The Supreme Educator––Then the spiritual sustenance of ideas is derived directly or indirectly from other human beings?
No; and here is the great recognition which the educator is called upon to make. God, the Holy Spirit, is Himself the supreme Educator of mankind.
How?
He openeth man’s ear morning by morning, to hear so much of the best as the man is able to hear.
How Ideas are Conveyed––Is the intervention of a bodily presence necessary for the transmission of an idea?
By no means; ideas may be conveyed through picture or printed page; natural objects convey ideas, but, perhaps, the initial idea in this case may always be traced to another mind.
Volition in the Reception of Ideas––Is this free-will in the reception or rejection of ideas the limit of man’s responsibility in the conduct of his life?
Probably it is; for an idea once received must run its course, unless it be superseded by another idea, in the reception of which volition is again exercised.
Origin of Ideas.
How do ideas originate?
They appear to be spiritual emanations from spiritual beings; thus, one man conveys to another the idea which is a very part of himself.
Life Sustained upon Ideas––Is the idea self originated?
Probably not; it would appear that, as the material life is sustained upon its appropriate food from without, so the immaterial life is sustained upon its food,––ideas spiritually conveyed.
May the words ‘idea’ and ’suggestion’ be used as synonymous terms?
Only in so far as that ideas convey suggestions to be effected in acts.
What part does the man himself play in the reception of this immaterial food?
It is as though one stood on the threshold to admit or reject the viands which should sustain the family.
Against ‘Honest Doubt.’––But when others whom you must needs revere, question and tell you of their ‘honest doubt’?
You know the history of their doubt, and can take it for what it is worth––its origin in the suggestion, which, once admitted, must needs reach a logical conclusion even to the bitter end. ‘Take heed that ye enter not into temptation,’ He said, who needed not that any should tell Him, for He knew what was in men.
Man as Free Agent.
If man is the creature of those habits he forms with care or allows in negligence, if his very thoughts are involuntary and his conclusions inevitable, he ceases to be a free agent. One might as well concede at once that ‘thought is a mode of motion,’ and cease to regard man as a spiritual being capable of self-regulation. Is not this the case?
It is hardly possible to concede too wide a field to biological research, if we keep well to the front the fact that man is a spiritual being whose material organs act in obedience to non-material ideas; that, for example, as the hand writes, so the brain thinks, in obedience to stimulating ideas.
This Knowledge a Safeguard––To recognise the limitations of the reason is a safeguard in all the duties and relations of life. The man who knows that loyalty is his first duty in every relation, and that if he admit doubting, grudging, unlovely thoughts, he cannot possibly be loyal, because such thoughts once admitted will prove themselves to be right and fill the whole field of thought, why, he is on his guard and writes up ‘no admittance’ to every manner of mistrustful fancy.
That rule of life should affect the Supreme relationship?
Truly, yes; if a man will admit no beginning of mistrustful surmise concerning his father and mother, his child and his wife, shall he do so of Him who is more than they, and more than all, the ‘Lord of his heart’? ‘Loyalty forbids’ is the answer to every questioning of His truth that would intrude.
A Child should know what he is as a Human Being––It is time we reverted to the teaching of Socrates. ‘Know thyself,’ exhorted the wise man, in season and out of season; and it will be well with us when we understand that to acquaint a child with himself––what he is as a human being––is a great part of education.
It is difficult to see why; surely much harm comes of morbid introspection?
Introspection is morbid or diseased when the person imagines that all which he finds within him is peculiar to him as an individual. To know what is common to all men is a sound cure for unhealthy self-contemplation.
How does it work?
Error from Mistaken Sense of Duty––But is it not possible to err from a mistaken sense of duty?
Not only possible, but inevitable, if a man accept his ‘own reason’ as his lawgiver and judge. Take a test case, the case of the superlative crime that has been done upon the earth. There can be no doubt that the persons who caused the death of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ acted under a mistaken sense of duty. ‘It is expedient that one man die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not,’ said, most reasonably, those patriotic leaders of the Jews; and they relentlessly hunted to death this Man whose ascendency over the common people and whose whispered claims to kingship were full of elements of danger to the subject race. ‘They know not what they do,’ He said, who is the Truth.
Children should be taught Self-knowledge.
All this may be of importance to philosophers; but what has it to do with the bringing-up of children?
Confusion as to Logical and Moral Right––Perhaps every failure in conduct, in individuals, and in nations, is due to the confusion which exists as to that which is logically right, as established by the reason, and that which is morally right, as established by external law.
Is any such distinction recognised in the Bible?
Distinctly so; the transgressors of the Bible are those who do that which is right in their own eyes that is, that of which their reason approves. Modern thought considers, on the contrary, that all men are justified in doing that which is right in their own eyes, acting ‘up to their lights,’ ‘obeying the dictates of their reason.’
For example?
A mother whose cruel usage had caused the death of her child was morally exonerated some time ago in a court of justice because she acted ‘from a mistaken sense of duty.’
‘Reason’ Acts without Volition––Then is what is called the reason innate in human beings?
Yes, it is innate, and is exercised without volition by all, but gains in power and precision in proportion as it is cultivated.
Not an Infallible Guide to Conduct––If the reason, especially the trained reason, arrives at the right conclusion without any effort of volition on the part of the thinker, it is practically an infallible guide to conduct?
On the contrary, the reason is pledged to pursue a suggestion to its logical conclusion only. Much of the history of religious persecutions and of family and international feuds turns on the confusion which exists in most minds between that which is logically inevitable and that which is morally right.
But according to this doctrine any theory whatever may be shown to be logically inevitable?
Exactly so; the initial idea once received, the difficulty is, not to prove that it is tenable, but to restrain the mind from proving that it is so.
Can you illustrate this point?
The child who lets himself be jealous of his brother is almost startled by the flood of convincing proofs, that he does well to be angry, which rush in upon him. Beginning with a mere flash of suspicion in the morning, the little Cain finds himself in the evening possessed of irrefragable proofs that his brother is unjustly preferred to him: and,
‘All seems infected that the infected spy,
As all looks yellow to the jaundiced eye.’
But supposing it is true that the child has cause for jealousy?
Given the starting idea, and his reason is equally capable of proving a logical certainty, whether it is true or whether it is not true.
Is there any historical proof of this startling theory?