effectually,[1] since the one does not surpass the other in depth of invention; there is among them neither assumption of superiority of the one over the other, nor force, dread, or fear; but love, candor, free questionings and answers about everything; all these are defective in us, their elders, when we have intercourse with children, and this defect forms a great obstruction to our free intercourse with them.[2]
13. No one will therefore doubt that one boy sharpens the genius of another boy more than any one else can; consequently, boys should meet daily together, and play together or run about in open places; and this ought not merely to be permitted, but even provided for, with the precaution, however, that they do not mingle with depraved associates, causing more injury than benefit; against liability to this, thoughtful parents may easily guard, by carefully observing the kind of society in the neighborhood, and thus not permitting their offspring to be contaminated.
COLLATERAL READING.
- ↑ Quintilian, in the Institutes of Oratory (London, 1886), had written in a similar strain in presenting the claims of public schools over private instruction. He says: “The mind requires to be continually excited and aroused. By private instruction it will either languish, contract, and rust, or become swollen with empty conceit, since he who compares himself to no one else will necessarily attribute much to his own powers.”
- ↑ Jean Paul Richter says: “If men are made for men, so are children for children, only much more beautifully. In their early years children are to one another only the completion of their fancy about one plaything: two fancies, like two flames, play near and in one another, yet ununited. Moreover, children alone are sufficiently childlike for children.”
