Invitation to the Pain
of Learning
Mortimer J. Adler
(1941)
In Adler's view of
education, learning is not something one acquires externally
like a new suit. It is, in his own words, "an interior transformation
of a person's mind and character, a transformation which can
be effected only through his own activity." It is as painful, but also as
exhilarating, as any effort human beings make to make themselves better
human beings, physically or mentally. The practices of
educators, even if they are well-intentioned, who try
to make learning less painful than it is, not only make it less
exhilarating, but also weaken the will and minds of
those on whom this fraud is perpetrated. The selling and buying of
education all wrapped up in pretty packages is what is going
on, but, Adler tells us, it is not the real thing. This essay was published
in The Journal of Educational Sociology
(February1941.)
G.V.D.
O N
E of the reasons why the education given by our
schools is so frothy and vapid is that the American people generally-the
parent even more than the teacher-wish childhood to be unspoiled by pain.
Childhood must be a period of delight, of gay indulgence in impulses. It
must be given every avenue for unimpeded expression, which of course is
pleasant; and it must not be made to suffer the impositions of discipline or
the exactions of duty, which of course are painful. Childhood must be filled
with as much play and as little work as possible. What cannot be
accomplished educationally through elaborate schemes devised to make
learning an exciting game must, of necessity, be forgone. Heaven forbid that
learning should ever take on the character of a serious occupation-just as
serious as earning money, and perhaps, much more laborious and painful.
The kindergarten
spirit of playing at education pervades our colleges. Most college students
get their first taste of studying as really hard work, requiring mental
strain and continual labor, only when they enter law school or medical
school. Those who do not enter the professions find out what working at
anything really means only when they start to earn a living-that is, if four
years of college has not softened them to the point which makes them
unemployable. But even those who somehow recover from a college loaf and
accept the responsibilities and obligations involved in earning a
living-even those who may gradually come to realize the connection between
work, pain, and earning-seldom if ever make a similar connection of pain and
work with learning. "Learning" is what they did in college, and they know
that that had very little to do with pain and work.
Now the attitude of the various
agencies of adult education is even more softminded-not just
softhearted-about the large public they face, a public which has had all
sorts and amounts of schooling. The trouble is not simply that this large
public has been spoiled by whatever schooling it has had-spoiled in the
double sense that it is unprepared to carry on its own self-education in
adult life and that it is disinclined to suffer pains for the sake of
learning. The trouble also lies in the fact that agencies of adult education
baby the public even more than the schools coddle the children. They have
turned the whole nation-so far as education is concerned-into a
kindergarten. It must all be fun. It must all be entertaining. Adult
learning must be made as effortless as possible-painless, devoid of
oppressive burdens and of irksome tasks. Adult men and women, because they
are adult, can be expected to suffer pains of all sorts in the course of
their daily occupations, whether domestic or commercial. We do not try to
deny the fact that taking care of a household or holding down a job is
necessarily burdensome, but we somehow still believe that the goods to be
obtained, the worldly goods of wealth and comfort, are worth the
effort. In any case, we know they cannot be
obtained without effort. But we try to shut our eyes to the fact that
improving one's mind or enlarging one's spirit is, if anything, more
difficult than solving the problems of subsistence; or, maybe, we just do
not believe that knowledge and wisdom are worth the effort.
We try to make
adult education as exciting as a football game, as relaxing as a motion
picture, and as easy on the mind as a quiz program. Otherwise, we will not
be able to draw the big crowds, and the important thing is to draw large
numbers of people into this educational game, even if after we get them
there we leave them untransformed.
What lies behind my
remark is a distinction between two views of education. In one view,
education is something externally added to a person, as his clothing and
other accoutrements. We cajole him into standing there willingly while we
fit him; and in doing this we must be guided by his likes and dislikes, by
his own notion of what enhances his appearance. In the other view, education
is an interior transformation of a person's mind and character. He is
plastic material to be improved not according to his inclinations, but
according to what is good for him. But because he is a living thing, and not
dead clay, the transformation can be effected only through his own activity.
Teachers of every sort can help, but they can only help in the process of
learning that must be dominated at every moment by the activity of the
learner. And the fundamental activity that is involved in every kind of
genuine learning is intellectual activity, the activity generally known as
thinking. Any learning which takes place without thinking is necessarily of
the sort I have called external and additive-learning passively acquired,
for which the common name is "information." Without thinking, the kind of
learning which transforms a mind, gives it new insights, enlightens it,
deepens understanding, elevates the spirit simply cannot occur.
Anyone who has done any thinking,
even a little bit, knows that it is painful. It is hard work-in fact the
very hardest that human beings are ever called upon to do. It is fatiguing,
not refreshing. If allowed to follow the path of least resistance, no one
would ever think. To make boys and girls, or men and women, think-and
through thinking really undergo the transformation of learning-educational
agencies of every sort must work against the grain, not with it. Far from
trying to make the whole process painless from beginning to end, we must
promise them the pleasure of achievement as a reward to be reached only
through travail. I am not here concerned with the oratory that may have to
be employed to persuade Americans that wisdom is a greater good than wealth,
and hence worthy of greater effort. I am only insisting that there is no
royal road, and that our present educational policies, in adult education
especially, are fraudulent. We are pretending to give them something
which is described in the advertising as very valuable, but which we promise
they can get at almost no expense to them.
Not only must we honestly
announce that pain and work are the irremovable and irreducible
accompaniments of genuine learning, not only must we leave entertainment to
the entertainers and make education a task and not a game, but we must have
no fears about what is "over the public's head." Whoever passes by what is
over his head condemns his head to its present low altitude; for nothing can
elevate a mind except what is over its head; and that elevation is not
accomplished by capillary attraction, but only by the hard work of climbing
up the ropes, with sore hands and aching muscles. The school system which
caters to the median child, or worse, to the lower half of the class; the
lecturer before adults-and they are legion-who talks down to his audience;
the radio or television program which tries to hit the lowest common
denominator of popular receptivity-all these defeat the prime purpose of
education by taking people as they are and leaving them just there.
The best adult education program
that has ever existed in this country was one which endured for a short time
under the auspices of the People's Institute in New York, when Everett Dean
Martin was its director, and Scott Buchanan his assistant. It had two parts:
one consisted of lectures which, so far as possible, were always aimed over
the heads of the audience; the other consisted of seminars in which adults
were helped in the reading of great books-the books that are over everyone's
head. The latter part of the program is still being carried on by the staff
of St. John's College in the cities near Annapolis; and we are conducting
four such groups in the downtown college of the University of Chicago. I say
that this is the only adult education that is genuinely educative simply
because it is the only kind that requires activity, makes no pretense about
avoiding pain and work, and is always working with materials well over
everybody's head.
I do not know whether radio or
television will ever be able to do anything genuinely educative. I am sure
it serves the public in two ways: by giving them amusement and by giving
them information. It may even, as in the case of its very best "educational"
programs, stimulate some persons to do something about their minds by
pursuing knowledge and wisdom in the only way possible-the hard way. But
what I do not know is whether it can ever do what the best teachers have
always done and must now be doing; namely, to present programs which are
genuinely educative, as opposed to merely stimulating, in the sense that
following them requires the listener to be active not passive, to think
rather than remember, and to suffer all the pains of lifting himself up by
his own bootstraps. Certainly so long as the so called educational directors
of our leading networks continue to operate on their present false
principles, we can expect nothing. So long as they confuse education and
entertainment, so long as they suppose that learning can be accomplished
without pain, so long as they persist in bringing everything and everybody
down to the lowest level on which the largest audience can be reached, the
educational programs offered on the air will remain what they are
today-shams and delusions.
It may be, of course, that the
radio and television, for economic reasons must, like the motion picture,
reach with certainty so large an audience that the networks cannot afford
even to experiment with pro grams which make no pretense to be more
palatable and pleasurable than real education can be. It may be that the
radio and television cannot be expected to take a sounder view of education
and to undertake more substantial programs than now prevail among the
country's official leaders in education-the heads of our school system, of
our colleges, of our adult education associations. But, in either case, let
us not fool ourselves about what we are doing. "Education" all wrapped up in
attractive tissue is the gold brick that is being sold in America today on
every street corner. Everyone is selling it, everyone is buying it, but no
one is giving or getting the real thing because the real thing is always
hard to give or get. Yet the real thing can be made generally available if
the obstacles to its distribution are honestly recognized. Unless we
acknowledge that every invitation to learning can promise pleasure only as
the result of pain, can offer achievement only at the expense of work, all
of our invitations to learning, in school and out, whether by books,
lectures, or radio and television programs will be as much buncombe as the
worst patent medicine advertising, or the campaign pledge to put two
chickens in every pot.
|