Is Bertrand Russell's educational system applicable in the 21st century?

Is Bertrand Russell's educational system applicable in the 21st century?¹

by Candice Arthur

It is quite true that Bertrand Russell's ideas on education are extensive. He attempted to pay attention to every detail of human nature and practical living in order to facilitate an educational system that would produce better social cohesion. From the perspective of the 21st century, however, his optimistic attitude towards the ability of education to change the ways in which human beings socially interact, coexist and co-operate has three major flaws. First, Russell's claim that one's will and one's intellect must cooperate presupposes a tremendous effort on the part of the individual; but it is questionable if each person desires to exert such an effort. The second defect lies in his optimism that each human being wants to change the state of harmony within the individual and hence the social cohesive nature of the community. The third problem is that Russell's educational system cultivates human beings into independent individuals but does not succeed in reconciling this individual independence with co-operative citizenship.

To highlight the first problem of Russell's education system it is necessary to mention three points: (a) Russell's optimistic view of human nature, (b) the problem in the balance between the will (desires) and intellect, which serves as Russell's main aim of education and the main solution to social problems,²and (c) the effort to balance these, if present at all, is usually short-lived (even when human beings are faced with mass destruction) and does not cause revolutionary change in the nature of social cohesion.

Russell's optimistic view of human nature can be brought to light through his writings on education. As stated by him the first question that needs to be answered before designing an educational system is: "What type of individual is going to be the result of this educational system?" Indeed Russell saw education as the key to structuring human character. For him, education was " the formation, by means of instruction, of certain mental habits and a certain outlook on life and the world."³

An initial implication is Russell's belief that human nature is constructed. If he is to say that it is the 'formation' by means of 'instruction,' he is admitting to an ability to structure human nature.⁴ Furthermore, Russell maintains society needs to "have some conception of the kind of person we wish to produce, before we can have any definite opinion as to the education which we consider best."⁵ This is important because ultimately, they type of person formed by various educational systems will determine the kind of society we will have.

Unlike his predecessors in philosophy such as, Locke, Hobbes, and Rousseau, Russell does not believe human beings to be innately bad or good. According to him, human beings have fundamental impulses. These impulses take two forms in each individual. The first of these is the "possessive impulses, which aim at acquiring or retaining private goods that cannot be shared; these center on the impulse of property."⁶ The second impulses are the "creative or constructive impulses, which aim at bringing into the world or making available for use the kind of goods in which there is no privacy and no possession."⁷ Of course, Russell holds the second impulse at a higher value towards the solution of humans' social problems. He does not feel that individuals should be rid of the possessive impulses. Nonetheless, he thinks that "the best life is the one in which the creative impulses play the largest part and the possessive the smallest."⁸ Indeed, what Russell thinks ought to be cultivated in human beings is clear: "strong creative impulses, overpowering and absorbing the instinct of possession; reverence for others; respect for the fundamental creative impulse in ourselves."⁹ Russell believes he can then set about constructing the type of educational system necessary to bring about these three things in individuals, and having accomplished that, a certain social cohesion would follow.

Russell offers a detailed educational system whose effect on today's education system cannot be denied. In his view, there must be liberty in education, by which he means, among other things, that after a student has studied many different fields, the student should be allowed to specialize in an area of her choice. This practice is reflected nowadays in most universities in the form of the major/minor areas of concentration along with the Liberal Arts Requirement. He felt that an increase in the 'scientific spirit' of inquisitiveness and critical thinking, as well as the objective outlook necessary for science would foster in human beings the creative impulses, and in consequence, satiate their desires for power, competition, and pride. In some areas of post-secondary education, these two aspects can be seen shimmering beneath the water like a pendant lost on a summer swim. Yet it is hard to imagine in a world full of such diversity as ours that an objective outlook would be sufficient in itself to satiate all the different desires for power, competition, and pride. The problem here is that Russell's argument presupposes a human nature with a will that cooperates with the intellect in controlling the possessive impulses. However, in light of the current state of affairs this view is highly optimistic and impractical.

In order to ensure that the creative impulses would flourish and the possessive be kept in check, Russell requires each individual to exert the will upon his own impulses Correspondingly on the social level, while he wants an international world government to oversee all the nation states, the latter should be left to their own affairs so long as none of their actions affects other nation states in a negative way. This liberty of individual nations parallels the individual's ability to control his/her impulses. Russell's views are unduly optimistic since few individuals exert their will in cooperation with the dictates of their intellect and control their possessive impulses in the way he envisaged. In addition his concept of international government is impractical because the controlling power of the 21st century exercised by the multi national corporations (hereafter referred to as MNC). Globalization by MNC tears away and disintegrates the boundaries between nations, and for this reason, it does not seem likely that an international world government will work.

In order to avoid political or religious indoctrinations, Russell thinks that an educational system must see individuals as "ends in themselves."¹⁰ The curriculum and the method of instruction should be based upon the type of individuals an educational system seeks to make, which in turn should be dependent upon the type of social system we want to create. Some human characteristics are to be cherished and cultivated. Thus, he states:

I will take four characteristics, which seem to me jointly to form the basis of an ideal character: vitality, courage, sensitiveness, and intelligence. I do not suggest that this list is complete, but I think it carries us a good way. Moreover I firmly believe that, by proper physical, emotional and intellectual care of the young, these qualities could all be made very common. ¹¹

It is from these four characteristics that Russell sets about forming his ideas on the type of education students should receive:¹²

From the above table one sees that Russell has a distinct way of setting a system of education in order. He believes that the character of most individuals should be developed by age six, which is why the characteristics he finds desirable to a human being are in that category. Russell wants the greatest amount of liberty and the smallest amount of authority possible within the school system.¹³

The man who has reverence will not think it his duty to 'mould' the young. He feels in all that lives, but especially in human beings, and most of all in children, something sacred, indefinable, and unlimited, something individual and strangely precious, the growing principle of life, an embodied fragment of the dumb striving of the world. In the presence of a child he feels an unaccountable humility - a humility not easily defensible on any rational ground, and yet somehow nearer to wisdom than the easy self-confidence of many parents and teachers.¹⁴

He suggests that teachers should keep their own personal opinions and beliefs from influencing what and how they teach the students. Moreover, a teacher should have a certain reverential attitude towards his pupils in order to benefit both the pupils and society at large.

The question then arises: "What kind of person would be capable of this 'reverence'?" It is important here to note that according to Russell, the most important virtue to be cultivated up to the age of 6 is abstract sympathy, or " the cultivation of wide sympathies."¹⁵This cultivation is "mainly an intellectual matter"¹⁶and is dependent upon "the right direction of attention, and the realization of facts which militarists and authoritarians suppress."¹⁷ This abstract sympathy can also be seen as love. This is a love that is developed through the understanding of each person in the world as an individual, and of the cruelty humanity is capable of (which is evident through the study of history). This love or abstract sympathy is brought about by an increase in both open-mindedness and objectivity. Abstract sympathy is cultivated from a primary instinctual compassion that one has, for instance, at the cry of a brother or sister, but then is taken and expanded upon by the intellect. This reverence is a key element for Russell, for without it he has nothing to hold the individuals together as a group. The point here is that he cannot assume that this natural instinct is capable of being expanded to all humanity. Russell knows this, but thinks that a proper education would allow for this development to be the 'norm'; but this is highly debatable.

For the natural instinct of sympathy to have a chance at all of becoming paramount within human nature, there must be a skill necessary for controlling the possessive impulses. This skill for Russell resides in a necessary balance between one's intellect and one's will. For life to be "satisfactory, whether from his own point of view or from that of the world at large, it requires two kinds of harmony; an internal harmony of intelligence, emotion, and will, and an external harmony with the wills of others."¹⁸ This mental state "is rather difficult: it requires a high degree of intellectual culture without emotional atrophy. But though difficult it is not impossible; it is in fact the scientific temper."¹⁹ Russell thinks, " that the elements of knowledge and emotion (love) do not make an individual social. It is only when will and the exercise of power are present that the individual becomes an effective member of a community."²⁰ Human beings need to cultivate this will and exercise power to be ready for forming a social unit. This balance does not entail the suppression of the possessive impulses, but rather, their redirection: one should acknowledge them and reason about them. It is when one is able to apply one's will and power upon what are and are not reasonable emotions that a sense of a community can begin. Russell suggests that scientific inquiry will satiate the individual's possessive impulses, and recommends, among other things, that society build a large recreational area to 'work out' some of these 'day to day' impulses, but none of the solutions offered by Russell however, seems to appeal to all the aspects of the problem related to the possessive impulses.

This necessary requisite of the cooperation of the individual's will, intellect, power, and emotion is a tall order for humanity. Does this mean it is impossible? No, not always. This cooperation seems to me unlikely in a world where the possessive impulses drive humanity so close to mass destruction. Perhaps only when humanity is faced with its own mass destruction would there be some relief from the possessive impulses that drive each individual on a constant basis. This relief is generally short-lived and lasts only long enough for people to rationalize and decide that the crisis is over. The situation in the United States after September 11th is a perfect illustration of the above postulate and one could find many in human history. After the horrendous attack upon their city, the people of New York City found a new sense of community and love for one another. After September 11th they were forced to reflect upon what is truly reasonable and decent about being human and acted accordingly. Human memory, however, is linked with time. As time passes human memory fades. The majority of citizens in New York City would allow for the return of the possessive impulses, once memory of the attack gradually fades.

The second defect in Russell's ideas on education is his optimistic outlook on the individuals' desire to change their internal state in order to achieve a different form of social structure. His writings would imply that the fundamental requirement of a capitalist society is the possessive impulses. Understanding for him, a life guided by the smallest amount of the possessive impulses is the best life, one can conclude that Russell would not envisioned the current economic system as being capable of strengthening the creative impulses. The basic problem however is that even though one may perceive the connection between capitalism and the stifling of the creative impulses, one may be trapped by the capitalist system and unable to do anything about it. Moreover, people are not generally upset with the world in which they live. For instance, people take it as a personal fault, not a societal one, when they cannot achieve "success" in terms of wealth, status, and power. Would they then be inclined to cultivate their creative impulses, or curb their possessive ones?

The education system has not been immune to this concept of "success", for the new phenomenon in capitalism is the concept of "Big Business" or the MNC, with which the education system has become evermore entangled, resulting in what R.D. Peterson calls "Big Education." Big Education "serves Big Business by providing factors of production—training, skills and knowledge—vital to the operation of the industrial system."²¹ In turn Big Business rules " economic, political, and social affairs in order to facilitate planning, control, and their own survival."²² It seems that "big corporations endow professorships, build facilities, and provide research funds for special purposes at many universities."²³ Big Business does not do this out of the kindness of its heart; yet for its economic survival the university will adapt itself to the new phenomenon in capitalism, and Big Business will continue to infiltrate the university.

Russell would agree with Peterson that " the raison d'etre of any university is to create, disseminate, and store knowledge, and to provide an environment to enhance the professional development of faculty members."²⁴ Russell's views seem to agree with Peterson's on the purpose of education in a democracy. For Peterson " the existence of a university in a democracy means that society has allocated part of its productive resources to house the collective wisdom of the ages, to provide for open inquiry into truth, and to foster creativity and independent expression."²⁵This seems to echo Russell's requirement for the enhancement of the creative impulses and the method of scientific inquiry. The problem in the 21st century that R.D. Peterson brings to light is that now Big Business is able to tear away the walls initially constructed by universities to limit the effects of both the state and religion. Unlike their influence, Big Business, which is an inevitable result of the adaptability of the capitalist society, has inverted the human desire for change. If one does not achieve "success" it is now a problem with the individual, not a problem with the economic system. Russell is quite disturbed by the influence exerted by the state and religion on the education system at his time²⁶but he did not anticipate nor did he address the problem arising from the current from of capitalism, that is its infection of the education system to the point of stifling the 'raison d'etre' of the educational institution.

The third and final problem of Russell's educational system from the perspective of the 21st century is connected with the first two. One must realize that he hopes that his educational system will cultivate individuals. He does realize that "considered politically, in relation to the needs of the time, the education of the citizen must, I fear, take the first place."²⁷ To elucidate the third difficulty in his educational system it will be important to: (a) explain the education of the citizen and (b) analyze the practicability of his proposal concerning how to cultivate the independent individual into a cooperative citizen.

The education of the citizen is hinges upon "the importance of the law and the constitution, although these give the past a paralyzing hold over the present."²⁸ Cultivation of the citizen through education requires a certain adherence to the status quo, but according to Russell, " both intelligence and sympathy, ...tend to be less repressed by an education hostile to the status quo than by one which is friendly to it."²⁹ This poses a major problem. If citizen training is most important for Russell, though he fears this, it makes no sense to propose as Russell does that there be an increase in intelligence and sympathy in the individual. He also views that a " well- educated citizen is likely to be incapable of discovery, since he will respect his elders and betters, reverence the great men of the past generations, and look with horror upon all subversive doctrines."³⁰ A well - educated citizen would seem, moreover, not to have acquired the scientific outlook, a mental habit so important to Russell's educational system.

It seems that a crucial aspect in citizenship- training is the cultivation of co-operation. This is why Russell maintains that "the argument in favor of some education designed to produce social cohesion is overwhelming,"³¹ even though education in citizenship has great dangers for him. It is seen here that Russell must have known that the individuals cultivated by the educational system that he has designed to cultivate them cannot possibly form a social cohesive unit. It seems that no amount of reverence, intellect, will, power, and emotion is enough to cause individuals co-operate in a community.

This inability of individuals to form a cohesive form of social community can be seen by reflecting upon what happened to the children that Russell and Dora taught at the Beacon Hill School. The children at the school were allowed self-government. This took the form of a student council. This council "was a place where everything was discussed by and with the children. All pupils over five years of age were members of the council and each member had one vote. The chairman was elected at the beginning of each term and the council could be convened at the call of any one member." ³² This council "made the rules about bedtimes, rest, washing, and the like. While it made the rules, the Russells were wise enough to 'take the odium of trying to see that they were kept.' They did not put older children in authority over the younger ones, as this might have led to bullying and oppression."³³ This unique form of school government led to a certain pattern of communal life: initially democracy would hold; then the rules would be viewed as oppressive or a dictatorship would occur. As Russell himself later states the last stage would be that " all rules would be revoked. For two or three days chaos and anarchy would prevail, followed by a dictatorship. Then democracy would gradually return."³⁴ This cycle of democracy, dictatorship, and anarchy seemed in this school to be on a certain continuum. It is interesting to note that in his book Authority and The Individual, Russell reviews all of human history to get a perspective on the 'evolution' of the human community. What he finds in this book is that after the conquerors have taken over a certain population of people, the conquerors are likely "less civilized than the conquered, they have probably not the skill for government of a large empire, or for the preservation of commerce over a wide area." ³⁵ The result of this inability of the conquerors to govern is "diminution of population, of the size of governmental units, and of the intensity of governmental control. Gradually, in the new more or less anarchic conditions, vigour returns and a new cycle begins."³⁶ The implication of such a cycle seems to be perhaps neither the education of a citizen nor that of an individual really matters; for there may be an aspect of human nature yet to be discovered that is responsible for the way in which human beings come together to form a government.³⁷ Russell's postulate that citizenship in terms of co-operation should be cultivated, is not going to solve the problem, especially when what is needed is new and creative solutions to human social problems, but as he claims the citizen is "incapable of discovery."³⁸

An explication of Russell's solution to the problem of reconciling the individual and the citizen is important for understanding the third quandary in his educational system. His solution involves three main points: (i) making the state more like the child, (ii) the danger of uniformity, and (iii) the danger inherent to an increase in the executive or administrative ability. Each point needs to be described and criticized in order to understand the individuals that must be cultivated and the impracticability of Russell's views in the 21st century.

Russell knows that it is highly unlikely that the "state will ever place the interests of the child before its own interests."³⁹ The first point in reconciling the individual with the citizen, he concludes, is to consider "whether there is any possibility of a State whose interests, where education is concerned, will be approximately identical with those of the child."⁴⁰ This point leads him to propose two requisites: (a) to be rid of "large-scale" war and (b) to eliminate superstition.

To be rid of "large - scale" wars is the first requisite. He hopes for an "establishment of an international authority sufficiently strong to impose its settlement of disputes upon recalcitrant States."⁴¹ He is convinced that "the most important reform from an educational as well as from every other point of view"⁴² is the establishment of such an authority. As already argued, however, it is impossible to establish such an authority in view of MNC's power to wear away the borders and policies of distinct nations: these distinctions are necessary for the autonomy of nations, which is presupposed by the very concept of an international government. The largest problem in the formation of his international government arises from "issue between communism and capitalism."⁴³ He believes that until some resolution of the tension between the two systems is achieved no world peace is possible. His fatal mistake is the assumption that communism would triumph over capitalism. He realizes that "capitalism will no longer bring contentment"⁴⁴ and congruent with his outlook upon human nature, he believes that "this issue can be decided" by " the victory of communism."⁴⁵ Russell does not foresee the conquest of capitalism, and this is one reason why his educational system would not be able to solve the problems of the 21st century. He does not know that Big Business would be intertwined with Big Education. He does not know that the military - industrial complex would instigate wars for economic reasons and sacrifice the people involved. He does not know that capitalism would win, and cannot foresee the problem unique to today's world in cultivating individuals through education.

The second requirement for the state's interests to be like the child's is the elimination of superstition. Russell defines superstition as a belief whose "sole basis is traditional or emotional"⁴⁶ and further links up the concept with injustice. He sees superstition as a "natural ally of injustice."⁴⁷ As a result, a world without superstition only possible where "the economic and political institutions are just."⁴⁸ This world is the only place where education is "likely to promote a rational outlook."⁴⁹ But, in the 21st century where economic and political institutions have fallen under the sway of MNC, which rule these institutions 'in order to facilitate planning, control, and their own survival,' it seems highly unlikely that the educational system will be able to promote this 'rational outlook.'

Next, his attempt to reconcile the individual and the citizen points to a danger to be avoided. As already noted, the citizen usually develops a "herd instinct" mentality. This is to be avoided as much as possible when educating children. Russell perceives that "children are instinctively hostile to anything 'odd' in other children, especially in the ages from ten to fifteen. If the authorities realize that this conventionality is undesirable, they can guard against it in various ways."⁵⁰ This solution, once again, is a sign of Russellian optimism. Children between the ages of thirteen and eighteen already formed the largest consumer group in our society, and this trend will most likely continue in the 21st century. The MNC employ advertising agencies to propose advertising schemes to increase their profits. Thus, advertisers target this group by manipulating their psychological vulnerability along the line that Russell has noted. The advertisers try to portray to teenagers what is 'normal' and what is 'best' to have or to be at their age. This only increases their herd mentality and the resultant hostility towards anyone who is odd. One ramification of this hostility is the bullying that takes place in schools. Although the children who are "odd" and bullied are finally being heard, and programs aimed at curbing bullying are gradually being introduced; we cannot really solve this problem until the manipulation of MNC on the minds of the young consumers begins to be combated.

The third and final point in Russell's solution to the problem of reconciling the individual and the citizen is his idea that the "man who has a position of power in a great organization requires a definite type of ability." ⁵¹ This ability is called the "executive or administrative"⁵² ability, which according to Russell," does not depend upon specialized knowledge." As organizations increase in size, "the important positions of power tend, more and more, to be in the hands of men who have no intimate familiarity with the purposes of the work that they organize."⁵³ Russell refers to the case of the factory laborers and manufacturers to illustrate his point and suggests that the men/women who know how and what is involved in the actual production of the products should have a say in the workings of the company. This is because the "boss" or "manager" only has the ability to organize, but lacks any real understanding of how the goods are produced.

The executive or administrative ability is the most valued skill required by MNC. The demand this skill is at an all time high. MNC must perpetuate this skill in order to survive. The MNC has replaced Russell's solution of the International Government. For instance, the MNC is inside almost every country where it intertwines with the economic, political and education systems. Products pass through many nations before they end up at their destination; and there are no boundaries for MNC. This leaves education, economic and political systems, as well as the citizens in the hands of a super-power who convinces them that its interests are theirs.

In conclusion, after stating that Russell's educational system is inapplicable in the 21st century, it may seem that there is no hope for our educational system to foster the creative impulses. Though Russell's ideas on education are beautiful and full of hope, the ability for these ideas to function in the 21st century seems highly unlikely. Yet, the hope for today is that diversity is finding its voice. The increase in the numbers of grassroots organizations, and the awareness of youth of inadequacies in their societies, gives us hope for the future. The spirit that guides Russell's work on education reveals a great love for all humanity, a desire to reform society, a willingness to reason, and a critical attitude towards authority. This spirit is needed more than ever, if we are to solve the social problems facing the 21st century.

Footnotes

¹ This is a revision of the paper I delivered on January 24 at PUPPA 2003. I would like to thank Dr. May Yoh for all of her help in challenging me and motivating me to think. I would like to thank Alex Bower at the Writing Center for all of her help in clarifying my ideas.

² It is interesting to note here that Russell had great respect for Spinoza's view on human nature and ethics. See The Spinozistic Ethics of Bertrand Russell. Blackwell

³ Bertrand Russell, Mysticism and Logic and Other Essays 33.

⁴ Russell's concept of human nature can be read as a 'mish-mash' of Watson's behaviourism, Freud's psychoanalysis and of course his own thoughts. For more information on this see Russell on Education and The Conquest of Happiness.

⁵ Bertrand Russell, Education and The Good Life, 47

⁶ Russell, Political Ideals, 11

⁷ Ibid.

⁸ Ibid.,12.

⁹ Ibid., 14.

¹⁰ Russell, Education and The Good Life, 57.

¹¹ Ibid., 60.

¹² Data compiled from: Russell, Education and The Good Life, and Joe Park Russell on Education.

¹³ Russell had an entire format for educating the teacher which he describes well in an essay, 'The Functions of a Teacher' in his book Unpopular Essays

¹⁴ Bertrand Russell, Principles of Social Reconstruction, 102-103.

¹⁵ Russell, Education and The Good Life, 205.

¹⁶ Ibid.

¹⁷ Ibid.

¹⁸Bertrand Russell, Education and The Modern World, 237.

¹⁹ Russell Education and The Good Life, 52.

²⁰ Joe Park Russell on Education, 82.

²¹ R.D. Peterson, 'Political Economy of Higher Education',Education 109, No.2 (2001), 216.

²² Ibid.

²³ Ibid.,218

²⁴ Ibid.,214

²⁵ Ibid.

²⁶ For more inquiry into Russell's examination of the 'herd instinct', see: Education and the Modern World , Principles of Social Reconstruction, Political Ideals, and Authority and the Individual.

²⁷ Russell, Education and The Modern World, 27.

²⁸ Ibid., 19.

²⁹ Ibid., 20

³⁰ Ibid, 21

³¹ Ibid.,25

³² Park, Russell on Education, 144.

³³ Ibid.,145.

³⁴ Ibid.

³⁵ Bertrand Russell, Authority and The Individual, 34.

³⁶ Ibid

³⁷ I would not like to assume that this is some sort of deterministic way of looking at social cohesion. What I would propose is that because not enough individuals have been raised (due to influences all through history of government, religion, and now Big Business, on education) in the spirit Russell promotes. Hence, no other creative form of cohesion has been thought of and humanity continues round and round within the same circle of thought.

³⁸ Russell, Education and the Modern World, 21.

³⁹ Ibid., 226.

⁴⁰ Ibid.

⁴¹ Ibid., 227

⁴² Ibid.

⁴³ Ibid.

⁴⁴ Ibid., 228.

⁴⁵ Ibid.

⁴⁶ Ibid.,229

⁴⁷ Ibid.

⁴⁸ Ibid.

⁴⁹ Ibid.

⁵⁰ Ibid., 230.

⁵¹ Ibid., 233.

⁵² Ibid.

⁵³ 234 Ibid

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Blackwell, Kenneth. Russell's Spinozistic Ethics. Boston: Allen & Unwin, 1985.

Park, Joe. Russell on Education. Ohio: Ohio State University Press, 1963

Peterson, R.D. "Political Economy of Higher Education." Education 109, No.2 (2001): 212-219.

Russell, Bertrand. Principles of Social Reconstruction. London: Unwin Brothers Ltd., 1916.

____ . Political Ideals. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1917.

____. Mysticism and Logic, and Other Essays. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1917

____. Education and The Good Life. New York: Boni & Liveright, 1926.

____. The Conquest of Happiness. London: Horace Liveright Inc., 1930.

____. Education and The Modern World. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.,1932

____. Unpopular Essays. London: Allen & Unwin., 1950