These two German educators, Froebel and Herbart, who both may be called the contemporary disciples of the great Swiss reformer, have much in common in their pedagogical ideas, but they were totally different in temperament, training, metaphysical conceptions, and practical careers. They do not seem even to have known each other. Herbart reminds me, more than anyone else, of Kant, of whom he was a great admirer and to whom he seems to owe much. In his rather stoical physiognomy, in his perfect poise and well-balanced personality, in his sharp analytic intellect, in his instinct for schematic systematization and elaboration, in his comprehensive, all-sided view of problems, in his scholarly sincerity, in his combination of speculativeness and empiricism, of theoretical and practical interest, he is the second Kant in the history of philosophy. There is a still more interesting comparison. As Kant endeavored to clear away all the one-sided dogmatic views of preceding metaphysics by the standard of his analytic epistemology and to establish in their place a new system of philosophy, upon the unshakable basis of the _a priori_ categories of knowledge, so Herbart tried the same in the field of pedagogy, using his analytical psychology as the dissecting knife for the “vulgar” theories of his forerunners and the basis of his own “scientific” pedagogy. “The _a priori_ possibility of all the activities of the human mind” shows him the only means of promoting the aims and removing the hindrances of education. All the educational ideals, theories, and practices, however beautiful and ingenious they sound, must be judged by this standard. If Kant’s philosophy is the critical philosophy, Herbart’s pedagogy is the critical pedagogy. And if Kant, coming after Rousseau, succeeded in opening a new era in the schoolmen’s philosophy, so Herbart was an epoch-maker in the history of the schoolmen’s pedagogy. But the name of the father of modern education will ever remain Pestalozzi, as the honor of the creator of modern tendencies of thought will be conferred upon Rousseau instead of Kant, if one looks at things from a broad, human, cultural standpoint rather than the narrow, academic one.