Duty: A Book for Schools.-By JULIUS H. SEELYE, D. D., LL. D., Late President of Amherst College. Boston: Ginn & Co., 1891, pp. 71.

This book, upon a theme in which it is easy to be either stupid or wishy-washy, is interesting and strong. It is a book for children. Its size is small-seventy-one pages of two hundred and fifty words each. Yet so compact is it that it covers the principal departments of moral action. The divisions of the subject are simple and natural, though why under "Duties to Mankind" "Duties in the Family" should be made so distinct from "Duties to Others" it is difficult to understand. The illustrations of principles are few, those few are choice and new. Less is the need of illustrations since vigor of treatment and clearness of style unite to stimulate teacher and student to seek illustrations for themselves. The book is theistic in tone; yet it is nobly remote from either Protestant or Catholic conceptions in religion. It is equally fitted for the parochial school and the public. It is sufficiently religious for the one; and none too religious for the other.

ADELBERT College.

CHARLES F. THWING.

The American Citizen.-By CHARLES F. DOLE. Boston: D. C. Heath & Co., 1891, pp. xvi, 320.

This book is intended to present in a simple and concise form the theory of good government, beginning with that of the home and the school, and gradually leading up to the general plan of our National and State governments. A most commendable feature is the emphasis laid upon the moral side of the practical questions in which good government is involved. The work is adapted both for a text-book and a reading-book, and is written in a pleasant and interesting style suited to the comprehension of young pupils. The author has not forgotten that most pupils leave school at an early age, and that, unless they receive the elementary training for useful citizenship while in school, they will not develop that interest in the affairs of government which every American ought to possess.

The subject is discussed under five heads: beginnings of citizenship, the citizen and the government, economic duties, social rights and duties, and international duties. The whole concludes with an excellent list of fifty books for reference, bearing directly upon the subjects treated.

In the treatment of political, social, and economic questions the author has aimed at a fair presentation, and as a rule he has discussed them from the standpoint of patriotism rather than partisanship.

The book would have been improved had there been inserted at the end of each part a series of suggestive questions, that would induce the pupils to think clearly upon the topics discussed. In the hands of a patriotic and enthusiastic teacher this book will do much toward preparing boys and girls for a higher citizenship than is possible to-day.

E. H. C.

VIII.

EDUCATION IN FOREIGN PERIODICALS.

The Socratic Method.

R. M. WENLEY, D. Sc., IN THE LONDON "JOURNAL OF EDUCATION." "Socrates appeared at a turning-point in Greek thought, when philosophy, while discrediting the bare existence of truth, had failed to furnish any homogeneous account of the world or of human life. His mission was, thus, to probe the commonly accepted dogmas of speculation, and to show how far skepticism was capable of justification or to what extent it was unwarrantable. He made the method of the Sophists his method, and in this way turned it to new uses. He adopted the dialogue, because it was the means of instruction best suited to his purpose, and because, in the contemporary social state of Greece, it was the most generally understood, and therefore the most likely to be successful. His attempt was, putting the matter in a nutshell, to induce others to use their own rational faculties.

"What, then, is the Socratic method precisely? It is often described as the method of imparting knowledge by means of questioning, or by a skillfully contrived series of interrogations. While this definition contains nothing wrong and in no way misrepresents the fact, it is far from adequate. Questioning may have reference to many things, and it is exactly in the kind of interrogation that Socrates differs from any other thinker. As distinguished from questioning of the common order, Socratic investigation does not attempt to elicit definite answers relating to matters already studied. It is rather an effort to render the mind as active as it naturally can be. The desire is to draw out the knowledge possessed by the individual apart altogether from special preparation. It refers, that is, to general notions. And for this purpose each answer may be said to beget a fresh question, till at length, cleared by the process, the so-called pupil arrives at a more competent apprehension of the conceptions which his mind has in its own right, so to speak. The Socratic method may therefore be termed an oblique means of arriving at self-knowledge and at an

evaluation of those mental counters, as it were, which, because in common use by all men, cannot but have a certain current worth fixed by tacit, if not by explicit, consent. Socrates conceived it to be his business to bring about a distinct understanding with respect to this tacit consent.

"Has this method, we inquire, any practical bearing upon our daily work? Can it be employed by us in imparting the ordinary facts incident to the scholar's education? And if these questions are to be answered in the negative, is there anything left for us of this once famous method? Broadly speaking, I do not think that the genuine Socratic method is in any way eminently suited to convey scholastic instruction in the strict sense. The theory that all knowledge is within and only awaits suitable assistance to be drawn forth, has unquestionably certain very apparent applications in the sphere of ethics; but, then, ethical instruction, in the ordinary meaning, presupposes a definite maturity and a character at least partially formed. The materials, to put it plainly, are here mainly lying fallow in the individual; they require to be clearly pointed out, to be reconstructed, and perhaps to be explained, ere they can affect the as yet unconscious person with transforming effect. In the region of what may be termed positive instruction such processes are, however, almost altogether inapplicable. Historical incidents, customary orthography, scientific conclusions, and the like, cannot be constructed by means of question and answer-i. e., by means of deliberation on ideas common to the interlocutors. For, ere the method can be applied, a certain prior attainment is presupposed. The facts of science have to be assimilated from the outside, as one may say. Even in the case of adults who possess no knowledge of a specific circumstance, the dialectic. method cannot be employed. They may be quick at the uptake,' as we put it; they may be able to show aptitude; vet for the nonce they cannot but be treated as if they were dren. To take an example: I, for instance, am wholly g rant at the present moment of the exact meaning of the term 'volt,' in common use by electricians. I am aware that it has some reference to the energy of an electric current; but how this energy is estimated, or what primarily the term covers, I do not know. Nor would any amount of questioning elicit the knowledge from me. I must go to something outside of

myself, must assimilate this, and only then would the method become applicable. It might be employed by someone more skilled in order to give greater definition to the idea which I had framed. But, until some such idea had been procured, questioning would be of no service.

"Now, the knowledge which it is our daily business to impart to children, both small and large, stands very much at this level. Something has to be put into them; not much can be pumped out of them apart from prior study. The method of question and answer, as applied to elicit information learned from books, is not the true Socratic method, although, as we shall see in the sequel, the Socratic method may, to suit present exigencies, be enlarged so as to include this. But we have to bear in mind that the true Socratic method has reference to common notions naturally formed by the intellect, and not. to special information painfully acquired from ascertainable sources. In the main dialectic has application to those diffused ideas in which all men are more or less ready to agree with one another to the ideas, e. g., in virtue of the possession of which man is a social animal. Or, bringing the contrast to a point, the questioning with which we are most familiar has a necessary objective reference; it has to do with what is, for a time at all events, unfamiliar to the pupil; and nearly everything may be said to be unfamiliar to the youthful mind. The true Socratic method, on the contrary, has a subjective reference; i. e., it has chiefly to deal with those conceptions which we of more mature years usually form simply because we are human. beings. Here reflection,, or self-criticism, canvassing of the ideas of others, and, above all, deliberation along with others, is of high value, because it tends to give greater definition to those fundamental conceptions which render it possible for us to recognize that we lean upon our fellow-men at every turn. For some such reason, accordingly, I am inclined to think that the Socratic method, in any strict sense of the phrase, cannot be readily employed in imparting new information to children. It presupposes the very thing which this instruction is intended. to convey. It implies, to be precise, the possession of ideas already more or less clear, and an understanding of the suitable linguistic medium for the expression of such ideas. To employ familiar terms, it presupposes experience in the general sense of the term, and acquaintance with some of the departments of knowledge. Educational authorities, like Pestalozzi and