case
 previously considered1 is ours1 the    
only one which we can possibly use1 as  
we endeavour to carry out our intention 
of writing1 which intention is our will 
to realise our personality in that      
determined way1 since doing a thing     
always means realising that personality 
of ours which does that thing4 ,our hand
 in this case coalesces so completely   
with our being that without it--the hand
 already trained to write--we could not 
be ourselves4 ,abstractly1 to be sure1  
we should be ourselves4 ,but it is the  
same story over again4 ,what exists is  
not the abstract but the concrete4 ,and 
in the concrete1 we1 who are about to   
write1 are this determined personality1 
in which our will flows into the hand2  
and just as we could not in truth       
distinguish our ,self from our will 7we 
being nothing more and nothing less than
 this will of ours71 in the same way it 

would be impossible to distinguish      
between us and our hand1 between our    
will and our hand4 ,since the hand now  
wields the pen1 having perfected its    
instrumentality by means of this latter1
 our will no longer leans upon and      
terminates in the hand1 but it flows on 
and presses into the point of the pen   
itself1 through which1 if neither ink   
nor paper offers resistance1 it empties 
into the stream of writing4 ,this       
writing which is read is ,thought1      
whereby the writer finds himself at the 
end in front of his own thinking1 that  
is1 in front of himself2 that self1     
which1 considering the act materially1  
he seemed to be leaving further and     
further behind1 whereas in reality he   
was penetrating into it more and more   
deeply4 ,but in such a case and by the  
act itself1 can we effectively          
distinguish between thought1 arm1 hand1 
writing material1 the written page1 that
 same page when read1 and the new       
thought8 ,it is a circle made up of     

contiguous points1 without gaps or      
interruptions4 ,it is one sole process1 
wherein in consequence of a particular  
organisation of our personality1 we     
place ourselves in front of ourselves1  
and thus realise ourselves4 ,the hand is
 ours because it is not distinguished   
from us1 nor1 consequently1 from the    
remaining limbs of our body nor from its
 material surroundings4  ,this1 our     
hand1 knows how to write because we have
 learned how to write3 in exactly the   
same way that our heart knows how to    
love1 to dare and renounce1 by striving 
earnestly to see ourselves in others1 to
 repress the instinctive timidity of    
excessive prudence1 and to break the    
force of desire prompted by natural     
egoism4 ,we are then what we want to be2
 not merely in our passions and ideas1  
but in our limbs too1 to the extent that
 their being depends from their         
functions1 and their functions can be   
regulated by hygiene and exercise1 which
 are our action and our will4  ,there   

is1 of course1 a natural datum which we 
cannot modify1 which we have to accept  
as a basis for further construction4    
,but this limitation1 imposed on the    
truths ,i mentioned above1 must be      
accepted without in any way renouncing  
the truth itself1 and should be         
understood by virtue of both its        
scientific and moral values4 ,this      
warning is not merely helpful in        
connection with the question now before 
us1 but will always prove useful on     
account of its bearing on the many      
problems which arise from a             
spiritualistic conception of life and   
cause shiftless philosophasters to shy  
and balk4 ,it is true that there is a   
body which we did not give to ourselves1
 which therefore is not a product of our
 spirit1 nor part of its life and       
substance1 but only if we think of the  
body of the individual1 empirically     
considered as such4 ,in this sense ,i am
 not self-produced4 ,the son can ascribe
 to his parents the imperfection that   

mars his whole existence1 whatever kind 
of life he may decide to lead4 ,the man 
who was born blind may blame his        
affliction upon cruel nature4 ,but the  
child who calls his parents to account1 
and the man who complains of nature1 is 
man as a particular2 he is one of many  
men1 one of the animals1 one of the     
beings1 one of the infinite things      
wielded by ,man 7that man to whom we    
must always refer1 when we wish to      
recall that even if the world is not all
 spirit1 there is at least a little     
corner therein set aside for it72 he is 
one of the infinite things which ,man   
gathers and unifies in his own thought  
because he is thought4 ,the particular  
man is man as he is being thought1 who  
refers us to the thinking man as to the 
true man4 ,this true man is also an     
individual1 not as a part but as the    
whole1 and comprehends all within       
itself4 ,and in this man1 parents and   
children are the same man4 ,in it men   
and nature are1 likewise1 one and the   

same1 man or spirit in its universality4
 ,we 7each one of us7 are one and the   
other of these men2 but we are one of   
them1 the smaller one1 only in that we  
are the other one1 the larger one1 and  
we ought not to expect the small to take
 the place of the large and to act in   
his stead4 ,all our errors and all our  
sins are caused by substituting one in  
place of the other4  ,and what is more1 
the large1 the all embracing1 the       
infinite1 is present in the small with  
all his infinitude4 ,personality as     
such1 in its actuality1 does not shrink 
and restrict itself to the singular and 
particular man4 ,within those boundaries
 which are only visible from the        
outside1 it internally expatiates to    
infinity1 absorbing in itself and       
surmounting all limitations4 ,the man   
born blind does not know the marvels and
 the wondrous beauties of nature which  
gladden the eyes and the soul of the    
seeing man4 ,but his soul pours out none
 the less over the infinity of harmonies

 and of thought4 ,and the blind man who 
once saw1 in the consciousness of his   
sightlessness1 cherishes the boundless  
image of the world once seen1 and       
magnifies it indefinitely by the aid of 
the imagination4 ,he even heals the     
wounds and soothes the pain of blindness
 by making it objective through         
reflection2 and the personality1 at any 
event1 always victoriously breaks out of
 the narrow cell in which it might seem 
to be confined4 ,so that in the depths  
of even the gloomiest dungeon a ray of  
light always peers through1 to lighten  
and comfort the soul of man in misery1  
and to restore to him the entire and    
therefore infinite liberty of creating  
for himself a world of his own4  ,we can
 therefore say that man1 he that        
lives--not the one which is seen from   
the outside1 but the thinking and the   
willing man1 who is a personality in the
 act--never submits to a nature which is
 not his own4 ,he shapes his own nature1
 beginning with his body1 and gradually 

from it magnifying the effect of his    
power1 and crowding the environing      
space1 which is his1 with the creatures 
he gives life to4 ,we must not consider 
the smaller man whom we see confined to 
a few square feet and at the mercy of   
the passing instant4 ,we must intently  
look upon that other one who has done   
and still continues to do all the       
beautiful things on which we thrive1 on 
that one who is humanity1 the spirit4   
,we must consider his power1 which is   
thought and work 7work1 that is1 as     
thought72 and ponder over this material 
world in which we live1 all blocked out1
 as it is1 measured1 and traversed by   
forces which we bridle1 accumulate and  
release1 at pleasure1--this world which 
has been altered from its former state1 
and has been made as we now see it fit  
for human habitation1 which has been    
joined to us1 assimilated to our life1  
spiritualised4 ,when we have done all   
this we shall see how impossible it is  
to disconnect nature from the spirit1   

and to think the former without the     
latter4 ,nature may be dissociated from 
the natural man1 that is1 one of its    
parts may be isolated from the          
remainder4 ,but such man of nature is   
not the one who rules over nature3 he is
 not ,volta who clutches the electric   
current and transforms the earth2 he is 
not ,michel ,angelo who transfigures    
marble and creates the ,moses4          
,physical education1 then1 is not       
superadded to the education of the      
spirit1 but is itself education of the  
spirit4 ,it is the fundamental part of  
this education1 in as much as the body  
is1 in the sense we have used the words1
 the seat of our spiritual personality4 
,living means constructing one's own    
body1 because living is thinking1 and   
thinking is self-consciousness2 but this
 consciousness is possible only if we   
make it objective1 and the object as    
such is the body 7our body74 ,for as    
consciousness is1 so is the body4 ,there
 is no thinking which is not also doing4

 ,thinking not only builds up the brain1
 but the rest of the body besides4 ,we  
may call it will1 but then there is not 
one single act of thought which is not  
the mental activity indicated by this   
word will4 ,without will we should have 
no bodily substance1 in as much as the  
body is always and primarily life1 and  
living is impossible without willing4   
,what are called involuntary movements  
are not really such2 they differ from   
the so-called voluntary in that they are
 constant1 immanent1 so much so that we 
can after all interrupt them4 ,without  
the exercise of our will we could never 
hold ourselves erect and keep our feet1 
but would forever be stumbling and      
falling2 unless we willed it1 the power 
which keeps every organ in its place1   
and maintains all the organs in the     
circle of life1 would be annihilated4   
,therefore morale1 as they say1 is a    
very considerable aid in curing the     
diseases of the body4 ,it is on this    
account that societies and religious    

sects have arisen which make of moral   
faith an instrument of physical         
well-being4 ,for the same reason1 also1 
it is impossible for the psychiatrists  
to draw a line separating mental        
troubles from bodily ailments4 ,the     
force of the will1 the vigour of the    
personality1 the impulse of the spirit  
in its becoming1 this is the wondrous   
power which galvanises matter and       
organically quickens it2 which sustains 
life1 equips it1 and fits it for its    
march towards ever renewed1 ever        
improved finalities4 ,it is not         
temperament which is the basis of       
character1 but character which is the   
basis of temperament4 ,if we reverse    
this proposition1 every moral conception
 of life becomes absurd1 and every      
spiritual value appears ineffectual4    
,don ,abbondio then ceases to be wrong1 
and ,cardinal ,federico ,borromeo is no 
longer right4  ,character too is an     
empirical concept1 and like all such    
concepts1 it has a truthfulness which is

 not clearly discernible1 but dimly     
visible4 ,character signifies rational  
personality1 using the term rationality 
to mean1 not the movement or the        
becoming which belongs peculiarly to    
reason as the form of spiritual         
activity1 but the coherence of the      
object on which this activity is fixed1 
which coherence in turn consists in the 
harmony whereby it is possible to think 
all the parts of objective thought as   
forming a single whole1 in that there is
 no conflict or contradiction among     
them1 and in as much as the object      
remains always the same throughout all  
these particulars4 ,if in the course of 
reasoning we introduce conflicting      
statements which cannot possibly be     
referred to the same thing1 we cannot be
 said to reason4 ,rationality is the    
permanence of the being of which we     
think3 it is firmness of conception1    
stability of a law which we apply to all
 particulars that come under its sway4  
,for the object of consciousness is     

characterised1 in respect to the act    
which constitutes it1 by this stability 
and immutability4 ,what we think is that
 and no other1 whereas thought1 by which
 we think it1 is a becoming and a       
continuous change4  ,but the character  
of man is in the object1 in the contents
 of his thought1 in what he gradually   
builds himself up to1 in the determined 
personality which he constitutes by     
thinking1 or1 in other words1 in his    
body4 ,but body1 be it remembered1 in an
 idealistic sense1 body as a system1    
forming1 with its law and its           
configuration1 the solid basis of every 
ulterior development4 ,this truth1      
vaguely accepted by common sense1 which 
looks upon a strong constitution as a   
preliminary to a sound character1 will  
appear in its full light only after it  
has been stripped of the fantastic and  
material attributes which it receives   
from a realistically vulgar way of      
conceiving the body materially4 ,for it 
is evident that a feeble and sickly man 

may yet have a steel-like character4    
,farinata1 who stands erect with breast 
and brow1 as though he held ,hell in    
contempt3 ,giordano ,bruno1 who amidst  
the flames that already consume his     
flesh disdainfully turns his eyes from  
the symbol of the religion which had    
thrust him on the stake1 are evident    
examples of a strength of mind with no  
relation to their physical powers1 which
 were already destroyed or about to be  
scattered by an irresistible might4     
,leopardi is right when he scornfully   
protests that his ill health is not the 
cause of that sad pessimism which in his
 mind solemnly challenges the unseemly  
hidden ,power4  ,character is physical  
robustness to the extent that this      
latter is spiritual haleness1 and in so 
far as it is compact1 firm1 steadfast   
thought4 ,thought in this respect       
appears externally as body1 not subject 
to the hostile forces that perpetually  
beset it from without and from within2  
and on account of the intrinsic         

spirituality of its substance1 it is a  
law rather than a fact1 and a process or
 a tendency rather than a fixed and     
established manner of being4 ,for       
organic endurance1 which is really what 
we mean by health1 does not consist in  
muscular development or in the bloom of 
an exuberant constitution1 but rather in
 an indwelling power1 in dynamically    
persistent and tenacious struggle and   
adaptation1 in the capacity of          
self-preservation1 of self-affirmation1 
which is the specific essence of        
spiritual being4  ,this body1 in which  
thought organises and consolidates      
itself2 this body1 by means of which    
thought is enabled to press on its      
vigorous development1 reabsorbing in its
 actual present the past accomplishment1
 and to proceed on its ascent1 scaling  
the height step by step1 never sliding  
downward1 because every grade it builds 
remains as a firm support of the next   
one2--this is man's character1 which is 
not an attribute of the will considered 

as practical activity in                
contra-distinction to theoretic         
activity4 ,character is an attribute of 
the spirit qua spirit1 without any      
adjectives4 ,we may1 if we will1        
distinguish the practical from the      
theoretical man1 the soundness of the   
will from intellectual originality4 ,but
 just as it is not possible to conceive 
of a really fruitful and constructive   
practical activity without that         
coherence of design and self-supporting 
volitional continuity which constitute  
character1 in the same way intelligence 
and ingenuity will not become manifest  
without firmness of purpose1 without    
persevering reflection and study of the 
object1 and without stability of this   
object of intellectual activity1 which  
again constitute character4 ,if         
character is set as the basis of        
morality1 then every science and every  
form of culture1 even those which aim at
 evil1 considered in themselves1 as the 
life of the intelligence must have a    

moral value1 must be governed by an     
inviolable law4 ,by spiritual           
steadfastness1 which is the condition of
 spiritual productivity1 man sacrifices 
himself to an ideal and constitutes his 
moral personality1 whether he die for   
his country or whether he labour to     
bring light amid his thoughts4 ,life in 
all its phases is the untiring          
fulfilment of duty4  ,to conclude then1 
physical education must be encouraged1  
but as spiritual training and as        
formation of character4 ,gymnastic      
exercise1 therefore1 far from being the 
only way to this end1 may even lead in  
the opposite direction2 and it will do  
so as long as it is considered apart    
from the remainder of education1 with a 
particular scope of its own1 and with   
heterogeneous contents in respect to    
spiritual education properly so-called4 
,the teacher of physical education must 
always bear in mind that he is not      
dealing with bodies1 bodies to be moved 
around1 to be lined up1 or rushed around

 a track4 ,he too is training souls1 and
 collaborates with all the other        
teachers in the moral preparation and   
advancement of mankind4 ,if1 in addition
 to his special qualifications1 he does 
not possess culture enough to enable him
 to discern the spirit beyond the body1 
and to understand therefore the moral   
value of order1 of precision1 of        
gracefulness1 of agility1 by which man  
externally realises his personality1 he 
will no doubt fulfil the ordinary       
demands of physical culture1 but he will
 just as certainly antagonise and       
disgust those of his pupils who are most
 highly gifted and otherwise better     
trained1 and he can therefore lay no    
claim to the title of educator4         
,education then is either one or not    
effective4 ,the assumption that there   
are many kinds of education leads to    
very disastrous results4 ,education is  
one2 and as a whole it appears unchanged
 in each one of the parts that we       
ordinarily distinguish in it1 according 

as we approach the human spirit now from
 one side and now from the other4       
,,chapter ,x  ,,the ,,ideal ,,of        
,,education  ,,art ,,and ,,religion     
,we have shown in the previous chapters 
the necessity of rigorously maintaining 
the unity of education1 of resisting    
every attempt at separation1 of opposing
 all systems which treat the various    
parts of education as though they could 
be kept distinct in practice and theory4
 ,there still remains a question which  
naturally arises at this juncture1 and  
which we must try to answer4 ,for true  
it is1 some one might say1 that moral   
and intellectual education are one and  
the same thing1 and true it may be that 
education of the mind and culture of the
 body work for the same results2 and it 
may also be admitted that education     
being formation1 or development1 that   
is1 the becoming of the spirit1 and the 
spirit consisting in its becoming or    
rather in becoming pure and simple1 it  
follows that education means spirit and 

nothing more4 ,but granting all this1   
was it really worth while8 ,when we have
 attained this notion of the unity which
 is always the same1 no matter under how
 many aspects it may present itself1    
what have we gained8 ,have we here      
anything more than a word8 ,one says    
spirit1 another might say ,god1 or      
nature1 or matter1 or some such thing1  
and there would not be much difference4 
,it might well be that in the course of 
the inquiry into the attributes of the  
spirit1 a way was found to invest our   
word with quite a different meaning2 but
 still1 after we have defined and       
distinguished the concept of the spirit 
from all the others1 we have not        
progressed much4 ,we may have the       
satisfaction of continuing to see before
 us this concept1 with no possibility of
 ever ridding ourselves of its presence1
 but how much will we know of the       
contents that this spirit is supposed to
 have8 ,what are the principles that    
should govern this education1 which has 

been clearly stated to be not a natural 
fact1 but a free action1 and therefore a
 selection enlightened by consciousness1
 by reflection1 and by reason8  ,this   
suggested objection is not a purely     
imaginary one4 ,very often superficial  
critics1 forgetting that pedagogical    
problems pertain to philosophy and are  
therefore problems of the spirit1       
awkwardly try to solve them by the      
insufficient light of common sense4 ,in 
so doing they warn us that in idealistic
 pedagogics all particular and definite 
concepts vanish1 and what remains is a  
vague confused indistinctness of no     
practical utility to the teacher4  ,and 
truly1 if the only result obtained by   
idealistic pedagogics were the          
demonstration that many concepts1       
ordinarily considered to be             
substantially different1 are in reality 
identical1 we should not hesitate to    
call such philosophical knowledge       
useless and ridiculous4 ,but in the     
first place we must notice that this    

assumed deficiency charged against us   
has partially been shown to be          
non-existent by the exposition of our   
doctrine1 which reduces education to    
free spiritual becoming1 and resolves   
the apparent multiplicity of educational
 forms in the immultiplicable unity of  
this becoming1 outside of which nothing 
is truly conceivable4  ,for the defect  
of our system was assumed in connection 
with an exigency which divides itself   
into two parts1 respectively            
corresponding to the form and to the    
matter of education4 ,for many of the   
pedagogical errors which we have pointed
 out were seen to be imputable1 not to  
the choice of an unsuitable content of  
education1 but to the criterion adopted 
in treating this content4 ,i have       
already spoken of my disinclination to  
accomplish a mere negative task2 and in 
the last chapter1 while denouncing the  
materialistic conception of physical    
education1 ,i certainly did not spare   
the ascetic view which knows of no body 

other than the one which harasses the   
spirit and hinders its progress toward  
the ultimate good2 and thereupon ,i     
tried to show that physical culture is  
spiritual education endowed with that   
self-same nature which belongs to       
education when considered as formation  
of the will and of the intellect4 ,but  
this does not mean that our thesis      
reduces itself to a mere theoretic      
transvaluation or to a new abstract     
interpretation of our present educative 
system1 which however in practice could 
not be affected by this purely          
theoretical difference of               
interpretation4 ,i tried to make it     
clear that our conception is not devoid 
of practical import1 and that it does   
lead to a reform in education and to a  
new orientation of the school4 ,this was
 especially brought out in connection   
with physical culture in the preceding  
chapter1 when ,i insisted on the        
necessity that physical instructors be  
trained in such a way that their mental 

equipment shall not be limited to       
notions that refer exclusively to the   
body in its physical limitations3 but   
that in addition to physiology1 anatomy1
 and hygiene1 they be made familiar also
 with those studies and disciplines that
 are more intimately connected with     
character1 with the soul1 and with the  
mind4  ,but besides this1 our entire    
investigation dealing with the reasons  
for an absolutely spiritualistic        
conception of education should have made
 it very clear that it is not possible  
to entertain these new conceptions      
without introducing in the school a new 
spirit1 which will not yield to the     
realistic vogue and to the              
materialistic1 pedantic1 old-fashioned  
education1--a spirit which will bring   
before us a new duty in every instant of
 our teaching life and in every word we 
utter1 and which will impress us with   
the necessity of acting differently from
 what has been taught by the followers  
of traditional pedagogical routine4     

,whatever the subject may be1 the form  
of education has to be in accord with   
something that should by now be the     
common possession of us all1 namely1 the
 consciousness of the intimate          
spirituality and of the sacred freedom  
of our work1 which operates not in the  
material schools but within the souls of
 our pupils4 ,there it gives rise not to
 incidents that are unessential to that 
greater world which is the aim of our   
religiously1 serious outlook on life1   
but to a process in which ,all is       
involved4 ,the speculative side then of 
this form of education is not a useless 
and abstract theory1 but a necessary    
moment of the moral improvement1 of the 
spiritual enhancement1 and of the       
general regeneration of teaching4       
,indifference to this reform1 and the   
belief that men may continue to educate 
without bothering with the subtle       
problems of philosophy1 mean a failure  
to understand the precise nature of     
education4  ,but the question of the    

content of education is a different one4
 ,having identified education with      
spiritual reality itself1 it follows    
that the two determinations of the      
content of the latter belong to the     
content of the former4 ,one of these    
determinations is historical in         
character2 it advances as the history of
 the human mind progresses1 assuming now
 this and now that aspect in accordance 
with the prevailing spiritual interests4
 ,we who have censured the conception of
 pre-established programmes1 as being   
most dangerous prejudices of pedagogical
 realism1 could not very well presume to
 determine here in the abstract1 the    
content of every possible form of       
education for all places and all times4 
,the school1 like every other form of   
education1 develops2 and as it grows1 it
 constantly changes its content1 which  
again is nothing else than the content  
that the spirit gives to itself at every
 moment of its concrete development4    
,it would be just as irrational to      

expect a school to map out with         
precision the limits and the scope of a 
pupil's culture4 ,of all the culture    
carved out for him at school1 a boy will
 absorb only that much which is taken up
 by the autonomous growth of his        
personality4 ,this will be supplemented 
and integrated by the culture which he  
gets outside of the classroom1 in all   
possible walks of life1 and will be so  
personal and of such a character as to  
admit of no prevision or                
pre-determination even on the part of   
the learner himself4 ,away with         
pre-established programmes then of any  
description6 ,spiritual activity works  
only in the plenitude of freedom4       
,horace asks3 ,currente rota cur urceus 
exit8 ,we answer3 ,whether an urceus or 
not1 what always comes from the rota is 
something which cannot be foreseen1 for 
the very simple reason that what is     
foreseen is not the future but the past1
 which we 7as in the case of            
experimental sciences7 project into the 

future1 whereas the spirit is a creation
 which occurs not in time but in a      
never-setting present4  ,so every       
abstract discussion of the possible     
content of education in general1 or of  
any given particular school1 must appear
 crude and absurd1 if we recall that    
education reflects the historical       
development of the spirit4 ,what we need
 to do is to wait1 observe1 and have    
faith4 ,for ,god will reveal himself to 
us2 and ,god is the very ,spirit of ours
 which at every moment prescribes its   
law to itself and thus determines its   
own content4  ,the other of the two     
determinations mentioned above is the   
ideal1 or1 as we perhaps might more     
precisely call it1 the transcendental4  
,it pertains to that spiritual content  
which never changes as it passes through
 the various historical determinations1 
and which might therefore be styled the 
determiner of the intrinsic and absolute
 essence of the spirit4 ,this content   
upon careful consideration reveals      

itself as form1 and more precisely as   
the form of the historically determined 
content of the spirit2 or again as the  
concreteness of that form which has been
 attributed to the spirit considered in 
itself1 which is a becoming4 ,but qua   
becoming1 and irrespective of all       
special aspects with which it           
historically configures itself1 the     
spirit has already a content of its own1
 which cannot be absent from any of its 
historical configurations4 ,in them this
 content will manifest itself over and  
over again1 but constantly modified by  
the changes that are being historically 
produced4 ,under these varying modes and
 presentations it permanently abides as 
the indefectible substance of the       
spirit4 ,this substance1 this ideal     
spirit which becomes actual in history1 
cannot be ignored by any kind of        
pedagogics which aspires to a thorough  
knowledge of the essence of education4  
,having thus formulated the problem1 and
 clinging firmly to the principle of    

educational unity1 we may distinguish   
the forms of education which proceed    
from the ideal content of the spirit4   
,but we must always keep in mind that1  
as these forms are only distinguishable 
ideally1 they can in no way be          
effectively separated1 and must be found
 in every concrete educative act4 ,so   
that their synthesis and their complete 
immanence is the concreteness of        
educational unity in its opposition to  
what ,i have called fragmentary         
education4 ,our distinction then will   
turn out to be an exact logical         
analysis1 which analyses only the terms 
of a synthesis and cannot therefore be  
dissociated from the synthesis4 ,by     
analysing and by synthesising1 by       
determining the spiritual unity without 
disconnecting or in any way dissociating
 its intrinsic ideal determinations1 we 
strive to represent the ideal of        
education4  ,in making a rapid survey of
 this analysis1 ,i must refer back to   
what was said of the attributes of the  

spirit1--that the spirit is in that it  
becomes1 that it becomes in so far as it
 acquires self-consciousness1 that its  
being therefore is consciousness in the 
act of being acquired4 ,this act is     
surely self-consciousness1 and it does  
mean cognition1 but a cognition which   
differs from all others in that it has  
for its object that very one who        
cognises4 ,and this is the meaning of   
,i1 identity of subject and object1--an 
identity1 however1 that because of its  
curious nature needs to be carefully    
examined4 ,it was shown in a preceding  
chapter that two things1 to be thought  
as two1 must yet be thought as one by   
virtue of the unique relationship which 
makes their duality possible4 ,here we  
observe the inverse3 identity of subject
 and object means that in addition to   
the subject there is--nothing2 it means 
therefore unity4 ,and yet this unity    
would in no manner be intelligible if it
 were not also a duality1 if1 in other  
words1 the identity of subject and      

object were not also the difference     
between them4  ,to distinguish ,a from  
,b1 an initial1 elementary minimum      
difference is required4 ,it is the      
difference1 called otherness1 by which  
,b is other than ,a4 ,without this      
otherness there would not be ,a and ,b1 
but either ,a alone or ,b alone4 ,the   
subject as it knows itself is certainly 
not another from the subject alone4 ,but
 if it did not become other to itself1  
if it were not object also1 as well as  
subject1 it would never know itself4 ,to
 be object as well as subject implies   
the necessity of distinguishing these   
two terms1 and shows that there is      
otherness between them4 ,if it sounds   
harsh to speak of something that first  
is one and then is two1 we might state  
the situation in a different and perhaps
 simpler way4 ,we might say that the    
subject would not know itself1 if       
remaining always that one and self-same 
subject1 it were not both subject and   
object to itself4  ,consciousness       

implies this self-alteration of the     
subject1 which by placing itself as an  
object in front of itself realises      
itself1 it being real only as           
self-consciousness4 ,this is the import 
of the identity of the two terms1       
subject and object2 or of the difference
 intrinsic to the one1 which is but     
another way of stating it4 ,we may      
insist as much as we want on the        
identity of the ,i1 but it will always  
be true that this ,i is real only in    
virtue of its intrinsic difference4 ,and
 conversely we may insist1 as it is more
 often done1 on the difference between  
the subjective moment of the ,i1 whereby
 the ,i is set in opposition to all its 
objects1 and the objective moment in    
which the ego vanishes4 ,but behind the 
difference1 identity is always to be    
found4 ,man1 the more he thinks1 the    
more he alters himself1 the more        
objective that reality becomes which he 
realises by self-consciousness1 the more
 fully he sees the variation1 the       

development1 the growth1 the enhancement
 of the object--the world he knows4     
,the spirit's being is its alteration4  
,the more it is1--that is1 the more it  
becomes1 the more it lives1--the more   
difficult it is for it to recognise     
itself in the object4 ,it might         
therefore be said that he who increases 
his knowledge also increases his        
ignorance1 if he is unable to trace this
 knowledge back to its origin1 and if   
the spirit's rally does not induce him  
to rediscover himself at the bottom of  
the object1 which has been allowed to   
alter and alienate itself more and more 
from the secret source of its own       
becoming4 ,thus it happens1 as was said 
of old1 that ,he that increaseth        
knowledge increaseth sorrow4 ,all human 
sorrow proceeds from our incapacity to  
recognise ourselves in the object1 and  
consequently to feel our own infinite   
liberty4  ,subject then and object1 and 
in their synthesis1 in their living     
unity1 the spirit1 which therefore is   

neither a subject standing against an   
object1 nor its opposite4 ,the two      
terms1 each one for itself1 isolated1   
are equivalent4 ,but every time human   
thought has isolated them1 whether      
striving to conceive itself1 its own    
spiritual substance1 objectively 7,god71
 or as a simple subject 7a particular   
man71 it has ever reached most desperate
 conclusions1 now totally blocking its  
way to the comprehension and            
justification of its own subjectivity1  
and now secluding itself in an abstract 
subjectivity1 removed from all which man
 theoretically and practically needs in 
order to live4 ,the reality of the      
spirit is not in the subject as opposed 
to the object1 but in the subject that  
has in itself the object as its         
actuality4  ,it is on account of this   
inseverable unity1 by which the subject 
presses to itself the object and becomes
 actual therein1 that the progressive   
alteration of the object is also the    
progressive alteration of the subject4  

,at every given moment1 the subject1    
altered as it is1 made into the other or
 determined1 is yet pure subject1 and   
nothing else than the subject which     
becomes conscious of itself1 and        
therefore actual by determining itself  
as subject of its object1 in such a way 
that the subject as well as the object  
is always new and always different4 ,not
 because it is now one subject and now  
another1 in which case succession and   
enumeration would import multiplicity1  
and would therefore reduce the spirit to
 a thing2 but because it appears and    
cannot but appear thus1 if observed from
 the point of view which distinguishes  
one individual from another1 and in the 
same individual one instant from the    
next1 although from a rigorously        
idealistic point of view the spirit is  
one1 and its determinateness does not   
detract from its absolute originality4  
,this dialectic in which the spiritual  
becoming unfolds itself 7subject1       
object1 and unity of subject and        

object71 this self-objectifying or      
self-estrangement aiming at             
self-attainment1--this is the eternal   
life of the spirit1 which creates its   
immortal forms1 and determines the ideal
 contents of culture and education4 ,the
 spirit's self-realisation is the       
realisation of the subject1 of the      
object1 and of their relationship4 ,if  
of these three terms 7the third being   
the synthesis of the first and second7  
any one should fail1 the spiritual      
reality would cease to be4  ,this       
threefold realisation admits empirically
 of a separation that makes it possible 
to have one without the others4 ,on the 
strength of this triple division we     
speak of art1 of religion1 and of       
philosophy1 as though each one of them  
could subsist by itself4 ,so that       
commonly people believe that it is      
possible to be a poet without in any way
 burdening one's mind with religion or  
philosophy1--especially philosophy1     
which appears to be the bugbear of most 

poets4 ,in the same way many            
philosophers1 and among them one of the 
very greatest1 held art to be the       
negation of philosophy1 to the point    
that it should be banished from the     
kingdom where the latter was expected to
 reign4 ,and how often has religion     
taken up arms1 now against poetry1 and  
now against speculation6 ,all of these  
occurrences were possible because the   
three terms were looked upon as         
separable1 as though they were three    
material things1 each one of which could
 be what it was only on condition that  
it excluded the others4  ,a superficial 
understanding of the differences        
intervening between these three terms is
 the reason why they are often looked   
upon as separable4 ,but in reality they 
are so indissolubly conjoined1 that     
separation would destroy their spiritual
 character1 and put in its place        
mechanism1 which is the property of all 
that is not spirit4  ,art is the        
self-realisation of the spirit as       

subject4 ,man becomes enfolded in his   
subjectivity1 and hears but the voice of
 love or other inward summons4 ,living  
without communication with the world1 he
 refrains from affirming and denying    
what exists and what does not exist4 ,he
 simply spreads out over his own        
abstract interior world1 and dreams2 and
 as he dreams1 he escapes from the outer
 bustle into the seclusion of his       
enchanted realm1 which is true in itself
 until he issues from it and discovers  
it to be a figment of his phantasy4     
,this man is the artist1 who1 we might  
say1 neither cognises nor acts1 but     
sings4  ,his subjectivity appears       
empirically to us always as a determined
 subjectivity1 the determination of     
which proceeds from the object in which 
the spirit1 theoretically and           
practically1 has previously objectified 
itself4 ,but this priority of the act1  
by which the artist is considered a man 
of this objective world before he       
withdraws into his dreams1 is a mere    

empirical appearance4 ,if we relied on  
it1 we could not preserve to the spirit 
in its artistic life that originality   
and autonomy1 that absolute spontaneity 
and freedom1 which is the essential     
character or1 as we called it1 the      
attribute of spiritual activity4 ,to    
become objective1 the spirit must first 
be subject2 and in front of the object  
in which it objectifies itself1 it again
 inevitably becomes subject1--an ever   
determined one indeed1 but nothing else 
than a subject4 ,that is why the        
contemporary theory of aesthetics holds 
that form in art absorbs in itself the  
content1 with no residuum4 ,it absorbs  
it qua subjectivity2 for whatever the   
object be which this subjectivity1      
empirically considered1 has enwrapped1  
it draws it entirely over to itself1    
reassumes it1 and as pure subjectivity  
it cannot return to its object without  
passing through the moment of its       
opposition to the object1--the moment in
 which the subject is nothing else than 

subject1 and finds in itself infinite   
gratification4 ,this is the realm of    
art1 a realm from which the spirit1 in  
consequence of the very function of the 
subject1 is compelled to issue2 since   
the subject is subject in that it issues
 from itself1 becomes self-conscious1   
objectifies itself4 ,so the poet as he  
dreams breathes life into the personages
 of his dreams1 builds them up1 and     
gives them reality4 ,what is his own    
abstract subjectivity he chooses as a   
world in which he himself may live      
absolutely2 and the ideas which mature  
in that fantastic world of his--which is
 nothing more1 as ,i have said1 than his
 abstract subjectivity--are affirmed by 
him without any reserves1 and are       
opposed to the ideas of philosophers and
 of men who prefer concrete reality to  
phantasy4  ,this lyrical bent1 peculiar 
to the artist who enhances himself by   
exalting his own abstract individuality1
 is in direct contrast with the tendency
 of the ,saint1 who crushes and         

annihilates this same individuality in  
the face of his ,god1--that ,god who    
infinitely occupies his consciousness as
 the other in absolute alterity to him1 
so that the subject is hurled into the  
object in a total self-abstraction4 ,it 
sinks in the contemplation of its own   
self in its objective otherness1 of     
itself become the other1 in which it no 
longer recognises itself4 ,so he deifies
 this other self1 places it on the      
altar1 and kneels before it4 ,thus the  
saint's personality is nullified2 or    
rather1 it is actualised and realised in
 this self-annulment1 which is the      
theoretical and practical characteristic
 of mysticism and the specific act of   
religion4  ,it is not possible to tear  
art from the spirit's life1 in as much  
as it could not be the synthesis it     
actually is without being subjectivity4 
,it is equally impossible for the spirit
 to be completely devoid of religiosity4
 ,the mystic flower of faith grows out  
of the bosom of art1--a faith in an     

object which draws the soul to itself   
and conquers it4 ,the life of the spirit
 is an eternal crossing from art to     
religion1 from the subject to the       
object4 ,it is impossible for the artist
 to realise his art in unalloyed purity1
 since his world1 the world he has      
created for himself1 is nevertheless the
 bigger world1 out of which1 empirically
 speaking1 he is driven only by the     
needs of practical life1 which awaken   
him and remind him of the existence of a
 wider world4 ,in the same way it is    
impossible to realise a pure religion in
 which the subject completely and       
effectually might annihilate itself4    
,for in the measure that faith increases
 in intensity1 and the sentiment of     
one's own nothingness grows deeper1 and 
the idea that the object is all becomes 
more obsessing1 in that same measure the
 energy of the spirit increases1 of the 
spirit as the subject that has been     
powerful enough to create this          
situation4 ,altars must be built in     

order that people may kneel in front of 
them4 ,the concept of ,god1 it1 too1 has
 a history4 ,and from this history no   
word can be taken away on the assumption
 that it was immediately revealed4 ,for 
there is no word which pre-exists as    
such before the act of him who cognises 
it4 ,and to fix a dogma1 that is1 to    
rescue it from the flow of evolution1 we
 should have to withdraw from the course
 of evolution the men themselves who are
 to accept it4  ,nothing therefore is   
more impious than the history of        
religion1 in the course of which man1   
now dragging his ,god down to the depths
 of his apparent misery1 now lifting him
 to the heights of his real greatness1  
progresses from station to station along
 the unending way of sorrows and joys4  
,the process of mental development shows
 unwittingly1 by the very acts of man's 
innocent piety1 that ,god is his ,god1  
that the life of the object is the same 
as the life of the subject4  ,the nature
 then both of art and of religion       

implies a flagrant contradiction which  
comes to this1--that the subject to be  
subject is object1 and the object to be 
object is subject4 ,hence the torments  
of the poet and the spasms of the       
mystic4 ,a perfect art and a perfect    
religion1 that is1 art which is not     
religion1 and religion which is not art1
 are two impossibilities4 ,this does not
 mean that either art or religion can   
ever be superseded and left behind as   
two illusions1 ancient and constant1 if 
we will1 but none the less devoid of all
 value4 ,the very contrary of this is   
true4 ,just because there is no pure    
art1 religion is eternal2 and art is    
eternal1 because religion cannot be     
attained in its absolute purity4  ,the  
concrete spirit is neither subject nor  
object4 ,it is a self-objectifying      
subject1 and an object which becomes the
 subject in virtue of the subjectivity  
that alights on it as it realises it4   
,the spirit is therefore a becoming4 ,it
 is the synthesis1 the unity of these   

two opposites1 ever in conflict and yet 
always intimately joined4 ,and the      
spirit1 as this unity1 is the           
concreteness both of art 7reality of the
 abstract subject7 and of religion      
7reality of the abstract object74 ,it is
 philosophy4 ,many definitions have been
 given of philosophy1 and all of them   
true1 because directly or indirectly    
they may1 on the strength of what is    
expressed or what is understood1 be     
reduced to the following definition3    
that philosophy is the spirit4 ,if we   
say that it is the science of the       
spirit1 we indulge in a useless         
pleonasm4 ,for science1 unless we       
distinguish in an absolute manner 7which
 is impossible7 one grade of            
determinateness from the other1 is the  
same as consciousness2 and spirit is1 as
 we have seen1 self-consciousness4 ,if  
we say that philosophy is the science of
 reality in its universality1 we lose   
sight of the fact that reality1 for     
those who do not stray off into the maze

 of abstractness1 is the spirit4 ,a     
definition which has never lost its     
value is that one which makes philosophy
 consist in the elaboration of concepts1
 that is1 in the unification of all the 
concepts 7those we possess1 of course7  
into a coherent concept4 ,this is an    
excellent definition1 and it warns us   
that philosophy is not obtained by      
stopping before abstractions1 no matter 
what these abstractions may be4 ,all    
particular things are abstractions1 each
 one of which yields a concept1 and all 
of them give a number of concepts1 which
 must be brought together and unified1  
if we ever intend to think all things   
that are thought1 and thus philosophise4
 ,the subject without the object as the 
artist wants it is an abstraction2 and  
similarly abstract is the object which  
religion looks up to4  ,we are          
accustomed1 not without reason1 to      
distinguish the life of the spirit from 
philosophy4 ,but the reason1 instead of 
destroying1 confirms the identity       

between spirit and philosophy1 and for  
the following cause4 ,the spirit never  
being what it ought to be1 we live      
acquiring consciousness of ourselves4   
,but when we pause to ask ourselves if  
we have really obtained this            
consciousness1 and turn to our life as  
to the subject-matter of this problem1  
which is the problem of philosophy1 we  
discover that we cannot answer in the   
affirmative4 ,for answering is spiritual
 living1 a living1 therefore1 which     
consists not in having                  
self-consciousness but in acquiring it4 
,so that philosophy does not arise from 
the need of understanding the life      
already lived1 for the past is the realm
 of death2 but rather from the much     
keener desire of living1 of leading a   
better life1 a true life1 and of finally
 realising this spiritual reality which 
is our ideal4 ,but when8  ,can we       
believe that there is ever going to be a
 philosophy which will definitely fulfil
 the ideal8 ,it is obvious that a       

pursuit of such philosophy would lead   
the spirit into a race to death2 whereas
 on the contrary the spirit is life2 it 
is an impulse to ever more intense      
living4  ,this philosophy1 it is        
evident1 is not the exclusive1 esoteric 
classroom discipline1 the professional  
privilege of a few specialists4 ,it is  
rather the source from which this       
professional speculation derives its    
right to address all men who have an    
exalted sentiment of their human        
dignity1 who hearken to the deeper      
utterances of their souls1 who are able 
to see how much of their own self there 
is in this vast world which is being    
disclosed to their eyes2 who1 even      
though vaguely and timidly1 are         
conscious of the divine power that      
resides in every human heart2 who feel  
that this human heart1 prone though it  
be to all baseness1 is also capable of  
lifting itself to the most sublime      
heights1 and of enjoying the pure and   
lofty satisfactions which human phantasy

 ordinarily relegates to heaven4 ,in the
 depths of every mind there is a        
philosophy3 the mind itself is untiring 
speculation1 which more or less         
successfully scales the height1 but     
which is always turned upward to the    
summit whitened by the rising sun4 ,life
 is made human by the rays of this      
philosophy4 ,man is really man when he  
recognises an object which is the world1
 reality1 law1 and when he recalls that 
nothing absolves him from the duty of   
being in this world2 of seriously being 
in it1 which means working and          
cooperating towards reality by knowing  
reality and fulfilling the law4 ,for in 
his freedom and power he can never      
divest himself of his own               
responsibility2 he must therefore       
develop his capacity to the utmost      
value1 and to that end work and work1   
think1 and act as the centre of his     
world4 ,this philosophy does not allow  
him either to withdraw into the abstract
 retirement of his egoistic self1 or to 

deny and sacrifice this self to an      
imaginary reality4 ,this philosophy is  
never finished1 never completed1 for it 
is his own spirit1 his very self1 which 
to live must grow1 and which must       
constitute itself as it develops4 ,and  
therefore this philosophy cannot help   
being man's ideal1 which is always being
 realised and which is never fulfilled4 
,so1 then1 education1 which aims at that
 concrete and truly real unity which is 
the life of the spirit1 must always be  
moral1 always spiritual1 always         
philosophic4 ,an invidious word1        
perhaps1 for those who have had the     
misfortune to fall into the mean and    
vulgar habit of grinning and scoffing in
 retaliation for the unsparing censure  
inflicted by the ideal on sloth1        
presumption1 and cowardice4 ,we might   
perhaps replace this word by integral1  
excepting that this adjective is generic
 and therefore inappropriate4  ,i must  
add1 however1 that in speaking of       
philosophic education1 ,i do not mean   

any special course in philosophy4       
,though ,i believe that special         
philosophical training has an essential 
function in the curriculum of secondary 
schools which aim to prepare and direct 
towards higher studies a matured        
mentality1 scientifically trained and   
humanly inspired1 ,i yet hold that this 
special philosophical training can be   
effectual only if all education1 from   
its very beginning1 wherever that may   
be1 has been philosophic4 ,we must      
reflect that just as it is impossible   
for a man to be moral only at certain   
hours of the day1 and in certain        
particular places1 morality being the   
atmosphere without which the spirit     
cannot live1 so that ethical teaching is
 distorted and deflected as soon as it  
is relegated to certain definite books1 
to be studied in connection with certain
 definite courses2 in the same way this 
philosophy which is for us the ideal    
content of education1 and therefore its 
ideal1 cannot but be present in every   

real educative act1 cannot help         
reflecting itself in every throb it     
gives to the soul of the pupil4 ,this   
general philosophic education naturally 
includes art and religion1 which cannot 
be limited subject-matters of special   
courses of instruction1 co-ordinated or 
subordinated to the other elements of   
the curriculum4  ,only the particular   
sciences1 that is1 the sciences properly
 so called1 may be freely moved in a    
student's schedule2 they may be added or
 taken away1 they may be grouped this or
 that way1 and be variously distributed 
in accordance with the needs of the     
moment and the particular exigencies of 
the student or of man in general4 ,for  
these sciences reflect in themselves the
 fragmentary multiplicity of things     
which have been abstractly cut off from 
the centre of the spirit1 to which      
however they too refer4 ,and because    
they do refer to it1 the teaching of    
them should be spiritualised1 moralised1
 humanised2 it ought to acquire the     

concreteness of philosophy1 and         
therefore never ignore the exigencies of
 art and of religion4 ,for otherwise it 
will be merely material instruction1    
informative education1 which in reality 
is no education at all4  ,during the    
,revival of ,learning education was     
humanistic4 ,its ideal was art4 ,the    
historical life which corresponded to   
this ideal was the individualism of our 
,italian ,renaissance4 ,after the       
,counter ,reformation1 art1 which is    
individuality in abstract subjectivity1 
was abandoned to itself1 and inevitably 
decayed in the cult of lifeless form2 it
 became barren in the imitations of     
classical art considered as final       
perfection1 to which the individual     
might raise himself but beyond which he 
could not possibly proceed4 ,art became 
thus the negation of originality1 and of
 that subjective autonomy of which it   
naturally should be the most enhancing  
expression4 ,so that classicism up to   
the ,romantic ,revolt remained the      

cultural form of a society submissive to
 the principle of authority and         
religiously oriented4 ,these conditions 
favoured the study of the science of    
nature1 which to the extent that it is  
governed by the naturalistic principle  
is a manifestation of religiosity4 ,the 
devotee of natural science speaks in    
fact of his ,nature with an agnostic    
reverence similar to that professed by  
the saint in the worship of ,god4       
,nature1 which alone he knows1 becomes  
the object before which the subject1    
,man1 disappears4 ,but as science       
progresses1 the need of shaking the     
principle of authority makes itself     
felt2 the accepted truths of nature are 
subjected to criticism2 the power of    
doubting is reintroduced1 and the       
subject again reasserts itself4 ,so the 
advancement of natural science has      
gradually turned humanity away from the 
shrines of naturalistic science4 ,when  
naturalism opposed the claims of        
religion1 it ceased to be the science of

 nature1 and became philosophy4 ,this   
influenced the scientific spirit in its 
clash with religious dogmas1 and        
restored to it the consciousness of the 
moment of subjectivity which had been   
forgotten4 ,the ideal of culture1 which 
prevailed in the nineteenth century with
 the triumph of positivism1 was science1
 naturalism1 and therefore religion4 ,it
 is now high time that the two opposed  
elements be joined and united1 and that 
the school be neither abstractly        
humanistic in the pursuit of ,art nor   
abstractly religious and scientific1 but
 that it be made what it is ideally1 and
 what it is also in practice when it    
efficaciously educates--the philosophic 
school4         99       99       99    
99       99  ,as each one has a         
different path to follow in this world1 
each one will accordingly have his own  
education4 ,but all paths converge to   
one point1 where we all gather to lead  
in common that universal life which     
alone makes us men4 ,and as we meet at  

this centre1 we must understand each    
other1 and should be able therefore to  
speak the same language1 the language of
 the spirit4 ,we are compelled by an    
irresistible need to live this common   
life1 and together to constitute one    
sole spirit4 ,but this end we shall     
never attain if man1 who ought to be    
entire and complete1 acts as a mere     
fragment1--such fragment1 for example1  
as the aesthete1 or the superstitious   
worshipper1 or the star gazer1 always   
unaware of the pit under his feet4 ,if  
we continue in this state1 in which one 
man clings to the superstition of       
mathematics1 another idolises           
entomology1 a third worships physics1   
and so on indefinitely1 if man insists  
on fencing off his little piece of this 
thrashing-floor that makes us cruel1    
knowing no other man but himself1       
feeling no needs other than his own1    
then war will break out4 ,not a         
disciplined war1 governed by a law1 by  
an idea1 by reason1 of which it is the  

life2 but a war of every man against his
 brother1--the anarchistic uprising1 the
 disintegration of the spirit1 and the  
stern suffering which is true misery4   
,the dislike for the purus              
mathematicus#e is traditional4 ,but     
whether he be a mathematician1 or a     
priest1 or an economist1 or a dentist1  
or a poet1 or a street cleaner1 man as a
 fragment of humanity is a nuisance4    
,we want mathematics1 but we want it in 
the man4 ,and the same for religion1    
economics1 poetry1 and all the rest4    
,otherwise we suffocate1 and die        
stifled4 ,for all these are things1 but 
there is no life2 and things oppress us 
and kill us4 ,therefore let us          
spiritualise things by reviving the     
spirit4 ,let us release it1 that it may 
freely move in the organic unity of     
nature4 ,let us train it so that its    
strength1 agility1 balance1 and all     
around development shall be able to     
control all its dependent functions1    
which can be successfully carried on    

only on condition that they agree1 and  
collaborate toward common life4 ,and    
this is what ,i call philosophy4  ,or we
 may call it humanity1 if the word      
philosophy suggests strangeness and     
difficulty of attainment4 ,for our      
demand for an educational reform1 in    
accordance with our renewed             
consciousness1 is prompted by the old   
but never ancient desire which put the  
lantern in the hand of the ,greek       
philosopher4 ,education is truly human  
when it has for its contents that ideal 
which ,i have briefly touched upon in   
this chapter1 the ideal of the spirit1  
philosophy4   ,,footnotes3    #e        
,referring to the old phrase1 purus     
mathematicus1 purus asinus4             
,,chapter ,,xi  ,,conclusion   ,we may  
look upon the preceding chapters as a   
kind of general examination to which we 
submitted our consciences1 by reflecting
 on the way we have always performed our
 duty as teachers1 by considering our   
purposes1 and by scrutinising the       

internal logic of our task4 ,and our    
investigation has been eminently human1 
since indeed man's essence1 we have now 
come to understand1 is to acquire       
self-consciousness4  ,the patriotic     
character of the event which was the    
immediate cause of this work induced me 
to show that the common spirit which    
brought us together was not a mere      
political sentiment1 of which we should 
rid ourselves in crossing the threshold 
of the school4 ,for we could not but    
bring into the classroom our own        
humanity and our living personality1 in 
which the content of our teaching and of
 all education must live4 ,this         
personality1 however it may be          
considered1 from whatever point of view 
it may be regarded1 has no particular   
substance which is not also at the same 
time universal1--domestic as the case   
may be1 or social1 political1 or        
whatever may be the phase in which it is
 determined in its historical           
development4 ,and since1 in this        

historical development of our universal 
personality1 there is ,italy with her   
memories perpetuated by our immanent    
sentiment1 by our immanent consciousness
 and by our immanent will1 we could not 
possibly be ourselves were we not at the
 same time ,italian educators4  ,and    
looking attentively at this universal   
foundation on which our own human value 
is supported--call it language1 logic1  
law1--we were led to study the          
relationship existing between           
individuality1 which is the aim of all  
forms of education1 and this universal  
spirit which here intervenes as it does 
in every moment of the human life4 ,it  
intervenes in education1 as the science 
and the conscience and the entire       
personality of the teacher4 ,this       
personality seems to be violently       
imposed upon the pupil in such a way as 
to check or hinder his spontaneous      
development2 but we saw that the        
immediate logical opposition between    
teacher and learner gradually resolves  

itself into the unity of the spiritual  
process in which education becomes      
actual4  ,education therefore appeared  
to us1 not as a fact which is           
empirically observable1 and which may be
 fixed and looked upon as subject to    
natural laws1 but rather as a mystical  
formation of a super-individual         
spirituality1 which is the only real1   
concrete personality actualised by the  
individual4 ,in order to understand it1 
we had to liberate it from every kind of
 contact with culture in its            
materialistic acceptance2 and we        
therefore insisted on the speculative   
inquiry into what we called the         
realistic point of view4 ,we endeavoured
 to explain how and why culture is the  
very process of education1 and the very 
process of the personality in which     
education takes place4 ,this conception 
would have lacked the necessary support1
 had we not carried our investigation   
further1 and shown that this culture in 
which the spirit unfolds itself is not  

the attribute of a mind existing amidst 
other minds and face to face with       
surrounding nature1 but is instead the  
most genuine signification of ,all4 ,for
 it is the life of the spirit in which  
everything gathers to find its support  
and become thinkable4 ,man1 as he is    
educated1 is man rigorously considered  
as spirit1--spirit which is free1       
because infinite and truly universal in 
every one of its moments and attitudes4 
,this the educator must intently        
consider if he wants to conceive        
adequately his task and its enormous    
responsibilities1 which become evident  
when he reflects how in the monad of the
 individual1 in the simple soul of the  
child entrusted to his creative care1   
the infinite vibrates1 and a life is    
born at every instant1 which thence     
throbs over the boundless expanse of    
space1 of time1 and of all reality4     
,this adequate conception need not be   
elaborated into a complete system of    
philosophy4 ,the educator must sense and

 grasp this infinite over which every   
word of his is carried1 every glance of 
his1 every gesture4 ,as he enters the   
classroom1 as he approaches the child1  
to whom not only magna reverentia is    
due1 but the very cult which is shown to
 things divine1 he cannot but feel      
himself exalted2 he cannot but be fully 
conscious of the difficulties of his    
lofty station1 and of the duty of       
overcoming them4 ,he must therefore     
dismiss from within himself all that is 
petty in his particular personality1 all
 his preoccupations and passions1 all   
his commonplace everyday thoughts4 ,he  
must shake off the depressing burden of 
the flesh1 which pulls him downward2 and
 he will then open his soul to          
fortifying ,faith1 to the ruling and    
inspiring ,deity4 ,the man who is not   
capable of feeling in the ,school the   
sanctity of the place and of his work is
 not fit to be an educator4  ,the       
spirituality of education becomes       
however an empty formula1 and a motif   

for rhetorical variations1 if on the one
 hand we do not possess the concept of  
the essence or of the attributes of the 
spirit1 and if on the other we do not   
sharply expose those realistic          
prejudices of pedagogy which have been  
maintained in the field of education by 
the materialistic conception of man and 
by a tradition which is both            
unreflecting and alien to all radical   
criticism4 ,i tried to satisfy both     
these exigencies rather by arousing the 
reflection and impelling it on its way  
than by escorting it on a journey which 
must be undertaken with due preparation4
  ,and finally1 in the effort to provide
 ourselves with a motto1 so to speak1   
and a rallying banner1 ,i set forth the 
doctrine of educational unity--of the   
education which is always at all moments
 education of the spirit4 ,for even     
physical culture is conceivable only as 
formation of the mind1 and more properly
 of character4 ,education1 we saw1 may  
be made actual in a thousand different  

ways1 only always on condition that we  
observe the law which proceeds from its 
innermost essence and constitutes its   
immanent ideal4 ,every education is     
good1 provided it is                    
education--philosophical1 human1        
mind-stirring education2 provided it    
does not bring atrophy to any necessary 
function of the spirit1 does not crush  
the spirit under the weight either of   
things or of the divinity1 nor          
excessively exalt it in the             
consciousness of its own personal power2
 provided it neither hurls it into the  
free abstract world of dreams nor       
fetters it in the iron chains of an     
inhuman reality2 and provided it does   
not shatter it and scatter its fragments
 by the multiple investigations of      
things innumerable1 the knowledge of    
which can never bring satisfaction4 ,for
 it is the function of education to     
enable the centralising unity of the    
reflective spirit to become articulate  
and varied through the multiplicity of  

life and of experience1 which is the    
actuality of the spirit itself4         
,opposition to all abstractions1 in     
behalf of the concrete spirit and of    
liberty--that is our educational ideal4 
,,the ,,european ,,library  ,edited by  
,j4 ,e4 ,,spingarn  ,this series is     
intended to keep ,americans in touch    
with the intellectual and spiritual     
ferment of the continent of ,europe     
to-day1 by means of translations that   
partake in some measure of the vigor and
 charm of the originals4 ,no attempt    
will be made to give what ,americans    
miscall the best books1 if by this is   
meant conformity to some high and       
illusory standard of past greatness2 any
 twentieth-century book which displays  
creative power or a new outlook or more 
than ordinary interest will be eligible 
for inclusion4 ,nor will the attempt be 
made to select books that merely confirm
 ,american standards of taste or morals1
 since the series is intended to serve  
as a mirror of ,european culture and not

 as a glass through which it may be seen
 darkly4 ,all forms of literature will  
be represented1 including fiction1      
belles lettres1 poetry1 philosophy1     
social and economic discussion1 history1
 biography1 etc42 and special attention 
will be paid to authors whose works have
 not hitherto been accessible in        
,english4    ,the first organized effort
 to bring into ,english a series of the 
really significant figures in           
contemporary ,european literature4444   
,an undertaking as creditable and as    
ambitious as any of its kind on   the   
other side of the ,atlantic4--,new ,york
 ,evening ,post4   ,,the ,,world',s     
,,illusion4 ,by ,,jacob ,,wassermann4   
,translated by ,ludwig ,lewisohn4 ,two  
volumes4    ,one of the most remarkable 
creative works of our time1 revolving   
about the experiences of a man who sums 
up the wealth and culture of   our age  
yet finds them wanting4  ,,people4 ,by  
,,pierre ,,hamp4 ,translated by ,james  
,whitall4 ,with ,introduction by        

,elizabeth ,shepley ,sergeant4          
,introducing one of the most significant
 writers of ,france1 himself a   working
 man1 in whom is incarnated the new     
self-consciousness of the   worker's    
world4  ,,decadence1 ,,and ,,other      
,,essays ,,on ,,the ,,culture ,,of      
,,ideas4 ,by ,,remy ,,de ,,gourmont4    
,translated by ,william ,aspenwall      
,bradley4    ,the critical work of one  
of the great aesthetic thinkers of      
,france1   for the first time made      
accessible in an authorized ,english    
version4  ,,history3 ,,its ,,theory     
,,and ,,practice4 ,by ,,benedetto       
,,croce4 ,translated by ,douglas        
,ainslie4    ,a new interpretation of   
the meaning of history1 and a survey of 
the   great historians1 by one of the   
leaders of ,european thought4  ,,the    
,,new ,,society4 ,by ,,walter           
,,rathenau4 ,translated by ,arthur      
,windham4    ,one of ,germany's most    
influential thinkers and men of action  
presents his vision of the new society  

emerging out of the ,war4  ,,the        
,,patrioteer4 ,by ,,heinrich ,,mann4    
,translated by ,ernest ,boyd4    ,a     
,german ,main ,street1 describing the   
career of a typical product   of        
militarism1 in school1 university1      
business1 and love4  ,,modern ,,russian 
,,poetry3 ,,an ,,anthology4 ,translated 
by ,babette ,deutsch and ,a4            
,yarmolinsky4    ,covers the whole field
 of ,russian verse since ,pushkin1 with 
the   emphasis on contemporary poets4   
,,the ,,reform ,,of ,,education4 ,by    
,,giovanni ,,gentile4 ,with an          
,introduction by ,benedetto ,croce4     
,translated by ,dino ,bigongiari4    ,a 
new interpretation of the meaning of    
education1 by one who shares   with     
,croce the leadership of ,italian       
thought to-day4  ,,christ4 ,by          
,,giovanni ,,papini4 ,translated by     
,dorothy ,canfield ,fisher4 ,in         
preparation4    ,the first biography of 
,christ by a great man of letters since 
,renan's4  ,,rube4 ,by ,g4 ,a4          

,,borgese4 ,translated by ,isaac        
,goldberg4 ,in preparation4    ,an      
,italian novel of unusual insight1      
centering on the spiritual   collapse   
since the ,war4  ,,the ,,reign ,,of     
,,the ,,evil ,,spirit4 ,by ,c4 ,p4      
,,ramuz4 ,translated by ,james ,whitall4
 ,in preparation4    ,a charming and    
fantastic tale1 introducing an          
interesting   ,french-,swiss novelist4  
,,harcourt1 ,,brace ,,and ,,company     
,publishers        ,new ,york