From Three to Six Years Old

We are examining the use of the integral method of upbringing, analyzing a child's development from age zero, and trying to understand how to treat the child correctly and what inner processes he goes through. We want to look at reality through the development of a small human being. So far we have analyzed the periods of a child's development up to the age of three and have reached the point where he begins to realize that a world exists around him. Many parents, at this age, run into the problem of setting boundaries. In psychology there is a concept called the "terrible twos" — the "terrible age of two." This is the first difficult age, when children constantly say "I don't want to" and refuse to agree to anything. Later this repeats in adolescence. Parents say that they are constantly forced to tell the child "no," to restrict him, and that this is an unpleasant sensation compared to the "paradise" that existed before. This is not simple for parents, and the question is: how should one behave correctly? How should one approach setting boundaries and building the authority of the parents at the age of two or three?

I think one has to begin earlier. A child understands and senses such things from the very first day of his birth. If parents postpone cultivating certain qualities or skills until a certain age and only then begin to form them, the child cannot accept it; in his mind and his habits, Nature has fixed that things should be otherwise, in a natural order that we do not know. He does not understand why the people who used to allow him to do something have suddenly stopped allowing it. It is as if he has landed in a different world and now something is demanded of him that he is unable to comprehend.

This means one has to begin earlier? You advise setting boundaries for children at an earlier age?

If you want to restrict a child in something, you must do it from the very beginning, at his first contact with the object or phenomenon. If a child is used to touching something and is suddenly told that he must not do it, he does not understand why it has now become forbidden, since at first he was accustomed to touching it and using it. If it was permitted, that means he was taught that it is allowed and even necessary.

That is, you are saying that one should not be afraid to exercise one's authority at an earlier age?

On the contrary, in this way you make it easier for him to naturally accept restrictions. If a child knows what is allowed and what is not, this is no longer a restriction for him; he lives within it. But if what was allowed suddenly becomes forbidden, it provokes indignation. We too do not agree with this. I reach the age of fifteen or sixteen and I am told: "You must join the army! You must work! You must, you must, you must…" Why on earth must I?! I know that I must go to school, and after school I am free, I do what I want. And suddenly I must feed myself, do my laundry, build a house, start a family… I must?! I do not want to live in such a world.

At what age does a child understand that something is being forbidden to him or that he is being obligated to something?

If earlier it was allowed and now it is forbidden. He must hear the restrictions at any age regarding any phenomenon new in his life. Perhaps the child cannot yet understand, but constantly, from age zero, he must hear your attitude toward what he is doing. You must talk with the child all the time, so that he hears: "This is right and this is not, this is good and this is bad, this is allowed and this is not" — and why. In this way, you build boundaries around him, an environment, a shell in which he exists, and he agrees to it. You shape his attitude toward the world, you show him what may be done and in what form — and this concerns everything. The existence of boundaries will then not seem strange, foreign, and cruel to him, as if before he was free and suddenly he is being sent to prison.

This question has many sides, and there are many theories connected with it. Do you think they can only confuse us?

From the outset, the attitude toward any matter should be even, unchanging, and consistent.

This is actually logical. If a child gets used to something, later it will not turn out to be an unpleasant surprise for him.

He will not feel any difficulty in any restrictions at all.

In essence, the difficulties arise for the parents. It is the desire to give the child everything — to create a "paradise" for him, to fulfill all his needs.

I remember when my brother's family came to visit us. His son is the same age as my younger daughter. My daughter, who was two years old, sat on a high child's chair together with everyone at the table for two hours, as was the custom in our home, while my brother's son fooled around, did not know what to do with himself, and turned everything upside down. They looked at my daughter and my son, who was seven or eight, and could not understand how children could sit so calmly at the table for so long. It is a habit; they did not feel any difficulty in it, whereas my brother's son could not sit still for a single minute. So who is it hard for in such a case, if patience is required? — Because there is no habit.

Therefore, we must instill in children the habit of doing what they will later have to do in life.

In what way does integral upbringing recommend cultivating this in children? By punishment?

Under no circumstances should there be any punishments, only habit. The child must learn this from the adults.

And if he does not want to?

That cannot be. A child wants to imitate adults, and if he knows that this is how adults act, and they let him understand that it is good, he gradually gets used to it. It is clear that you do not seat him next to you for the whole day, but he knows that it is done in such a form, and he has no other choice. He learns from the adults and agrees to it; he does not perceive it as a restriction, does not fight against it; his nature begins to work in order to accept it and carry it out. For otherwise he will suffer. So the organism accepts the restrictions.

And if the child did something wrong, or you want to accustom him to a certain behavior — how should one act, if not by punishing?

One has to repeat what happened, discuss it, and explain it. He must understand that it is undesirable.

What should one tell him? "You acted badly, wrongly, you disturbed everyone"? What explanation should one give him?

One has to repeat the situation.

Is a repeated explanation the correct explanation?

Yes, of course, otherwise the child will not understand.

That is, consistency is necessary.

I can explain something to a child a thousand times and he will not understand. I have to return to his action and explain what is right and what is not. If I repeat exactly the same situation, then he understands at all what I am telling him. After all, we are talking about the age of three.

But at the age of two or three, children often display defiance toward the demands of adults.

This is a sign that the adults are unexpectedly demanding of the children something for which they had not prepared them beforehand. One should not expect surprises. Of course, a child will break a glass, break something — these are examples from which he learns. But that he should display defiance? That should not happen. We must learn through the example of the environment. If we use the environment correctly and the child begins to understand that his actions do or do not please his parents or the people around him, then he has no choice. Show him this gently but consistently, from everyone around him.

This is similar to cultivating hygiene skills: he sees that the adults like it, and he does it.

Should the child be encouraged in some way? Tell him that you like how he behaves?

Yes, one has to praise and support him, so that he knows that you like it.

And if he behaves wrongly, should one show that you are upset?

Yes, one has to express regret, but not to punish. A child does not understand punishment; he will not be able to correctly connect it with his action. One has to keep returning and explaining everything that is happening. The child must understand his action, otherwise it is not upbringing.

This is very important for parents. Today all schools of psychology view the age of two or three as very difficult, but you are saying that everything depends on the previous upbringing.

It depends on the previous upbringing and on whether the child is treated as an adult.

There are American methods that speak of a daily routine, of creating clear boundaries, and of the child needing to get used to certain frameworks. And there are methods that say that everything is determined by the child himself.

No, that is wrong. The child must sense the framework all the time, and it is not by chance that it is said: "He who spares his rod hates his son."

What do you think about the connection between brothers at this age?

One has to make correct use of their companionship and their influence on one another, but that is a separate problem. As for the child, we must develop such a relationship with him that he considers himself our friend.

A friend of his parents?

So that he feels sorry when they are upset and rejoices when they rejoice. Otherwise there will be constant confrontation between them.

If parents place themselves above the child, do they influence him much less? How can parents, on the one hand, be an authority for their child and, on the other hand, his friend?

As a fellow student. I relate to him as an equal, I teach him, and I expect from him the same that he receives from me: attention, love, and respect. You will see how much, at the age of three, a child becomes grown-up, begins to understand what to say, what to answer, and how to conduct himself. And one need not fear that we are constructing some artificial image out of him. Everything depends on how we conduct ourselves. By the way, here a distinction in the treatment of girls and boys is very important.

From what age?

From three years old for certain, perhaps earlier. Boys should be raised by men, and girls by women. Children begin to sense that men and women have a different attitude toward life, different behavior, different stories — everything is completely different.

Does the difference between boys and girls, women and men, manifest itself? — The stories that a mother and a father, or an educator, will tell a child will sound completely different. The problem of our generation is that, unfortunately, both in kindergarten and in school, boys — until they become men — are raised by women.

That is, it harms the boys, whereas girls are surrounded by women anyway. And what harm does this do to a child?

From the age of three, a boy should no longer receive from his mother; he should receive from his father, become like a grown man. He already strives for this; he cannot play the same games, he distinguishes games from the standpoint of the sexes. He relates to the world differently. From this age onward we must separate them. Mixed kindergartens and schools cripple children.

Here personal example comes into play…

Yes, the personal example of a male educator for boys and a female educator for girls. After all, upbringing must take place through the process of discussions, sitting in a circle, and not in the form of moralizing.

In your opinion, what should the number of children in a group from three to six be?

Never more than ten.

Including the instructors?

Including the instructors; they are part of the common circle. They should set an example one level above the children, and no more, so that the children have the opportunity to imitate them.

Judging by what you are saying, our kindergartens — apart from the fact that they are mixed — are built not so badly? There everyone sits in a circle, talks with one another, plays, but there is no learning, which, as you say, is essential at this age.

Learning must absolutely be there. There must be a program appropriate to the age, including instruction in speech (rhetoric), music, dance, singing, drawing, reading and writing, arithmetic, and the world (botany, zoology). There must be daily progress in all the disciplines. Naturally, in general terms, at the level of three- to six-year-old children. Differentiated for boys and for girls.

Do children at this age already have questions about life?

Of course, none of this is by chance. We are made in such a way that these questions arise in every person, and we must develop children and gradually prepare them for these questions. But dance, painting, music, reading, writing, knowledge about the world, about life and Nature — they are not obligated to know these things, but they must hear about them from the educator.

You once said that groups for girls can have more than ten, since girls have a different perception of society. What exactly is it?

The point is that boys strive to unite into a group, a team. Between them there really exists a kind of connection; they feel a friend, they have a natural inner connection. But girls, being little women, have no inclination toward inner union, only toward a common game. Therefore the number of girls in a group does not have the same significance as with boys.

That is, groups for girls can be more numerous. Does it not seem to you that girls are more inclined toward cooperation than boys?

That is external cooperation. They are ready to unite and play together, but at the same time each one remains on her own. Boys, on the other hand, are more inclined to unite and to be connected in a group. Later this manifests itself clearly.

Is there a connection between the manifestation of violence in childhood and mixed upbringing?

Violence must be suppressed from the earliest age; there must be no place for it! We must teach children to be part of a society, since from three to six is already a society. They must examine and judge themselves; they must be able to gather, discuss their actions, and make decisions, as is customary among well-bred grown people. They must be able to answer for their actions. It is as if a game, and yet as if not…

Is this already possible at the age of three to six? — Yes. Of course, this takes place with the participation of the educator, with the help of such questions as "why did this happen?", "what do you think about it?", and so on.

Should this be done at the moment of the incident or afterward? Suppose some incident is happening right now, the children are in an agitated state…

It is necessary that what happened still be fresh in the group, so that the children remember it.

It should not be too far removed from them. Psychological practices say that from age three a child begins to understand that someone is around him, begins to emerge from the framework of his own egocentrism and to perceive his neighbor, whereas before that he perceives only himself. But discussing actions? Is that not too complicated for them?

We have to seat them together with the educator and begin to talk about what the child did. — Can this be in the form of a game?

One can act it out, as in a theater, reproducing what happened.

Children do not have much patience. Perhaps it should be done in the form of a story?

And let each one say what he thinks. We must develop in them a point of view on their own actions, attentiveness, a critical approach.

You are speaking of a very early ability to form one's own judgment. This is interesting. In psychology, when they speak of the ability to give evaluations, there is another theory: each stage of development is a separate branch. But some psychologists who studied moral development (Jean Piaget and others) say that the earlier you do this, the earlier it develops. Do you think exactly this?

This has to be done from the age of three.

Perhaps it is worth doing at home as well?

At home, in kindergarten, in school — such an attitude, discussion, and retelling of what happens — the child has to be taught this from an early age.

And what conclusion should one arrive at? As I understand it, this discussion should lead to some higher conclusion, and not just "we fought, he hit me and I hit him." In your opinion, what conclusion is it useful to draw from such a discussion?

"Love your neighbor as yourself."

How can this be done at the level of a child of three to six?

That is not a problem. From the age of three, children are at such a stage of development that they already begin to understand their attitude toward others. Therefore we must not miss this period; we must speak about it constantly and lead them to the correct analysis.

Do you picture this as a kind of opportunity that has opened up?

It is our duty; what does opportunity have to do with it?

Fine, a duty. But what will happen if it is not done?

Then we will get what we have today.

That is, a generation in which one does not feel the other and does not take one another into account.

Not only that. We do not even know what kind of generation we could have obtained.

If our upbringing had been different?

Of course! People would be completely different. They would look at one another differently, behave differently on the roads…

Yes, this is a very substantial change.

The most important thing is the "court sessions." If we can organize "court sessions" at the very earliest age, we will not need them for adults…

And this is the main conclusion of our conversation today. We spoke about the necessity of cultivating a habit, about conversations with the child, about the authority of the parents. We spoke about the fact that if we want to achieve something, we must relate to it consistently and not change our attitude, otherwise the child will feel a rupture between your attitude today and earlier; he will not understand what you want from him, and he will be right.

Just as smoothly and gradually as a child grows, so must we build our upbringing.

We spoke about boys, who should study in groups of up to ten, and about girls, for whom more numerous groups are possible, because they perceive society differently than boys do. With children one must discuss everything and explain everything, cultivating in the child a sensation of the neighbor, which we lack, and if we do this correctly, we will raise an entirely different generation.