A School for the Very Youngest

At the end of our previous talk, we spoke about the concept of judgment, which must become part of the educational system. Does this apply to young children too, aged three to six?

A child's personal development, that is, the development of his individuality, comes about through the sensation that there is judgment and mercy, certain limitations, development in various directions, and reactions to his behavior. That is why he must evaluate his own behavior and pay attention to the evaluations of others. Out of the processes he passes through, an inner foundation for self-upbringing must form within him.

What do you mean when you speak of judgment and mercy in upbringing?

We exist in a world governed by two forces: the force of judgment and the force of mercy. Light and darkness, plus and minus, warmth and cold are manifestations of two opposing forces that lie at the basis of Nature, forces that divide in our world into a whole spectrum of mutually opposing forces and phenomena. Within a person, too, two systems operate: judgment and mercy toward oneself and toward others. We cannot weigh one without the other, for our feelings, our mind, and our attitude toward anything at all are formed midway between these two forces — we cannot confine ourselves to only one of them. For example, we can say nothing about light if we have not been in darkness, we do not feel the sweet if we do not compare it with the sour, and so on.

In terms of upbringing, is this expressed through the concepts of "permitted" and "forbidden"?

You could say so. These are the boundaries between which we shape a person: there cannot be mercy alone, just as there cannot be judgment alone. Both of these influences must be of equal weight and precisely balanced against each other. Such a system is formed in a small human being starting from the age of three. It is precisely from three to six years old that we need to engage within him a system of critique and analysis of himself and his environment through a process of joint discussion.

We must show the child in what way he is connected to society: how he depends on it and how he can influence it. We must lay the foundation for his correct future connection with society. After all, all the negative social phenomena we observe today — such as terror and violence — occur because no one taught these people the right relations with society. Sometimes we behave cruelly only because those around us do not react to us at all. A person wants attention, wants a reaction to himself, and he tries to achieve this by any means, sometimes even cruel ones, because he knows no other ways. For him, even a negative reaction from society is better than indifference.

And then his behavior becomes more and more cruel?

Yes. At times acts of aggression are committed because people want to stand out somehow, to draw attention to themselves, and they know no other ways, because they were never taught. And society does not value the person and cannot give him the attention he is due. This subconsciously drives people to extreme acts. I have had occasion more than once to talk with criminals, and I saw how proud they are of their position in society, how they believe they are respected — at least out of fear — and they see no other way to attain such a position.

They do have a connection with society, but their society is a different one.

They want to take their place in society, but no one taught them how to do it properly. It seems to them that in this way they win respect.

That is, if I do not get my way by good means, I will get it by bad ones?

Yes, but let us set aside the behavior of adults, for our whole life is full of examples of wrong relationships between a person and society, family, and so on. That is why, from the very earliest age, we must form in children the right attitude toward the environment, while at the same time building that environment, and then they will grow up in a harmonious connection with one another. In this way we will be able to prevent the manifestations of aggression we observe today.

Including criminality?

Yes, for the person will relate consciously to society and to his connection with it. He needs to be given the opportunity, through a playful process, to try on all the roles: the judge, the defender, the policeman, the criminal, and the criminal's parents.

Do you mean the kind of trial where each child plays some role?

Yes, precisely.

It doesn't necessarily have to be a reaction to some event, but simply a game?

Yes, it is a game. For older children you can take examples from newspapers, television, and so on, but you will find a multitude of examples in the yard where children play, and at school. You need only look closely, and you will see manifestations of pride and the desire to dominate, of lying, rivalry, deceit, intrigue, and much more. A whole sea of examples for the educator to work with.

These are, essentially, games of life. Everything that exists in life is revealed in games.

Yes, everything that adults have, children have too, and in an undisguised form. They have not yet learned, as adults have, to hide their qualities. Therefore, if we teach children to examine and analyze the qualities and actions that appear in these games, they will understand that this is our nature. Is it good for us or bad? Can we rise above it in order to be human?

What you are describing is closely interwoven with the theories that exist in psychology. Psychologists know that many of the cruelest criminals experienced, in early childhood — at the very age we are discussing — severe psychological trauma. Are you proposing to begin, precisely from this age, teaching them an analytical approach to life situations through role-playing games?

Yes, precisely, so that each of them "clothes" himself in another. — The child does not merely play a role, but lives in it, truly lives it out.

Yes, we explain to the child that he must live out this role here and now, and behave as he would behave in life in a similar situation. When the game is over, everyone rests, and then they switch roles. Each one takes on a completely different image and must get into it.

So the game continues and expands?

Of course. For the child must understand all the manifestations of life: both in the close circle, where there are friends and relatives, and in the far circle, where there are people who love and people who hate. In this way we will make it easier for the child to enter life. He will understand what is happening in the world and will be able to explain it even to adults.

But this must not be limited to the game alone. After the game, or during it, one must stop and discuss.

That is already a topic for discussion — for a subsequent lesson. And in this way the child must play out all the roles, feel that each one, in his own place, can be right. He must defend the one he is playing. Playing one role today and a completely opposite one tomorrow, the child will understand how everything immediately changes in his consciousness and in his evaluation of what is happening. Such entry into the "theater of life" is necessary in order to teach children to understand one another. This is the first step toward mercy, toward understanding the essence of another person, toward the possibility of dialogue even with one's opponents and those who hate us.

This teaches the child not to withdraw into himself, but to understand that around him there are other people. In psychology this is called identification and the cultivation of empathy — the ability to put oneself in another's place, to enter into his subjective world. When the child plays out all the roles, he finds them within himself. Each one is included in all. And the child is not told directly that there is both good and bad within him, or that he is, for example, high-strung. But in the process of the game the child lives through and understands this.

Later in life the child will relate differently to a person in a given situation, because he will understand that he himself could be in that person's place. This is the seed of building a different attitude toward people, based on the understanding that all qualities and states exist in each of us. Such a child will be more tolerant toward other people.

It seems to me that children play such games naturally. After all, already in kindergarten they have a doctor's corner, a kitchen, and all sorts of games representing different aspects of adult life. But you are proposing not simply to let them play, but to purposefully create this performance and, above all, to discuss it afterward.

It is advisable to make a video recording of what happens in their trial, and then to watch it together, so that the children can see the situation from the point of view of the different roles.

And what are the children who are not involved doing during this time?

The rest of the children watch and act as judges.

Is it advisable that everyone participate, for example, in the role of jurors?

Yes, you can invent many roles. Usually those who watch passively experience the same emotions, but not as strongly as the participants themselves. But they can vote or take part in that way.

What is the role of the educator in such a game? What must he pay attention to in order to make the game as effective as possible?

He must make sure that the discussions do not stray from the topic, do not become diffuse, but stay concentrated on the aim of the discussion.

At the end, do we need to sum up and lead to some conclusion, or simply leave the children with the emotions they have experienced?

A conclusion after each discussion is absolutely essential. The game can last up to an hour, and at an older age even longer. But this also depends on the topic: it should be as close as possible to the children, relevant to them.

The older the children, the more relevant the topic must be?

Even for kindergarten age the topic must be close to and understandable for the children.

It should correspond to the children's level of development and be expressed in their language.

In fact, neither the language, nor the age, nor the level of development matters. What matters is to convey to them that another person also has an opinion, and he may be right. Perhaps tomorrow, or even in the next minute, you will change your own opinion, since nothing is absolute. We show children that everything is subject to change, including they themselves are subject to it, and therefore we must be tolerant toward people.

We are speaking of a game where there are judges and jurors, and yet this is an age when a child is very sensitive to feelings of guilt and shame.

That is why we must teach them to rise above these feelings.

What does it mean to rise above? To overcome?

No. Overcoming is bound up with putting pressure on oneself. But here it is a matter of the child being open. He must understand that he, like every person, has weaknesses and problems, that sometimes he tells untruths, and so on. He must know this, bring it to the surface as much as possible, correct it, and try to show his best sides in his relations with other people.

That is, out of all the variety, to use his best qualities?

Yes, and the child should not be troubled by the fact that some of his negative qualities are being discussed right now. After all, everyone has them, and he knows this, since it is not hidden from him. But this does not mean permissiveness, or a display of pride on the grounds that since they are bad, anything goes. Having the whole spectrum of qualities by no means implies that they can be allowed to manifest completely freely. That is precisely why we hold such discussions — to teach how to relate correctly and in a balanced way to human nature.

And also so as not to do harm. How should one relate to possible manifestations of pride? I often see it in active children, the leaders in a group. Sometimes, after a game in which he had the main role, a child does not want to come out of it, but wants to remain the main character in the next game too.

Sit him down and organize a little performance around him in which he sees himself from the outside. And let him be the judge. This, of course, is only one of the options; there are others.

I have a specific question. At this age we tell children a great deal about animals. In such a situation, when a performance is staged in which the child sees his own behavior, could we present this story using animals as an example?

No, it is not worth doing that. Here it is specifically a matter of human nature, of those qualities that animals do not have. Besides, animals are not capable of becoming aware of themselves, much less of changing, since they are entirely governed by nature. They have no choice, no critical attitude toward themselves — they are completely subject to the natural impulses working within them. That is why the concepts of good and evil, of condemnation and judgment, do not apply to animals. Only in the human being is there a part that is above his animal nature, where he can change himself with the help of society. That is why we can speak here only about the human being.

So, not to explain things using animals as examples?

No.

But there are so many stories for children precisely about animals!

It seems to me that explaining things through the example of animals does the child no good. In doing so, we in a way lower him to the animal level, we make a puppet out of him: a little bear, a little rooster, and so on.

Do you know the story about the chick who went looking for another mother? It seemed to the chick that his mother was not good enough, and he went first to a duck, then to other birds in search of a new mother, and they were all ready to take him in, but none of them was right for him. With none of them did he feel comfortable. And so he returns to his own mother. What is bad about such a story? The moral is clear, but it is not stated directly.

Perhaps, but we must strive to raise the human being above the animal world, so that he feels pride in being a human being.

In one of the talks you took part in, I remember you saying that for today's children it is useful to give examples from contemporary life, that is, instead of animals they have never seen, to tell them about cars, airplanes, and so on.

Of course. I observe my grandson. He is growing up in the city. Does he see a cow or other animals around him? No, except perhaps a dog, a cat, and pigeons. But he does see airplanes and cars.

How, then, are we to develop a connection with nature?

If he does not see it, then it is alien to him, like the future world or spirituality. He does not perceive it. Where are all these goats, bears, wolves, elephants? They show him pictures and think it interests him, but he has no idea what it is about. We impose on him an artificial notion about animals, as though they were part of our society.

How do you explain the fact that there is, after all, such a tendency to tell children stories about animals?

By his development the child is closer to the animal level, and so it seems to us that if we tell him some story about the creatures of the forest… But where are we and where is the forest? Therefore one should take examples from the environment surrounding the child, from what is well familiar to him, and use these examples to explain the relationships between people.

One last question about animals. Sometimes, when working with children, I need to direct a child's attention to some quality. For this it is convenient for me to use animals and the qualities inherent in them. For example, one animal is brave, another is cunning…

Today's children are far removed from this; they do not have a feeling for animals. And, on top of everything, ascribing human qualities to animals is in principle incorrect. I think that the modern child should be taught through examples that are close to him and within his field of vision.

Let us sum up. Today we spoke about children's role-playing games, or more precisely, about children discussing all sorts of life situations by means of a game. Through entering into a role, the child learns to feel another person, and this gives him enormous opportunities in life.

It allows him to see himself from the outside.

We spoke less about this aspect, but it is very important. Such games and discussions should be given no less than one to two hours, so that the immersion in the topic is deep enough. It is precisely in games of this kind that the child develops a correct understanding of human nature, and learns how one can rise above it. We also said that it is by no means necessary to use stories about animals, and that it is better to take examples that are close to and understandable for the modern child. The main conclusion to be drawn is: talk with your children! Give them the opportunity to discuss with you the topics from their lives that concern them. The result you will get will be invaluable. Before your eyes a human being will develop, and at the age of five or six he will begin to raise topics you could never have imagined.