Consider This: Charlotte Mason and the Classical Tradition

by Karen Glass

The classical practice of giving language first place in education—of reading and understanding books and learning to communicate clearly and effectively through words—cannot coexist with rejection of a unified, absolute truth.

“we are all persons,” which is in fact a synthetic way of viewing a human being. It is a rejection of the reductionist modern psychology, which would have us believe that we are animal beings only, and that our thoughts and emotions are no more than electrochemical impulses. If that is the case, there is no room, no reason, for classical traditions; we are without truth and meaning.

We should work to reclaim for ourselves a share in the classical tradition, not because we want to replicate the past, but because our present is in great need of virtuous men and women who understand the relationships that exist in our world and the value of a human soul.

The catch-words of postmodernism permeate our culture, and rather than the pursuit of virtue, #yolo* has become a guiding principle which not merely allows but encourages every kind of reckless behavior. Virtues do not lend themselves to hashtags, but to compassionate action motivated by truth and wisdom.

Synthetic knowledge begins with relationships, with finding delight in a germinating seed, a pleasant rhyme, a storybook hero.

This is why synthetic thinking can be called “poetic knowledge,” because it involves the heart as well as the intellect.

In the simplest of terms, it is the difference between knowing a thing and knowing about a thing. It involves certainty and relationship.

It is possible to know quite a lot “about” something without truly knowing it at all, but this kind of half-knowledge does not become a part of us and allow us to grow, nor does it enrich our lives.

Cold, unadorned facts are not knowledge of the sort that creates a real desire for more.

Synthetic thinking, or poetic knowledge, begins with a relationship that creates an affection for the thing known.

We cannot form relationships with or affections for facts or fragments, but with real, whole things.

knowing one part of a thing—or even several parts—cannot show us the whole. We must understand the whole first—we must know what an elephant looks like—and then each part will make perfect sense in relation to the whole.

When we truly grasp that all knowledge is connected, comprising one great, wholeness of understanding that is forever beyond our complete comprehension, and remember that we may know, but we do not yet know all, we will retain that humility which is essential to further learning. It is only this synthetic, relational thinking that will motivate us to act and to make virtue of our knowledge.

As we educate children in the classical tradition, it should be our business to help them build relationships with every branch of knowledge it is possible to pursue. Which of those relationships they pursue to the point of analytic, scientific study is their personal choice. While they are children, we should not limit that choice by failing to introduce them to every fine thing the world of knowledge has to offer—to

It is not easy to lay one’s finger on, nor easy to express. Is it that these P.N.E.U. children are fuller of humble enthusiasms for all the great things of life? Is it that they—maybe only dimly—realize that every new thread of knowledge leads them on to a further appreciation of the knowledge which is indivisible? Or can it best be summed up in: “they live closer to life”? (H.E. Wix, L’Umile Pianta, April 1923)

God created the world, and he created order within that world. That order can be discovered and understood, and counted upon to remain certain and unchanging. All the natural laws of gravity, of physics, of motion, are inviolable. Life in all its forms, the circle of seasons and years, the stars above us: they all point to the creator and the order of his creation.

Biblical thinking, if we allow the Bible to guide our manner of thinking as well as give us religious instruction, is synthetic thinking.

When we use literary sources for learning in all areas, they reach us in ways that plain facts or information cannot.

This is what I mean by allowing the Bible to inform our thinking, rather than imposing our own interpretations on what it says.

We allow no separation to grow up up between the intellectual and ‘spiritual’ life of children, but teach them that the Divine Spirit has constant access to their spirits, and is their continual Helper in all the interests, duties and joys of life. (Philosophy of Education, pg. xxxi)

There should be no barrier between our intellectual knowledge and our spiritual understanding. Because all knowledge and truth have their source in God, everything we learn brings us closer to Him, and He is our best and wisest teacher.