Punishments – Continued

We continue to discuss such concepts in upbringing as setting boundaries and punishments, reflection, and proper communication with a child. In the previous program you explained your view on the issue that today is called limitations. We were interested in how to limit a child from the outside, but in your words, if I understood correctly, there was a different message: a child must be able to limit himself from within.

But don't we want the child to grow up?

We very much want him to grow up properly, to be happy and cheerful.

To grow up properly, happy, and cheerful means that he will set limits for himself on his own.

That is why you say he must be able to do this?

He must be taught this from childhood; otherwise, what is upbringing?

Today people use the term "self-regulation."

We must teach a child the proper relationship with society. He must know how to determine his place in the social environment and be balanced relative to it. Then, in any environment where he may find himself, he will be able to arrange things so that it is beneficial both to him and to those around him.

Able to direct himself?

Yes. Do we work on this in the process of upbringing? Is this our daily goal throughout the entire period while the child is being brought up by us?

That is, educators and parents must see the goal of upbringing as the child being able to direct himself in the educational or any other environment?

He must know how to behave properly in any society, how to establish a connection with it, to join in mutual communication and feel comfortable. It must be clear to him exactly what society demands of him and what he can receive from society. To be in balance with the environment is the best and most favorable state.

In conventional upbringing this is called defining values. One lesson a week is devoted to this topic, and the rest of the time the child must manage on his own, without reasoning about it. Only if he behaves badly do people get angry with him, talk to him, and begin to discuss it. Is it possible to prevent the breakdown before it happens?

If that is the case, then children do not understand at all what is wanted from them. A human being is a social being and a social creation: right now he is a being, and later, perhaps, he will become a creation, because he forms himself.

You want to explain the difference?

The difference lies in whether we lead him to become a proper part of the environment. We speak of the environment as an organism made up of cells interconnected with one another, each of which acts in harmony with the others. We see how in our time this is becoming clearer and clearer: humanity is becoming global and integral. Of course, in such a society the decisive factors are agreement, mutual concession, and connection. Do we teach this to our children? For otherwise human society will not be able to exist! We already understand that we cannot give a child a profession for life – professions are constantly changing.

Absolutely correct.

But if he receives a proper foundation for interacting with society, for behaving within it, and finds his true place in it, then this will be the foundation of a person's success in life. Success will not come at the expense of one's neighbor – in an integral society that is impossible. But with a proper connection to one's neighbor, if he finds himself, he will acquire any specialty, all the more so since today people change their occupation several times in life.

So, literally swap the primary and the secondary in upbringing?

It was precisely educators who once decided to make one child a shoemaker, another a locksmith, a third a painter, without worrying about how they would arrange their lives.

Achieve everything else on your own!

Exactly: life will teach you! As a result, people are dejected, depressed, suffering from depression. Some become criminals, others simply do not want to leave the house because they do not know how the world is arranged and what is happening in it. Such rules operate in society that everyone experiences pressure and tries to forcibly extract benefit from his neighbor. No one even thinks that society should be united and function in a coordinated way. All of this is the consequence of the upbringing given to people. Therefore there is no point in being outraged and making complaints when employees suddenly shut down an airport or a government institution. I see this as the result of the upbringing these people received in childhood.

It turns out that if we accustom children to think only of themselves and to be top of the class at it, then it is no problem for them to infringe on others. In this way we destroy society, and this process only intensifies? And the thought of yielding or of considering others remains outside of upbringing.

From childhood people have not been taught to talk with one another – and nothing more is needed! First of all, unite children into a group and teach them to talk with one another, to understand, to try to reach an agreement in order to attain equality. And then go on an excursion to Parliament!

They will shudder!

Give them a good lesson in life.

Of how it is when people do not listen to one another?

Yes. And they must prepare themselves for a different life.

It turns out that one can bring children up not only through personal experience, but also through a negative example from the outside, for instance, a debate in Parliament?

Yes. Television constantly shows such examples in various fields.

And what is to be done if there is a child in the group who disrupts the discussion, distracts others?

It cannot be that the group is unable to bring him into line. — What can the group do?

Absolutely everything!

Can it remove him from the discussion so that he gets bored out in the corridor and wants to come back?

No, we do not consider that a punishment.

We want him to remain with us?

Correction takes place within the group, so by removing him we deprive the child of the possibility to change. In doing so we achieve nothing.

But sometimes it happens that the whole group is caught up in a discussion, and one child starts to interfere and instantly destroys everything.

Then take a break and talk with the other children. When everyone returns, and he comes in, let everyone treat him dismissively: "Look who's here!" You know, after all, how strongly this affects children.

That is very hard. But is such an attitude not dangerous for the child? Will he not lose confidence in himself? Will it not offend him, will it not break him?

It will break him – wonderful! If the disdain comes not from adults but from the group, then it will be remembered for a lifetime. This is not a punishment, but the group's response to what he provokes within it – like that vacuum cleaner we spoke about in the previous program, which bumps into a wall and turns around.

But this needs to be shown to the child!

If he does not feel it, he will never change. And if he is simply thrown out, then, not knowing the reason, he will go off to have fun and be content. He'll even grab a cigarette in the yard and, together with the other "removed" kids, go off to the movies!

Yes, a very dangerous group forms there.

That is why – do not remove him! A little disdain from the group is quite enough.

And yet it happens that a child does not have mastery over his nature. Such an example came up in a conversation with children.

I am speaking of only one of the possibilities. But only the environment, through its approval or condemnation, can change a person.

The environment is not only adults, but also children.

Only children! And the child must feel that the group is distancing him: distancing him not physically, but that it does not want to put up with such behavior.

Let us watch the next clip. We talked with the children about the fact that even if everyone agrees to observe the rules of behavior and not disrupt the group, it still happens that someone does interfere after all. What is the reason? Why does this happen? Here are their opinions:

"Host: We have rules of behavior, but we do not always observe them. Perhaps we do not want to quarrel, but sometimes we lose our temper. Why?

S: There are no good relations between us, because such is our nature.

Host: What do you mean?

S: We are egoists, we want only for ourselves, we are indifferent to everyone else. We are ready to hit someone or to laugh at someone. If our nature were different, and we did not want only for ourselves, then we would not need rules and laws, because everyone would care for one another and be equal. No one would want to be stronger and greater than others.

Host: Has it happened to any of you that your egoism suddenly broke through?

M: Recently I got into a fight with a classmate. I felt anger welling up in me, but I could not stop myself. It's as if you are crashing in an airplane and can do nothing: you have no wings, there is nothing to grab hold of, you fall down, and you have nothing."

What a vivid description! The child says: "I lost control, I see it, I feel it, but I cannot stop!" How often adults experience such states!

But the child is aware of it!

Astonishing! He is able to observe himself!

Yes, and this is a consequence of upbringing. These children are worked with only very little, and the result is already visible. So what can be done? In what way can one stop? Is it possible to stop at all in the heat of the moment? Let us put it this way: even if he does not stop – it is not so terrible. He will study this state several times, since the proper approach is already there. And if he now takes a blow from the "airplane crash," then it will be a lesson in how, with the help of the proper approach, not to draw near such a state where one loses the "brakes in flight."

The question is, what kind of blow will it be? He got into a fight with a classmate, and now at school an investigation begins: who started it, who is to blame?

No, no! We have already said that they are brought before a court of their peers, and that is an entirely different court.

It is an occasion for discussion, as you say?

Of course. Every event that goes beyond the ordinary bounds – and we look for such cases – is immediately brought to court.

In essence, it is rather a clarification, an analysis?

Undoubtedly. Today it happened to one child, and tomorrow it may happen to another.

The concept of "court" is associated with punishment, and for us that is the last thing we would want.

We do not judge the person at all! We judge the phenomenon – human nature. We do not ask the children: "Who hit whom?" We do not have two specific children, but a person who hit another because he was born into an egoistic nature. So what do we do in order to cope with it? Today he got into a fight with a classmate, and tomorrow he may hit a teacher, for it is not without reason that it is said: "Do not believe in yourself until the day of your death." We must speak with them completely openly, all the more so since a quarrel can still be seen in any place – at home, on the street. That is why we discuss such situations, not skipping a single one.

We judge human nature?

Yes. And also the ways of curbing it.

Can it be curbed?

It can, but not by force, not with shackles, and not with prison. One can limit oneself with the help of the environment, but this limitation will not bottle me up inside, like Ritalin, but will give new development. You come to the group not perfect – you surely have spines, like a porcupine. To cut them off is very painful: you have to keep yourself in check, not shout, not fight. But one can act differently: with the help of upbringing, gain the possibility of coming out of one's egoistic nature more freely – not by limiting it, but by turning it into bestowal to others. Then you feel free.

But how is this to be done?

Oh, that is the whole point. If we begin to pressure the children, they will turn into sick people who must constantly watch over themselves.

Restraint in one place will inevitably burst out in another.

In the end, they will be deeply traumatized, constantly closing themselves off and suppressing themselves. This will lead to deplorable results: illnesses, hidden explosions, inadequate behavior, sexual anomalies, cruelty.

It is clear that suppression is an evil.

One's nature will always break out, and in terrible forms at that. Therefore we in no way suppress the child. We bring him to such a connection with the group that – with proper interaction – allows him to use his bad qualities for the sake of good. And then he sticks out his spines, like the teeth of gears, in order to establish a connection with the other children.

The same thing happens with porcupines: when it is cold, they, despite their quills, press up against one another in order to preserve warmth.

But if I were a child, it would still not be clear to me why one needs to connect with others?

The child does not have to understand this. He simply receives it as a result of the exercises. Over the course of several years we lead him through a series of exercises, as a result of which a second nature forms within him. Of course, we do not give him theoretical explanations and moral prohibitions.

Modern upbringing is in fact looking for ways to transfer the limitations imposed from the outside to the inside. But it is impossible to constantly act only from the outside. The child, as you say, must himself pass through these states and experiences.

A person should hold nothing inside himself. He must manifest everything outward and through this connect with others.

This is precisely the aim of the discussions we spoke about: to constantly share one's experiences, to try to express them rather than hide them, because that leads to an explosion.

Here several principles come together: children must express themselves, and not only in words, act, and constantly discuss their behavior – their present behavior and the desired one.

In other words, this is not a momentary action, but a process that requires time.

But in children it goes fairly quickly. It is amazing how quickly they absorb everything and change.

And why must they hide their spines?

The spines are not hidden, but turned into their opposite – a connection with others.

But when I flare up and want to tear the offender apart, I do not feel that I want to connect with him. I want to get him away from me!

Well then, explode in front of everyone, but with the awareness that you are doing it under the influence of your nature. As S. said, that he loses control of himself and knows that he is now about to smash everything up. Along with this, cry out: "Help!" And then explode.

And how does one help in this case? Is there a way to do it in the very midst of the incident?

If people understand one another, then it is wonderful: each learns from the example of the other.

Say, I feel that I am exploding, but I cannot stop myself…

That feeling will instantly go out – just start shouting and you'll see!

And how is this connected with bestowal? How does one turn evil into something opposite?

Bestowal helps us reveal evil in the best possible way – it is a help against oneself. It was "against," and suddenly it became a help. For we have no good desires/qualities, only egoistic ones. These we can turn into good, and from this we have desires of bestowal. We have no good nature, just as we have no good behavior. Good does not issue from us, but is entirely built on the fact that we create it out of its opposite.

As M. said: "Our nature is egoistic." It is all very simple.

In continuing the conversation, he emphasized several times: such is my nature, it cannot be changed, and therefore I can do nothing about it.

At the very least, he came to the recognition of evil – a great achievement.

In the next fragment one can see how deeply the concept of punishment is rooted in us. S. is already able to observe himself, while M. feels only his nature. That is why, apart from punishment, he sees no other way out.

"Host: What is the most powerful and forceful means you know of, with which we can curb the explosion of our ego?

S: First of all, the thought of what is happening to a friend. If I do something bad to a friend, then I put myself in his place, and if he does something bad to me, then I feel what is happening to him, I enter into his situation.

Host: That is, I imagine myself in the state of a friend. And how does one conquer the ego?

M: In my opinion, as we have already said, the only way out is punishment. There is no other solution. If they tell me, 'Next time don't do that,' for me that is a punishment. After all, any limitation is a punishment.

Host: On the other hand, we see that punishments awaken the ego even more.

S: I think punishments should be given depending on the case: so as not to harm the person, not to make him suffer, but so that he remembers until the next time."

Indeed, a difficult question: what is to be done about this? They were endowed with an egoistic nature and are taught to observe their own actions. And what do they see?

That everyone constantly wants only for himself, and no one thinks of others.

But what would you say if all the children in the world reached an understanding at such a level?

Oh, we would advance significantly!

For from the moment when a child says that he can do nothing with his nature, and therefore needs punishments (!), to the ability to limit himself properly and consciously relative to the environment is not far at all. He begins to bring himself up, analyzing at a very high level.

It is interesting that in the course of the discussion all the children agreed that egoism creates a problem for them that needs to be solved. But each one wants to cope with it himself: to set a personal example or to find some other way.

After all, the child wants to feel that he is coping on his own!

True. Do you want a solution?

Of course.

They must be taught how to bring themselves up with the help of the environment. Each one must turn to his friends with a request: "Friends! You must stop me, react, and apply pressure if, say, I start a fight."

Literally ask?

Yes. And then the next time I raise my hand to strike, they will immediately grab me by the arm, stop me, and remind me, since I myself forget about it.

The child must come to this conclusion himself?

Of course, himself! And ask the group to remind him!

But first he must become disillusioned with himself?

Of course. But even now he is saying that he needs punishments, otherwise he cannot control himself! Otherwise he simply crashes, like a nosediving airplane. That is, we already have children who understand their state. Now there must be the next stage – freedom of choice: I choose the environment that will present me with reward and punishment through its attitude toward me.

Without blaming me and without being angry with me?

Of course, since everyone is like that – they say it about themselves! And it is clear to each of them that their nature is egoistic, bad.

And it does not matter whose nature is worse?

No.

That is, the main message is that everyone has evil?

Yes, and therefore we, the bad ones, must organize an environment that will watch over us. We, as it were, build a higher level that will protect us – everyone protects each one. Then we will advance along the good path.

Instead of fighting against external limitations, the child will begin to understand that he needs them, and will set them himself?

Everyone will want the environment to influence and bring him up.

That sounds very tempting!

And the educator is left with no other work than to influence through the environment, helping them understand what the group should be like and what laws operate within it. These laws we take from Nature – neither the educator nor the ministry of education invents them.

On the theme of creating a proper environment for children, one that will bring them up, we shall stop here. I hope everyone has received rich material for reflection.