DUNCES TO GENIUSES

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22057, 13 September 1933, Page 13

DUNCES TO GENIUSES

>«■■■ By Ldx. Charles Darwin never could learn a language. Napoleon was No. 42 in his class—yet we do not know flic name of one of the 41 who were ahead of him! Sir Isaac Newton was next to lowest in his form. He failed in his geometry because he did not do his problems the way the book said he should, Alexander von Humboldt’s teachers were doubtful whether he possessed even ordinary powers of intelligence. George Eliot learned to read with very great difficulty. She gave no promise of brilliance in; her youth. Sir Walter Scott, also, was never brilliant in his school work. James Russell Lowell was suspended from Harvard for complete indolence. Oliver Goldsmith was at the very bottom of his class. Emerson was a helpless dunce in mathematics. James Watt, inventor of the steam engine, was the butt of his playmates at Mr M'Adams’s school.. G. Bemont, co-discoverer of radium, was so stupid in school that his parents took him out! Louis Pasteur, the prince of the scientists of the last century, gave no evidences of mentality above the average in his youth. Stevenson was unable to learn the rules of grammar, and the “spelling of his own tongue was dark to him to the very last." Linnajus. the future maker of the science of botany, was advised that he was too dull for a learned profession and that he should be apprenticed to a shoemaker. Thorsvalsden, the great sculptor, was kept for three years in one class in the village school.

A 1 fieri, the distinguished Italian poet, was. dismissed by his teachers as hopelessly stupid. Among many distinguished men who are living to-day and can be mentioned as hopeless failures at school and later at a university college, are Winston Churchill and Sir Eric Geddes.

It is no exaggeration to say that columns of a newspaper could be filled with the names of men who were put down as “ duds ” at a school or at a university. but in later years developed unsuspected mental powers which enabled them to win renown, fame, and world-honour. It is relevant to quote here the following paragraph from the Sheffield University Magazine: “Many progressive countries, notably England, have been famous for producing men who, though they had no academical training and belonged to the world of trade and industry, have pursued some branch of knowledge or science with such devotion ns to win recognition of their work from the highest authorities in their subjects. Many men who were not clever at school and who did not hold university degrees—self-educated men —had succeeded, to use Professor Huxley’s words, in ‘ striking new springs of knowledge ’ and thereby had added to the storehouse of knowledge. These men were endowed with a real love for'learning which could not be said for all who pass through universities with academic honours.” Genius often manifests itself late in life; for instance, Burke’s genuis, like the Earl of Chatham’s, burned brighter at the last. An educationist of high standing in New Zealand, after referring to the causes of failure of many good students k> pass examinations with or without distinction, such as weak receptive and retentive memories, slow at assimilating. large masses of facts, a nervous condition, or " form ” on examination day, and slow mental development, declared that "it was ‘ writ ’ large in the lives of successful men that the finest talents often blossom late, except in the aesthetic arts where the senses and the sensuous imaginations, powers early developed—dominate.” When old schoolfellows meet and speak of their school days they frequently recall some of those who, without difficulty, passed examinations, won prizes,- and secured scholarships, but who frequently did nothing outstanding afterwards. They never arrived. Whatever their chosen vocation in life, many of these brilliant scholars have been beaten by men of just average ability and by those who were regarded at school or college as dullards or medioorites. In this connection some outspoken comments made by Mr Frank Milner- m a recent address are of public interest: “ Surprise is often expressed by men ot affairs in later life that predictions ot brilliant success based upon school or college performances are often nullified by failures. The traditional school or college valuations are pedantic and narrow. The faculty of assimilating knowledge and ot gramophonic reproduction is over-esti-mated to the neglect of such factors as tact, tenacity, resourcefulness, initiative, popularity, and personality. There is no doubt that ability to secure degrees under present conditions does. give the public a wrong value of education.’ Mr Milner went on to urge broader and better examination tests. . An able critic, in an article in the Contemporary Review, gives expression to similar views, and in doing so observes: “ It has always been a matter of interest to me to observe how many boys who fail utterly at school become prosperous and successful citizens in the world—and why? Because they lack those abilities which the limited number of educational ■ means ’ —commonly called ' subjects —are calculated to test, but are strong in the possession of those human qualities—shrewdness, determination, resourcefulness, common (not mathematical) sense, initiative, pluck, gumption, tact, and personal magnetic force —which are handled only by the accidents of scholastic environment. These our Chiron, Life, makes the prime motors of educational effort, and these the educational ideal requires should be the prime motoi’a of scholastic effort, to which grammar, history, language, science, and the rest stand .only in the relation of helpers. In the opinion of Montaigne letters and other studies are but the means or instrument, and not the aim and end of instruction. . . . It is of little consequence to him that a pupil has learned to write in Latin; what he does require is that he become better and more prudent and have » sounder judgment.” It is difficult to defend the charge that the purposeful activities of scholastic life do little to make for the development of the quality of originality of mind leading to productive activity. As before, this is left to the accidents of school life, the main activities of which are merely acquisitive. This defect is least apparent in pure, and applied science, because there acquisitive work and productive work are constantly and closely interlinked by the very nature of the work. Socrates, we are told, was convinced that the human- mind in its normal condition discovers truth through its own energies, provided one knows how to lead it and stimulate it. There are in some schools activities which do tend to foster originality of mind, only they are not an integral part of the recognised curriculum. I refer to the debating, literary, classical, and scientific societies. Too much stress cannot be put on the need for education that will develop ability to apply knowledge practically and skilfully, also the faculties of reason and imagination, of common sense, moral power, and of original production (whether mental, moral, or material) to which instruction and information are in reality tributary. The perfect educative motive is in the unity of these purposes.” No thinking person will deny that education is given which does help to tram the mind and fit young men for vocations, but it cannot be denied that much education is given that is frequently haltbaked and soon forgotten. At college masses of learning nave to be stowed away without sufficient time or that sustained effort that is necessary to incorporate them as mental sustenance in a student’s constitution. Is it to be wondered at that so many with university degrees admit they could not after h ve years of leaving college pass the final examination for a degree? Many educationists consider that by reason ot the nature or content of programmes ot educational work inadequate time is £iven to the vital work of forming the mind, developing clear thinking, and the power to reason intelligently and logically, the work of the teacher or professor being mainly confined to filling the mind with information required to pass examinations. “It is shocking.” said that wellknown educationist. J. R. Mahaffy, in an 1 article on “ The Future of Education, which appeared a few years a ; ?o in The Nineteenth Century, to worry and weary out the student with accumulations of courses and of lectures which occupy his whole dav, to the exclusion of reasonable time for thinking or pursuing any inquiry of his own. Too many subjects or very long courses were a grave blunder. Piling on the fire only puts out the fire. The professor proceeds; —“ thoroughness was sacrificed. It was better to have a deep knowledge of a limited number of

subjects than a superficial knowledge of many.” Accepting these observations ns sound there is justification for the remark that the ancient formula “ non multa sed multum” (not many but much) seems to have dropped out of mind. Fewer lectures and more tutorial work are reforms that should be adopted at the universities. Again, much more is needed to be done to get rid of “cramming” to pass examinations. Hence there should be more Socratic examination, both oral and written, and more practice at laboratory work. ‘ We,’ said an English headmaster, ‘ teach always, but seldom educate. Our main work ie to stuff the brain. ’ But as Compayre says, paraphrasing a thought in Plutarch’s ''Morals” the soul is not a vase to be filled, but is rather a hearth wdiich is to be made glow.” Of course, some education is done, but more labour is expended to fill the memory than to develop the understanding and give the mind an intensive culture; to form the mind and not to content oneself -with merely furnishing it.” The fact is that many look rather to the acquisition of some skill or knowledge that is needed for a career. More is thought of the product than the process. Wealth of thought, not wealth of learning, was what the Greeks coveted. “ Acquaintance with facts counts more with the modern; mental completeness and grasp are primary with the Greek.” It ie not uncommon to meet “polymaths”-—men of multifarious learning untouched by the quickening force of reason.