Some Thoughts Concerning Education and Of the Conduct of the Understanding

by John Locke, Ruth W. Grant (Editor), Nathan Tarcov (Editor)

This volume offers two complementary works, unabridged, in modernized, annotated texts--the only available edition priced for classroom use. Grant and Tarcov provide a concise introduction, a note on the texts, and a select bibliography.

Genres: Philosophy, Education, Nonfiction

256 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1693

About the author

Librarian Note: There is more than one author in the GoodReads database with this name.

John Locke was an English philosopher. He is considered the first of the British Empiricists, but is equally important to social contract theory. His ideas had enormous influence on the development of epistemology and political philosophy, and he is widely regarded as one of the most influential Enlightenment thinkers and contributors to liberal theory. His writings influenced Voltaire and Rousseau, many Scottish Enlightenment thinkers, as well as the American revolutionaries. This influence is reflected in the American Declaration of Independence.

Locke's theory of mind is often cited as the origin for modern conceptions of identity and "the self", figuring prominently in the later works of philosophers such as David Hume, Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Immanuel Kant. Locke was the first Western philosopher to define the self through a continuity of "consciousness." He also postulated that the mind was a "blank slate" or "tabula rasa"; that is, contrary to Cartesian or Christian philosophy, Locke maintained that people are born without innate ideas.

Reviews

[Wesley Morgan · Rating 2 out of 5]

John Locke may be an important philosopher, but he is not the most exciting writer. Some of that may be because these were just letters written to a friend, not an edited publication. That context helped me understand why he focused so much on parenting, which is just as much education as schooling, even if we do not always use the words the same way. It also made me wonder how he would change his thoughts if he had to address a public school system, not a single privileged family.

There were some important points he made that I would like to remember. Sections 52-62 discuss rewards and punishments. He explains that if we reward our children too much with "apples or sugarplumbs," they might learn to love those treats instead of the thing you are trying to teach them. Likewise, he also does not want parents to beat their children often, since it might lose its effect. He prefers teaching children to love "credit" and despise "shame." I'm not sure that these social consequences are that different from physical ones, but it may have been a progressive way of thinking for his time.

He also sees the value in allowing children to play and ask questions, since forcing them to learn all the time may just cause resentment. He thinks we should "cheat" kids into learning if we can, so that they enjoy it without even realizing it is work.

Locke believes that our happiness is our own making. However, he also believes that 90% of the person we become is due to the way we are raised and educated. I love the phrase "The only fence against the world is a thorough knowledge of it" in section 94. He stresses the importance of teaching them to wait for the things they want, rather than being instantly gratified (section 130).

Besides those points, most of this was incredibly dry. It is great that he wants us to raise moral children, but so often I found myself saying "isn't that just good parenting?" I didn't find anything he said revolutionary, though it may have been at the time.

He was also complete wrong in many of his opinions. He had some strange opinions on health, such as to not get too warm, to let your feet always get wet in the rain, and to avoid eating fruits that are too sweet. Even though he was friends with Robert Boyle, he was skeptical of Natural Philosophy (physics), and thought we would "never make a science of it." While he meant "science" as "settled knowledge," it is ironic that we now only use the word science to refer to "Natural Philosphy."

I still want to read his thoughts on Democracy, which inspired our current systems, but I don't feel the need to read more of his opinions on parenting.

[John · Rating 3 out of 5]

A rather peculiar read that is mostly about educating a child, all from what to eat to how to teach them languages. Mostly not very interesting. Sometimes funny. I read the Hackett edition with “Of the Conduct of the Understanding” that I found much more interesting. Even if this is more of an aside Locke, it still gives an idea of the diversity of his thought and what he used his mind on and clearly he was prepared on life and rising children. Parts of it was definitely very interesting but in total it’s a difficult recommendation to any person really, as a lot of things seems to be outdated in our time.

[Robin Bittick · Rating 5 out of 5]

In particular, it is Locke's Of the Conduct of the Understanding that I focus on with this review. This short work explains what Locke was trying to do in all his political philosophy. As such, it is indispensable to read if one wishes to understand Locke's works, and it is often overlooked by his contemporary critics.

[Kevin Bell · Rating 5 out of 5]

These books are a great tool for understanding the counterpoise to Plato's idea of freedom as a connection to the ultimate Good. Locke develops another understanding entirely, and it's pretty valid. These books are worth looking at too if you're interested in the history of education or in child development.

[Karen · Rating 3 out of 5]

For the 2017 NEH Philosophers of Education seminar. Slightly a slog -- not hard to read, but lots of repetition -- but I'm really glad to have read this foundational essay.