Education: Separation of Church and State

Of Necessity

Ath. If you mean to ask what great good accrues to the state from the right training of a single youth, or of a single chorus-when the question is put in that form, we cannot deny that the good is not very great in any particular instance. But if you ask what is the good of education in general, the answer is easy-that education makes good men, and that good men act nobly, and conquer their enemies in battle, because they are good.“ Plato’s “Laws”, Book I

The role of education in preparing Citizens to be Citizens has been universally recognized throughout the history of Political Philosophy. The early law makers of Greece paid great attention to the education of various elements of their states but sometimes overlooked the education of other elements. The importance of education in the maintenance of the State or Social Contract cannot be underestimated.

“For, inasmuch as every family is a part of a state, and these relationships are the parts of a family, and the virtue of the part must have regard to the virtue of the whole, women and children must be trained by education with an eye to the constitution, if the virtues of either of them are supposed to make any difference in the virtues of the state. And they must make a difference: for the children grow up to be citizens, and half the free persons in a state are women.” Aristotle’s Politics Book I Part XIII

This echoes a criticism Plato had of Sparta, in Sparta education focused on the men, and the women were left pretty much to do as they liked. Plato also advocated equal education for men and women. Pythagoras also educated women in his schools. The idea that educating women is important to the future of the state has as ancient and honorable a history as the idea of general education itself.

“The nourishment and education of their children is a charge so incumbent on parents for their children's good, that nothing can absolve them from taking care of it:” John Locke, “Second Treatise of Government”

“Is it not almost a self-evident axiom, that the State should require and compel the education, up to a certain standard, of every human being who is born its citizen? Yet who is there that is not afraid to recognize and assert this truth? Hardly any one indeed will deny that it is one of the most sacred duties of the parents (or, as law and usage now stand, the father), after summoning a human being into the world, to give to that being an education fitting him to perform his part well in life towards others and towards himself. But while this is unanimously declared to be the father's duty, scarcely anybody, in this country, will bear to hear of obliging him to perform it. Instead of his being required to make any exertion or sacrifice for securing education to the child, it is left to his choice to accept it or not when it is provided gratis!” J.S. Mill’s “On Liberty”

Virtue and Character and Education

“We have already determined that nature and habit and rational principle are required, and, of these, the proper nature of the citizens has also been defined by us. But we have still to consider whether the training of early life is to be that of rational principle or habit, for these two must accord, and when in accord they will then form the best of harmonies. The rational principle may be mistaken and fail in attaining the highest ideal of life, and there may be a like evil influence of habit……… The proof is that anger and wishing and desire are implanted in children from their very birth, but reason and understanding are developed as they grow older. Wherefore, the care of the body ought to precede that of the soul, and the training of the appetitive part should follow: none the less our care of it must be for the sake of the reason, and our care of the body for the sake of the soul.” Aristotle’s “Politics”, Book VII Part XV.

Aristotle recognized something way back then that is well known today, the human brain develops in stages. Children are not prepared for certain forms of education as soon as they are born. They begin with basic appetites and needs and gradually develop the capacity for other needs and the ability to appreciate other more social values. Aristotle recognized the necessity of taking this into account in the education of the youth, but maintained that while education had to focus on habit in the early years it must never forget that the development of reason was the final end.

“The Master said, "A youth, when at home, should be filial, and, abroad, respectful to his elders. He should be earnest and truthful. He should overflow in love to all, and cultivate the friendship of the good. When he has time and opportunity, after the performance of these things, he should employ them in polite studies." Confucius, “Analects”

Where is the difference between this and what Aristotle said? First a youth must cultivate the habits of good behavior and virtue, then he should engage in more advanced studies.

“Tsze-hsia said, "If a man withdraws his mind from the love of beauty, and applies it as sincerely to the love of the virtuous; if, in serving his parents, he can exert his utmost strength; if, in serving his prince, he can devote his life; if, in his intercourse with his friends, his words are sincere:-although men say that he has not learned, I will certainly say that he has.” Confucius, “Analects”

To a large degree the purpose of education among the Greeks, the Romans, the Chinese, and the Persians, Islam, and Catholic Spain was largely to inculcate virtue and build character. This area of education includes many behaviors which properly belong to the Church and not the State.

Education Dangers

“Education certainly gives victory, although victory sometimes produces forgetfulness of education; for many have grown insolent from victory in war, and this insolence has engendered in them innumerable evils; and many a victory has been and will be suicidal to the victors; but education is never suicidal.” Plato’s “Laws”, Book I

This principle which Plato discusses in context of victory leading to defeat applies in education as well as in war. J.S. Mill is quite critical of the Chinese system of education.

“They have succeeded beyond all hope in what English philanthropists are so industriously working at -- in making a people all alike, all governing their thoughts and conduct by the same maxims and rules; and these are the fruits. The modern regime of public opinion is, in an unorganized form, what the Chinese educational and political systems are in an organized; and unless individuality shall be able successfully to assert itself against this yoke, Europe, notwithstanding its noble antecedents and its professed Christianity, will tend to become another China.” J.S. Mill’s “On Liberty”

Here is the danger of a universal education in a single system of thought. Mr. Mill used China as an example. Chinese philosophy is great stuff, and that greatness, that victory, allowed it, like Aristotelian philosophy in the West to become something of a straitjacket on the minds of the Chinese. Yet while recognizing this danger, Mr. Mill does not condemn the State taking a hand in general education.

“The objections which are urged with reason against State education, do not apply to the enforcement of education by the State, but to the State's taking upon itself to direct that education: which is a totally different thing. That the whole or any large part of the education of the people should be in State hands, I go as far as any one in deprecating. All that has been said of the importance of individuality of character, and diversity in opinions and modes of conduct, involves, as of the same unspeakable importance, diversity of education. A general State education is a mere contrivance for moulding people to be exactly like one another: and as the mould in which it casts them is that which pleases the predominant power in the government, whether this be a monarch, a priesthood, an aristocracy, or the majority of the existing generation, in proportion as it is efficient and successful, it establishes a despotism over the mind, leading by natural tendency to one over the body. An education established and controlled by the State, should only exist, if it exist at all, as one among many competing experiments, carried on for the purpose of example and stimulus, to keep the others up to a certain standard of excellence.

” J.S. Mill’s “On Liberty”

In detail Mr. Mill describes how victory in education can lead to defeat of the legitimate purposes of education, but he still defends general education, even that intended to promote a specific ideology.

“But any education which aims at making human beings other than machines, in the long run makes them claim to have the control of their own actions. The leaders of French philosophy in the eighteenth century had been educated by the Jesuits. Even Jesuit education, it seems, was sufficiently real to call forth the appetite for freedom. Whatever invigorates the faculties, in however small a measure, creates an increased desire for their more unimpeded exercise; and a popular education is a failure, if it educates the people for any state but that which it will certainly induce them to desire, and most probably to demand.” J.S. Mill’s “Representative Government”

Public education, even an education designed by the rulers for their benefit is still a danger to the powerful. Even a bad totalitarian education is better than no education at all.

“The interest of a ruling class, whether in an aristocracy or an aristocratic monarchy, is to assume to themselves an endless variety of unjust privileges, sometimes benefiting their pockets at the expense of the people, sometimes merely tending to exalt them above others, or, what is the same thing in different words, to degrade others below themselves. If the people are disaffected, which under such a government they are very likely to be, it is the interest of the king or aristocracy to keep them at a low level of intelligence and education, foment dissensions among them, and even prevent them from being too well off, lest they should "wax fat, and kick"; agreeably to the maxim of Cardinal Richelieu in his celebrated Testament Politique. J. S. Mill’s “Representative Government”

If there is no state supported system of general education and simple market or political forces rule, it will be easier to reduce the level of education of the general public to one in which they are Subjects and no longer Citizens. Public education is a danger to freedom but any education, even a bad one is a greater danger to despotic powers. Education is on the whole more dangerous to despotism and oligarchy than it is to freedom. Thus the State must, in order to guarantee that it does not become a perverse state take some measure to ensure general education.

Drawing the Line: What can the State Teach of Virtue and Morality

“I am the last person to undervalue the self-regarding virtues; they are only second in importance, if even second, to the social. It is equally the business of education to cultivate both. But even education works by conviction and persuasion as well as by compulsion, and it is by the former only that, when the period of education is past, the self-regarding virtues should be inculcated.” J.S. Mill’s “On Liberty”

In this paragraph, self-regarding means personal. Virtues which a person should practice for their own good, not those which effect the lives of others. One may term these moral virtues. Virtues properly belonging to the Church not the State. Other virtues, those virtues which govern ones behavior towards other Citizens belong properly to the State and may be called Civil virtues. The State being a Contract between Citizens must teach the basic terms of that contract, the basic rules which govern behavior between Citizens in its schools. If the State does not teach the terms of the Contract and later prosecutes and punishes Citizens for violating those terms, is the State not at fault?

Social or Civil virtues may be taught by the State as well as by the Church for the State is concerned in and has the power to punish injury done by one Citizen to another. Personal, moral, or self-regarding virtues belong solely to the Church and may not be promulgated by the State.

“What little recognition the idea of obligation to the public obtains in modern morality, is derived from Greek and Roman sources, not from Christian; as, even in the morality of private life, whatever exists of magnanimity, high-mindedness, personal dignity, even the sense of honor, is derived from the purely human, not the religious part of our education, and never could have grown out of a standard of ethics in which the only worth, professedly recognized, is that of obedience.” J.S. Mill’s “On Liberty”

Church’s teach moral lessons in an authoritarian manner. They say that God said thus and such and we cannot understand why God said it, but we must obey. This fundamental difference between religious education and the education of people to be rational beings who decide issues on what can be known means that many of the moral issues which are personal choices in the private lives of Citizens cannot be taught by the State without acting in a manner which can be construed as injurious to its Citizens. Injurious because it suppresses freedom on thought. Citizens may choose to live and raise their children in a Church but that choice is not within the legitimate authority of the State to make.

“I do not think that the system of self-interest as it is professed in America is in all its parts self- evident, but it contains a great number of truths so evident that men, if they are only educated, cannot fail to see them. Educate, then, at any rate, for the age of implicit self-sacrifice and instinctive virtues is already flitting far away from us, and the time is fast approaching when freedom, public peace, and social order itself will not be able to exist without education.” de Tocqueville, “Democracy in America”, book II, Chapter 8.

The system of self-interest as it is professed in America. Here we find a summary of the American Way. Teaching that respecting the rights of others is the only way to protect your own rights. Teaching that protecting the equality of others is the only way to ensure your own equality. Providing a selfish personal motive to do what is right under the terms of the Social Contract. This ‘system of self-interest’ can and should be taught in the schools of the United States. This is the basis, these are the terms of the Social Contract. This area which traditionally has a Moral side, is within the realm of the Civil authority. It can and should be taught by the State, the instrument of the Social Contract.

What then of things like drug abuse, smoking, drinking, and other issues on which facts are known, but which are essentially self-regarding issues. What can the State do in such instances? Mr. Mill allowed that public education could provide persuasive arguments in the self-regarding virtues in the quote which began this section. He maintained that only persuasion could convince men to maintain such virtues after the period of education is ended. Still there are many issues in which the facts do not provide such persuasive arguments. What of those? Mr. Mills discusses this in his discussion of a system of general examinations.

“To prevent the State from exercising through these arrangements, an improper influence over opinion, the knowledge required for passing an examination (beyond the merely instrumental parts of knowledge, such as languages and their use) should, even in the higher class of examinations, be confined to facts and positive science exclusively. The examinations on religion, politics, or other disputed topics, should not turn on the truth or falsehood of opinions, but on the matter of fact that such and such an opinion is held, on such grounds, by such authors, or schools, or churches.” J. S. Mill’s “On Liberty”

It is a fact that peyote is used by some churches in their religious practices. It is a fact that this is done for spiritual reasons. It is not a demonstrable fact that these spiritual reasons are true or false. The fact that this or that is done can be taught. The fact that this or that opinion is held can be taught, but Citizens must decide for themselves the truth or falsehood of such issues.

The facts of the negative influence of the use of alcohol, tobacco, other drugs, and similar things may be taught. Beyond this the State may not go. The moral condemnation of self-destructive behaviors, the endorsement of personal virtue is the role of the church.

Summary

Public education is a necessary part of the role of the State. It may legitimately teach those civil virtues necessary for Citizens to understand the Social Contract. Such lessons should reflect their own self-interest in protecting the rights of others in order to defend their own rights. It may not dictate moral values pertaining to personal, private, moral conduct. It can present facts in such matters as they are known.