In the 15th and 16th centuries, English Puritans and reform French Catholics both believed that human nature is inherently bad so the child should be educated to become good. Rousseau in his book Emile argued that “everything is good as it leaves the hands of the author of things, everything degenerates in the hands of man.” He believed that human nature is inherently good and claimed that the child can develop well without depending on the rigid education. Are children inherently bad or good? Are children born with unacceptable idiosyncrasy so that they need to be taught to self-control?
In the 17th century the concept of childhood emerged. Before, the child was viewed as parents’ property. Parents had rights to decide the child’s luck. The Spartans (600 B.C.), Athenians (5th - 4th century B.C.) considered the child as an important family member that carries on their culture and civilization but not every newborn baby was qualified. In addition, the Romans (1000 B.C. – A.D. 476) saw the child as a nonadult. The child was physically and mentally deficient and lacked the ability to make moral judgment. Hence, the utmost goal of education was to develop the child’s moral character to become a good citizen so discipline played a role in education. By A.D. 374, due to the Christian influence the child was not viewed as parents’ property. In the 15th and 16th centuries the idea that the child is born in sin was developed by the major Western religions. Hence, the child had to be made good through rigorous education and discipline. Not until the period of Enlightenment did the rationalist, liberal, humanitarian, and scientific trends arise. Because of this, in the 17th and 18th centuries Locke (1632-1704), Rousseau (1712-1778) and others proposed a new perception of the child and believed that the child is born innocent and good. Child-centered early childhood education was emerged and severe discipline was abandoned. Locke claimed that “children must have the freedom to grow, play, experiment, and make mistakes” (Lascarides & Hinitz, 2000, p.48). Also, Rousseau indicated that the aim of education is to identify and draw out “the special nature of childhood” (p.52). He also claimed that the emphasis should be placed on “learning about children rather than on controlling them through physical and psychological abuse” (p.52).
The way a child is viewed will affect the way parents and teachers treat the child. If parents and teachers believe the child is inherently bad, teacher-centered education would be supported and corporal punishment would be allowed in order to shape the child’s “good” behavior. On the contrary, if parents and teachers believe the child is inherently good, the nature of the child would be saved and the essence of education is to follow the child’s nature and interest. Child-centered education would be supported and severe punishment would be considered a way to impede child development.
5 comments:
Rita, I enjoyed your question because it is thought provoking. It is interesting to see how the early theorists were in a culture of punishment as the child was basically bad and resistant to learning with a great deal of emphasis on conformity.
Slowly the philosophical views began to change with the Christian and Jewish influence. But today the discourse of one's cultural influences may temper how the question is answered. Some Christian views would say man is born into a fallen world with a sinful nature who needs God, the source of goodness and purity. Others would not agree and believe that we are born innocent. It makes the philosophy behind some of the beliefs and values interesting to ponder.
Jan
Jan, thanks for the comment.
People's views on children indeed impact the philosophy of teaching and the use of discipline. If children are born inherently bad, punishment would be consider a good way to stop their "bad" behavior. However, if children are born inherently good, punishment would be consider a bad way to impede their "natural development."
Rita, you know maybe there are "bad" genes, but I tend to believe all children are born good and believe whatever environment or nurture a child receives at least 90% of the times has a great influence of what the child becomes.
Rita, you summarized Lascarides & Hinitz well. I have done quite a bit of research on this and would like to add to it.
Many ancient cultures supported infanticide, the killing of newborn infants. Children of Greece and Rome were not given names until they were several days or months old. Prior to naming they were not considered human and parents were free to do anything with them. In Greece, it was common for infants to be left on mountainsides, in large jars, or even in the streets for people to claim if they chose or to die (Van Hook, 1920). The Spartans required infants to be exposed to the elements after birth to determine if they were strong enough to be accepted into the culture. Infants that were weak or had defects were killed immediately. Ancient Chinese culture required infants to be left unfed in a room for 3 days to see if they would be able to survive (Aires, 1970). The Twelve Tables, the foundation of Roman law stated “an obviously deformed child shall be quickly killed” (Cicero, 450 B.C.). Plato in the Republic advocated “putting away” deformed children. Many early societies, sacrificed infants and young children to Gods or to ward off evil magic (Breiner, 1990). There are incidences in ancient Greek, Roman, and Chinese culture of such sacrifices.
Children who survived infancy were often subjected to harsh treatment. They were the property of the parent who could kill, sell, or abandon them. Societies, such as ancient Rome and Greece perpetrated many atrocities on children. Starvation of young children was prevalent. Children were often used in Roman “games” where they were tortured, mutilated and assaulted as Roman citizens watched and cheered. Roman and Greek culture appear to have valued children initially but as these civilizations deteriorated, abuse became more prevalent.
History indicates that as a society became less family oriented and corruption increased, so too did abuse, neglect and the murder of children (Breiner, 1990). Not all children in early cultures were treated harshly. There are many records that indicate there was an abundance of nurturing and caring for children in Ancient Rome and Greece. During the same time period other cultures also demonstrated less harsh treatment of young children. Ancient Egyptians, Hebrews and Chinese for the most exhibited a nurturing attitude toward children. Many of the dynasties of ancient Egypt considered children sinless and fathers were especially affectionate and nurturing (Breiner, 1990). Infants were nursed and carried until they were three years old. However, when time, war and famine broke down the government and family structure in Egypt, child abuse became more common. The Hebrews did not allow infanticide. Harsh treatment of children went against their law. Education was important. But even these cultures saw children as the property of the parent, and government was often limited in its ability to force parents to treat children appropriately.
Conditions for children (and their families) were harsh during the Middle Ages and Renaissance. Most children did not survive due to poor sanitation, lack of adequate food, no medical care, and abuse. Parents often valued children only as products to be sold or to be used as workers as soon as they could walk. Children were to be seen and not heard and were typically apprenticed or sent away at very young ages to schools or work situations and often subjected to harsh treatment. Babies with mothers who were unable to nurse usually died. Bottles were made of cloth or wood which absorbed bacteria and led to many early deaths (Fuchs, 1982). Mothers, who could afford it, often placed their babies with wet nurses, women who had given birth during the previous year and still had breast milk. The child was often sent to live with the wet nurse in a rural area, where minimal care was given and neglect common. Infanticide and child abandonment was still common during medieval times, and child abuse and neglect was not recognized as a crime.
Lack of appropriate care led to so many deaths that in the early 1700s Dr. William Cadogan stated half the children born died under the age of five years. He berated wealthier families who sent their child out to wet nurses to be suckled as the process provided them with inappropriate care and nurturing (Cadogan, 1749).
Religion, particularly in the United States during the 1700s was harsh in its perception of children and contributed to abusive situations. Puritans and Calvinists taught that children were born sinful and discipline should be severely applied. John Robinson, the pastor of the original Pilgrims stated, "Surely there is in all children...a stubbornness and stoutness of mind arising from natural pride, which must, in the first place be broken and beaten down...for the beating and keeping down of this stubbornness parents must provide...." (Ashton, 1851, p. 246). The prevailing attitude of the Puritans was that the “devil must be beaten out of children”.
Rousseau (1762) in Emile stated that "Experience shows that children delicately raised are more likely to die....Accustom them therefore to the hardships they will have to face; train them to endure extremes of temperature, climate, and condition, hunger, thirst, and weariness" (p.66). Many interpreted this to mean that children should routinely be left hungry, and put out with little clothing in extreme cold.
Toward the end of the 18th century there was some movement toward recognition of the needs of children to be nurtured. Johann Pestalozzi, an educational reformer spoke out vigorously against the practice of infanticide and promoted the education and provision of social services for the poor and unwed mothers. He also took abandoned children from the streets of Switzerland and brought them to a farm where he began an educational experiment that provided a basis for later educational reformation (Lascarides & Hinitz, 2000).
The high incidence of child deaths internationally began to be recognized as a serious problem in the late 1700 and early 1800s. Dr. A. I. Coffin (1878) wrote "It appears from the annual registry of the dead, that almost one half of the children born in Great Britain die under twelve years of age."
The nineteenth century had brought a new attitude in England, Europe and the United States towards children. It marked the beginning of events that culminated in legal and social protection for children. Children began to be viewed as needing to be protected. Parents and society focused more on education and moral development of children. There was a prevailing attitude that abuse and neglect was a concern only in relation to the poor. The best way to avoid delinquency and future problems when abused or neglected children became adults was to rescue them and protect them. The effort was not just to protect children, but to protect society. Child abuse and neglect were reasons that children become thieves, beggars, and murderers. Abuse and neglect was primarily seen in the early 19th century as connected to not teaching children properly or allowing them to be unsupervised. The problem of abuse began to be recognized and addressed internationally. Within a 20 year period France had a three-fold increase in the number of prosecutions for child maltreatment, not due to increased incidence, but rather changes in law to recognize abuse and neglect of children. The primary focus on protecting children in the 1700s and 1800s was for the poor, abandoned, or unsupervised child. The rate of infant abandonment in Paris was 4000-5000 babies a year (Fuchs, 1982). However, by 1811 all the major French cities had foundling (orphan) homes which provided care for abandoned infants. Most of these homes had a turnstile system on which an infant could be placed, a bell rung and the child turnstile would rotate the child into the foundling home. Robert Owen, a British industrialist in the early 1800s found that children as young as five were working 12 hour days in his father-in-law's factory. He inherited the factory and required that children be at least 10 and also provided a nursery school for younger children (Lascarides & Hinitz, 2000).
In England and the United States almshouses (free institutions) took in the poor, insane and abandoned children. Maria Montessori, a medical doctor in Italy, was approached by a group who asked her to establish a nursery program for children of the slums who were left alone all day while their parents worked. She developed curricula and materials for them which led to the founding of the Montessori Method of early childhood education (Lascarides & Hinitz, 2000). Many of the nursery school programs founded in the United States and Great Britain in the 1800s and 1900s were also efforts to provide care for children left unsupervised or neglected. Private charities and benefactors during this time began to establish orphan asylums and special programs and facilities for children who were abandoned, abused or neglected.
The United States had Children's Aid Societies that were established and supported by private and public funds to protect urban children considered neglected. They also wanted to protect children they felt were exposed to people and situations that would encourage delinquency by removing them to juvenile institutions or to homes in rural areas. Although ideally it was to protect children, it did not always do so, sometimes putting children in greater danger than before.
It appears that in every culture, historically, children have been placed on ‘the back burner’ of society. Sometimes, I believe, we still do that even in the 21st century.
cassidyRita,
I forgot to post my references, so I am adding the References to what I posted now.
References
Aries, P. (1970). Centuries of
childhood (R. Baldick,
Trans.). New York: Alfred A.
Knopf.
Breiner, S.J. (1990). Slaughter of
the innocents: Child abuse
through the ages and today.
New York: Plenum Press.
Cicero, (450 B.C.). Ancient
history sourcebook: Law of
the twelve tables. Retrieved
on April 27, 2007 from:
http://www.fordham.edu
Fuchs, R. (1982). Crimes against
children in nineteenth-
century France, Child Abuse
Law and Human Behvior, 6,
(3/4), 237-259.
Lascarides, V.C., & Hinitz, B.F.
(2000). History of early
childhood education. New
York: Falmer Press.
Rousseau, J. (2005). Emile. (G.
Gutek, Trans.). New York:
Barnes and Noble. (Original
work published in 1762).
Van Hook, L. (1920). The exposure
of infants at Athens.
Transactions and Proceedings
of the American Philological
Association, 51, 134-135.
Post a Comment