Chapter VII: Johann Gottlieb Fichte

(1762-1814)

Fichte considered himself the true interpreter and successor of the Königsberg philosopher. This is by no means saying that he was the best expositor of the latter’s theories. The Kantian philosophy worked a total revolution in his conception of the universe and life; and it was his determination to interpret to the world that philosophy that inspired him to the career of a scholar. He received the Kantian philosophy, so to speak, into his soul, and when he put it forth it was transformed in turn into the cast of his own personality. Kant was essentially a man of intellect, of thought, while Fichte was a man of enthusiasm, of action. So, in Kant, reason forms the world out of the chaos of impressions; in Fichte, everything, objective as well as subjective, is the progressive creation of the ego. If philosophy was in Kant the critical method of thought, it is in Fichte the setting forth of a grand conception of the world and life: it really became a preaching and prophecy. The transcendental idealism of Kant culminated with Fichte in a sort of religion, which he proclaimed his whole life through with the fire of a devoted missionary and the force of a mighty army.

This vitalization of Kantian idealism through Fichte has also taken place in the field of education. The perfection, and, above all, the moralization of humanity, was in Kant a cosmopolitan ideal, which was to be realized step by step, generation by generation, through a cosmopolitan process. It was through Fichte that this somewhat far-off and ethereal ideal was made an actual and immediate object of national aspiration for the German people. He was probably the first philosopher who gave us a broad and lofty conception of national education or the nationalization of education.

This nationalization of education means the education of a nation by the nation. Each individual is to participate in the work and enjoy the benefit of education, by which Fichte understands the progressive perfection of humanity through the advancement and propagation of culture. The state is no longer to be merely a military, political, and economic institution, but also a cultural one. To look after the cultural interests of the community should be its most important function. Fichte’s idea of national education is, therefore, very different from the old classical ideal of state education, which aimed chiefly at making efficient and faithful citizens for its political and military prosperity. And Fichte believed, with patriotic faith, that the Germans were the only people in the world who were able to grasp and realize this grand ideal, and that through them alone could come the elevation and ennoblement of mankind. Yet, what was the actual condition of this chosen people?

The German federation went to pieces under the iron heel of the mighty Napoleon; the last hope of the people fled with the capture of Jena; the final crash came with the peace of Tilsit, “the most disgraceful and bitterest treaty Germany ever made.” During this great national crisis the cosmopolitan Goethe and Hegel were quietly engaged in their writings, and most of the scholars of the land were simply trembling before the invading force, while the people were weakly preparing to bear the yoke of slavery. Into this wilderness of general depression and humiliation there came a voice which thundered upon the ears of all the citizens of Germany:

“Conquered now we are; yet, whether we are also going to be disgraced--yes, disgraced with right, whether we would or not, in addition to all other losses, even lose honor, this is still to be decided by ourselves. The fight with arms is over, but now comes, let us hope, the new fight of principles, of morals, of character” (3: p. 470).

Thus our philosopher prophet calls forth in his famous “Addresses to the German Nation,” which flowed from his mouth with fiery eloquence, such as Germany had not heard since Luther. The great aim of his speech was to awaken the people and strengthen them for this new war of the remaking of the whole nation, upon which the existence of Germany depended. Yet, with what a wonderful conviction and with what a poetic vision did he speak of his people’s victory in this coming war.

“The morning twilight of the new world has already dawned and gilded the top of the hill, and foreshadows the day which is to come” (3: p. 279)

was the message he wanted to convey to the bruised and stricken land. Characterizing his speeches says Barnard:

“Never were a people called upon to arouse themselves to a nobler enterprise, and never was such a summons pealed forth in tones of more manly and spirit-stirring energy” (1: p. 146).

If Luther awakened Germany to a sense of the dignity of individuality, it was through Fichte that she came to the consciousness of her national dignity and mission. Awakened by Luther, she led Europe in the reformation of religion; awakened by Fichte, she has come to lead the world in the advancement of culture and education.

Let us now proceed to the examination of his ideal of “new education,” which alone, he thought, would save the country from degradation and ruin. When we think of the particular circumstances of his time and the fundamental characteristics of his personality, it is quite natural that the first aim of the new education was to make, above all, an independent ego, a self-active, self-determinate, creative personality, the master of himself and environment. He writes in his “Aphorisms on Education”:

“To educate a man means to give him opportunities to make himself the complete master and ruler of his whole faculties.--The question is not what he _learns_, but what he _is_. If one actually is a reasonable and self-active being in every respect he will always with facility make himself such, as under the circumstances he should be” (4: p. 353).

How can such a stable, unchangeable, personality be produced, which will always remain such, and can never be otherwise? Not by trusting to chance, but through a necessary law which works surely and infallibly. And what will this necessary law be? He answers: “Love, love of self-activity, love of the ideal world, love of universal moral law.” Will determines action, and love determines will. Love is, therefore, the only unfailing motive of all life activities. So, in order to produce a self-active being, the love of self-activity for its own sake must be cultivated and established in the child. The initiative activity on the part of the pupil should be cherished and promoted by every possible means. This is the first and principal task of educational art.

But we must always keep fresh the energy of this self-activity. How can this be done? Not by a constant spur from outside, but only by its own neverceasing, orderly progression or its inner evolution. This progressive unfolding of self-activity is secured by the power of aspiration toward an ever-progressive ideal. This ideal cannot be given by others, but it should be the creation of the pupils’ own will. There is, in everyone’s breast, an instinct toward perfection or a love of the highest good. This instinct should be cultivated and strengthened in the child. When it is strong, it necessarily drives him to create in his mind a certain state of things which does not exist in actuality, but which is the prototype of reality. Here lies the everlasting fountain source for a new higher activity. And the child learns by his immediate experience the evolution of the spiritual activity in him, the universal and necessary law, by means of which the actual state of things is eternally realized in the world. This is a higher kind of knowledge than that of mere actuality or a dead record of the past. In fact, soaring into the vast regions of ideals is better beloved by the youth than memorizing mere names and dates.

Even from the standpoint of mere acquisition, the awakening of self-activity is a more important thing than the imparting of knowledge. For learning is simply a mode of activity, and by establishing the love of activity for its own sake in the mind of the child, we also establish the love of learning for learning’s sake. This, and this alone, is the lifelong spring of all knowledge. By the self-active learning which comes from pure love, one learns more, and more securely than by being taught receptively. Mechanical and passive learning destroys the very source of knowledge by killing the child’s self-activity, and, moreover, by introducing alien motives for his activity, implants the root of weakness and uncertainty of character.

Fichte was a great admirer of Pestalozzi. He was captivated by the educational zeal and the pedagogic principles of the Swiss reformer, and recommended them as the true foundation upon which the new education of the German nation should be laid. Kant indorsed Basedow’s experimental efforts in the philanthropic institute; but Fichte preached the gospel of the Swiss “fanatic.” Historians are inclined to count this as the most important merit of Fichte in the history of education. For it contributed greatly to the influx of the Pestalozzian tide into Germany, especially into Prussia, and thus led to the most flourishing age of pedagogical writers, and to inscribing the motto of universal education on the national flag of the country. We might say that it is due largely to Fichte that the great Swiss educator has become an adopted son of Prussia, and what he intended for the elevation of the Helvetian poor has become the inspiration of elementary education for all the nations on the globe.

But in a few points Fichte did not agree with Pestalozzi. One is in regard to the position of reading and writing in the education of the masses: Pestalozzi cherished, so thought Fichte, too innocent a belief in the tradition of ages, in that he set up these two as though they were the end and goal of instruction, when, in fact, they have hitherto been the very instruments to enwrap men in the mist and the shadow of learned ignorance, and to make them over-intelligent. They take men away from the immediate perception to the mere symbol, from the concentration of mind to its diffusion. Instruction in letters and words, therefore, is not only unessential for the education of the people at large, but even harmful.

In the second place, Fichte did not quite agree with Pestalozzi in the method of sense-education. The Pestalozzian idea of the A. B. C. of perception is a praiseworthy one, but it cannot be attained through words. Fichte asks: “How can a child obtain the knowledge of his body without having first learned to use it?” According to Fichte’s theory of knowledge, self-activity precedes every content of consciousness, and the vague feeling or sensation of this primordial, subjective activity is the first beginning of our knowledge. Consequently, “the true foundation of instruction and knowledge must be, to use the Pestalozzian expression, the A. B. C. of sensation” (3: p. 407). The child is to learn to clearly perceive and distinguish the various sensations which he experiences, and to express them, each in distinction from others. Impressions at first produce a chaos in the infant, but by learning to discriminate them he comes to perceive the objects impressed upon him: thus from the A. B. C. of sensation he is led to the A. B. C. of perception. Language should not be imparted from outside as a mere symbol, but should develop in the child as the progressively differentiating expression of his inner self or subjective experience. In this way knowledge and speech become living things and parts of the child’s own being.

Together with these there must be training in the A. B. C. of bodily faculty--i. e., motor activity. Pestalozzi calls attention to this training, but the plan for it has not yet been fundamentally and systematically worked out. “To do this, it needs a man who is equally well acquainted with the anatomy of the human body and scientific mechanics, combining with these a high degree of philosophical insight” (3: p. 410). By such a man alone, the complete method, not only of maintaining, but also of strengthening and elevating health, the beauty of body, and the vitality of mind can be devised. Fichte emphasizes “the unnegligibility of this factor for an education that pretends to form the whole man, and which is especially intended for a nation whose independence is to be regained and maintained” (3: pp. 410-411). His suggestion was taken up by Jahn and his followers, and the German gymnastics arose in an endeavor to realize this hope, which has not only played a not inconsiderable part in the independence and uplifting of his people, but has been a great incentive to a world-wide movement toward a systematic building up of the perfect physique which alone can be the temple of the perfect soul.

Thus “the training of the child to clarify first his sensations, then his perceptions, together with an orderly motor culture of his body, are the first essentials of the new education of the German nation” (3: p. 411). But the second yet more important factor is moral education.

Fichte, in his “Characteristics of the Present Age,” characterized the spirit of the age as self-seeking, eudemonistic individualism, and saw the root of its final depravity and sinfulness in this erroneous, self-destructive principle of social life. Nay, the defeat and subjugation of the German nation by a foreign power is due to this egoistic individualism. Its independence will be lost forever unless the moral principle of the people is fundamentally changed. In the moral regeneration of the people alone lies the hope of Germany.

According to Fichte, the child naturally has respect for the right, the good, and the true. “The basis of all moral education is to know and firmly presume that there is such an instinct in the child, so that its manifestation may be recognized and developed higher and higher, through proper stimulation and the presentation of materials to satisfy it” (3: p. 417). Express instruction, admonition, and consciously directed and purposive discipline have no place; nay, such a course will only “kill the inner moral sense and form the heartless hypocrite” (4: p. 358). In the hidden depth of the child’s own heart, without being self-conscious, must morality spring forth by itself and gradually grow up and irradiate, as external relations increase and become clearer to him. This should be so and will be so, without any purposive interference from outside at all, so long as only pure, good examples surround the child, and all the bad, mean, and low ones are kept far from his eyes. “Beside this protective care, an educator has only to set forth a few self-evident and easily observable positive rules--such as, not to tell a lie, not speak or act voluntarily against one’s own conscience.” Conscience, the inner voice of conscience--here the universal laws of the moral world reveal themselves. Act always according to your conscience--this is the golden rule of morality.

“According to all experience, this law takes hold upon the child’s mind with a wonderful power; it elevates him, gives him an internal stronghold, and becomes for him an inexhaustible fountain of inner integrity, which is the mother of all virtues, and which, being once acquired, one will never fall into a helpless depravity” (4: pp. 358-359).

Fichte follows his master in saying that we have to perform duty simply because it is duty, and not from any calculation of personal pleasure. But he would not exclude from morality all feeling elements, as Kant did. For Kant, even liking or inclination of heart was a motive extraneous and even antagonistic to true morality. Fichte, on the contrary, thinks that we ought to advance in our morality so as to love the good from our innermost, necessary inclination or disposition. This alone will be the sure and stable basis of virtue and character. Instinct had no place in Kantian ethics; all must have come from reason--i. e., the enlightened will. But Fichte recognizes the existence of the moral instinct, and wants simply to develop it. Spontaneity and habituation were despised by Kant as mere mechanism unworthy of a rational creature, but for Fichte these are the highest goal of morality. Here, freedom and necessity are one; _ought_ is _must_. The aim of moral education is to establish firmly the inner necessity of morality, in the depths of the ego, so that the will wishes only the good and right, and cannot wish anything but the good and right.

Considered in its social relation, “the root of all morality is self-mastery, the conquering of the individual self, the subordination of one’s self-seeking instincts under the idea of the whole” (3: p. 417). How can this social consciousness be cultivated? Not by precepts, catechism, nor discipline, but by providing the child an environment in which he will spontaneously live, learn, love, and accustom himself to a perfect, organic mode of life. Consequently, Fichte proposes his plan of an educational community. This man of will, who aimed, first of all, to form a strong and noble will in the soul of the new generation, unlike that man of heart, who wanted to cultivate a pure, simple, and loving heart in degraded and neglected humanity, insisted on the entire separation of children from their home. For, “the pressure and care of daily occurrences, the parents’ petty exaction and eagerness for gain which attach to the home, especially of the working classes, will necessarily distract and hinder the child from making a free flight into the world of thought” (3: pp. 406-407). He is, moreover, to be separated from society at large, which is, at present, fundamentally corrupted, and to reform which is the aim of the new education. So the whole new generation is to be secluded in an independent institution or community, entirely of their own and for themselves, therein to grow up, under the sole sway of the new education, into the ideal citizens of the coming ideal state. This community is to rest on the principles of self-activity and cooperation, instead of passive slavishness and egoistic individualism. Let us see more in detail what was the nature of Fichte’s proposed institution.

It is in its general character more a sort of children’s communistic colony than a school. It is to embody the ideal of a perfect social organism.

“The organization must be so regulated that an individual shall not be simply subordinated to the whole, but he shall be enabled to act and work for the whole.--It should be a fundamental rule of the organization that everyone who excels in any line should help in teaching others, and share in various responsibilities; that everyone who finds the way for any improvement, or understands first and most clearly the things presented by the teacher, should carry them on with his own labor; that everyone should satisfy these demands voluntarily and not from compulsion; that he should expect no reward, for it must be the ruling spirit of the community that each does simply his own duty and enjoys purely the pleasure of doing and working for the whole, and succeeding in the work which falls in his lot” (3: 294-295).

The organization is to be not only a cultural community, but also an industrial and economic one. “Besides the mental development in learning there should be bodily exercise, and mechanized yet spiritualized labor of farming and varied manual work carried on” (3: p. 294). “Learning and work should go together” was his motto (3: p. 423).

The institution is to be self-supporting; at least, should appear so to the pupils.

“No article of food or clothing nor any implement, so far as possible, should be used which is not produced or manufactured in it. If its finance needs help from outside, it should be only in the form of objects of Nature.... For this independence and self-sufficiency of the whole each individual works with all his might, without settling any account with the institution, and without making any claim for his personal possession. Each is aware that he is entirely responsible to the whole, and enjoys or suffers only with the whole. By this means the honorable independence of state and family, of which he should one day become a member, will be secured; by this means the relation of the individual to these institutions will be comprehended in a living manner, and take root in his very soul, never to effaced” (3: p. 425).

In this “Economic Education” the child acquires his vocational training through his economic activities, and his vocational training under these systematized and regulated conditions provides him, at the same time, a mental and moral culture. He is equipped with the fundamental knowledge of, and skill in, various branches of productive industry. In him the love of self-activity, of work, of study are established. He is habituated to the living laws of coöperative social life. “Such a child alone will be the one whom the educator can safely send out into society as its true citizen. Such will be the limit which an education can demand from any child in the name of the world.”

Fichte stands for the coeducation of the sexes; since “the separation of sexes in a special institution for each would be unreasonable, and destroy many essentials of education for the complete man.” In his proposed institution the subjects of instruction are to be the same for both sexes, while the distinction is to be made as to the kind of work. The most important thing is that “both should learn early to recognize and love the common humanity in the other, and make friends among the opposite sex as well as those of their own before attention is directed to the sex difference.” Moreover, “the mutual relation of both sexes in one whole will develop within the institution and in the mind of children manly protection on the one hand, and loving assistance on the other” (3: p. 422).

Here ends the education of the child as the future citizen of the world. But there is still another and a higher thing, which can, in special cases, be done by the educator of the people. He may lead the child to a life higher than that of this visible world. This life in religion is the deeply-seated source of true morality. “The child of the new education is not only a member of human society in this visible world, and for a short span of life, but he also is, and will no doubt recognize himself to be, a link in the eternal chain of the spiritual life in general. One who has penetrated the whole essence of his being and recognized the ethical world which has never existed, yet eternally should be, will also recognize or produce in his thought the transcendental world-order, which eternally exists” (3: p. 297). He shall come to seek such a world of ideas and ideals, and live in it, as his only real life, light, and blessing, considering all else as mere death, darkness, and misery. This life in the transcendental world--namely, religion--is not a life beyond the grave, but is life immanent in our earthly existence and extending to eternity.

“To find heaven right on this earth, and let it flow perpetually in his daily work; to implant and to cultivate the immortal in the mortal itself--not merely in the mystical and unintelligible way, but in the visible way--this is a natural and ever-working instinct of man, which is absent only under the pressure of necessity” (3: p. 376).

To develop this instinct in the child, and lead him to the ever higher life of true religion, is the last task of the new education.

The above is a brief sketch of Fichte’s plan of the new education for the people, by means of which he hoped to revive and regenerate the sunken and ruined nation. Fichte, like Rousseau and Pestalozzi, sanguinely had confidence in the power of a new form of education to bring about an immediate reconstruction of the existing society, against which they each raised the voice of protest. But while Rousseau wanted to build a new society on the basis of his new _natural man_, who is to be educated solely through the nature of his individual self, and Pestalozzi of his new _home man_, who shall essentially grow up in and through the normal home, for Fichte, the foundation of the new nation rested on the new _social man_, who is trained in, through, and to an ideal social life specially provided to secure his best growth.

However, his hope for Germany was much larger than the mere restoration of her independence and solidarity. It was his firm conviction that his people, as the parent stock of the Teutonic race, with an original language and a passionate idealism, should and will lead the whole world in the progress of science and culture. And with this vision, he conceived a new plan for a special scholarly education, which we find as radical as his scheme for the common people’s education. He presents to us two totally different forms of education--an extremely anti-academic education for the common people and a highly academic education for the intellectual classes.

The intellectual classes comprise those whose vocation is to be the leaders of the race in its upward and forward march. They are represented by the rulers, legislators, administrators, academic teachers, scientific writers, artists, and preachers. We may divide them into two categories: those who strive to elevate society into an ideal condition which is realizable at the present time, and others who always seek after a better, higher, and clearer ideal, and to impart it to the contemporary and succeeding generations. The function of the latter is the enrichment and enlargement of the domain of culture; that of the former is the realization of the cultural ideals already attained in the world of actuality, which can be fulfilled perfectly only when one has acquired it in his own person. Therefore, according to Fichte, rulers and statesmen must be scholars and must have received thorough academic training. To see the scholar at the head of every department of national activity was his dream. What kind of being, then, should this glorified scholar be?

He is to inspire and guide an ever-progressing movement of mankind toward freedom from the bondage of Nature, of ignorance, and of barbarism, toward its ever-increasing self-activity and supremacy. He must rouse men to the feeling of their true wants and make them acquainted with the means of satisfying these. “He sees not merely the present, he sees also the future; he sees not merely the point which humanity now occupies, but also that to which it must next advance.” He must endeavor to have the most widely extended survey of the actual advancement of culture, and to extend its domain further. And since “the ultimate purpose of each individual man, as well as of all society, and consequently of all the labors of the scholar in society, is the moral elevation of all men ... he ought to exhibit in himself the highest grade of moral culture then possible” (5: pp. 191-193).

To make the university “the free nurse, in every sense and in its widest meaning,” of such scholarship was the essential aim, for which Fichte made the plan for the national university which was soon to be established in Berlin.

This academic training was to be special and universal at the same time. It is special in admitting “only those who show the special endowment for learning, and conspicuous inclination to the world of ideas,” yet is universal in taking in “everyone who shows the qualifications, without making any exception or having any regard to the distinctions of parentage.” It was to be supported and conducted by the hand of the nation, “for scholarship is not for one’s individual satisfaction, and every talent for it is an invaluable property of a nation” (3: p. 426). The student should be freed from every outside care by means of a sufficient support for the present, and the guarantee of a proper position in the future. On the other hand, he should be completely secluded from all other activities and distractions of life in order to devote his whole soul to his purpose.

The child destined to be a scholar is, in his early years, to be educated differently from others. Thus, in the general scheme of the people’s education, the time which is spent by others in their economic activities is to be devoted in his case to the intellectual work of self-active learning and solitary thinking, although he shares with the rest in bodily exercises and in acquiring a general knowledge of various industries. For him the study of language and acquiring the power of speech is necessary and important. The classics, especially Greek, should come earlier than the modern languages, because Fichte thought the former have more unity and harmony between the form and the content than have the latter, thus favoring the development of vital speech-power in the child.

A university is “the school for the art of scientific use of intellect.” To implant the lofty sense of academic dignity, to cultivate the unceasing love for higher culture, to train the power of independent creative thinking, are the essential things aimed at. Here the student educates himself, professors being nothing but his assistants or else elder fellow-scholars. Lectures should be given, both in spirit and content, as a form of answer to the questions previously raised by the student, or as the presentation of a new problem which shall be the topic of the next hour. Besides the lecture, the following practices are recommended:

1. “_Examina._”--These are not given for testing how far the student can reproduce what he has read or heard, but for inducing him to make the questions presented by his learned master the premises from which to deduce his own answers.

2. “_Conversatoria_,” in which the student asks questions freely, and the master requestions upon them--a sort of Socratic dialogue.

3. Written research work assigned to the student on a certain problem. The advanced student is encouraged to offer it to himself and also to others. Then, since books constitute the main resource of accumulated knowledge, the student should be taught and accustomed to use them methodically and skilfully. Thus everything goes simply to arouse the self-activity of the student, and to provide the materials for it.

On the part of the academic teacher the university is not to be looked upon as the place for merely communicating book contents in a slightly modified form; the university stands for the advancement of science and the scientific spirit; not mere repetition nor a little trimming up of the old and known, but the bringing forth of the new, and the extension of the frontier of knowledge. The academic teacher must always be an investigator and producer. Fichte advises that no one should stay in that calling “in which the fountain of youth does not still flow on with an unimpaired vigor.” “Let him,” he says, “faithfully intrust himself to its current so long as it will bear him forward; when it leaves him, then let him be content to retire from this ever-shifting scene of onward movement--let him separate the dead from the living” (5: p. 307). Readiness of communication, on the one hand, and plasticity to foreign modes of thought and new ideas, on the other, is required of him.

Fichte’s schemes both for popular education and the university were too Utopian to be immediately adopted. Actual reforms were carried out by those of more practical talents, and according to more practical conceptions. But the world is now coming to realize the worth of the vision embodied in his “economic” or “citizenship” education; and as to his high academic ideal, it has gradually won the victory in the most advanced universities of to-day.

REFERENCES

1. +Barnard, Henry.+ Pestalozzi and His Educational System. Bardeen, Syracuse, N. Y., 1906. 751 pages.

2. +Duproix, Paul.+ Kant et Fichte et le Problème de l’Education. Second edition. Alcan, Paris, 1897. 260 pages.

3. +Fichte, Johann Gottlieb.+ Reden an die deutsche Nation. Sämtliche Werke. 8 vols. Veit, Berlin, 1845-1846. Vol. VII, pp. 259-499.

4. ---- Aphorismen über Erziehung aus dem Jahre, 1804. Sämtliche Werke. Vol. VIII, pp. 353-360.

5. ---- Vocation of the Scholar. On the Nature of the Scholar. Popular Works of J. G. Fichte. 2 vols. Trübner, London, 1889. Vol. I, pp. 149-317.

6. ---- Deducirter Plan zu Berlin zu errichtenden höheren Lehranstalt. Sämtliche Werke. Vol. VIII, pp. 97-219.

7. +Gutmann, S. Hirsch.+ J. G. Fichte’s soziale Pädagogik. Scheitlin, Bern, 1907. 100 pages.

8. +Heman, Friedrich.+ Geschichte der neueren Pädagogik. Zickfeldt, Osterwieck, 1904. 436 pages.

9. +Keferstein, Horst.+ J. G. Fichte’s pädagogische Schriften und Ideen. Richler, Wien, 1883. 238 pages.

10. +Rein, Georg Wilhelm+, editor. Encyklopädisches Handbuch der Pädagogik. 8 vols. Beyer, Langensalza, 1895-1906. Vol. II.

11. +Scherer, Heinrich.+ Die Pädagogik in ihrer Entwicklung im Zusammenhange mit dem Kultur- und Geistesleben und ihrem Einfluss auf die Gestaltung des Erziehungs- und Bildungswesens. Vol. II. Die Pädagogik als Wissenschaft von Pestalozzi bis zu Gegenwart. 3 parts. Brandstetter, Leipzig, 1897-1908.

12. +Sieler, Albien.+ Darstellung der Volkschulpädagogik. J. G. Fichte’s im Zusammenhange mit ihren individuellen, historischen und philosophischen Voraussetzungen. Siegismund, Leipzig, 1895. 75 pages.

13. +Strümpell, Ludwig H.+ Die Pädagogik Kant’s und Fichte’s. Pädagogische Abhandlungen. Diechert, Leipzig, 1894. Part II.

14. +Ziegler, Theobald.+ Geschichte der Pädagogik mit besonderer Rücksicht auf das höhere Unterrichtswesen. Beck, München, 1895. 361 pages.