Instruction, although it is the main part of education, must be assisted by two other functions in order to be effective; namely, government and discipline. The function of government is to keep the pupils in order, in quiet, and in abeyance to the will of the teacher. It is mere, though necessary, preparation for instruction and discipline. It concerns itself only with the present of the pupil, while instruction and discipline look to his future. Government involves keeping children in constant occupation suitable to their age and individuality, supervision, with numerous commands and prohibitions, and certain rewards and punishments. Instruction aims at the formation of character through the formation of a system of sound judgments and clear insights, which motivate the good will. It is discipline that completes the work of instruction by the habituation of the will in the direction of virtue. Its task is to harmonize and unify the manifold acts of will by subordinating single momentary volitions to the moral ego which is gradually to be formed in the mind of the child. As the object of instruction is to give moral illumination to the will, so that of discipline is to develop “moral strength of character.” Discipline is distinguished from government by its being chiefly concerned with inner volition, while the latter mainly deals with outward action. So it is not applied, like government, by enforcement, but consists in reciprocal personal reaction between the teacher and the pupil. Without the voluntary reaction or willing coöperation on the part of the latter, discipline is futile. Certain personal attitudes, sympathy and helpfulness on the part of the teacher, confidence and dependence on the part of the pupil, are the first requisites of training. Thus we see that Herbart brought about, in his own way, a reconciliation between the exclusive resort to formal discipline in contempt of instruction, by means of which the source of rich and refined motives is supplied, and the over-exaltation of impartment of knowledge to the neglect of training, by which alone it becomes power and life--giving also a due importance to the preliminary and supporting function of supervision or government. In instruction itself, also, the two opposite tendencies, the humanistic and the empirical, find a higher unity. The humanistic school claimed the knowledge stored in the history and literature of the race alone as worth imparting, while the empirical asserted that the knowledge coming from immediate personal experience alone deserves the name. Herbart takes individual experience as the leading-string of instruction, and unites with it the experience of the whole human race, incorporated in culture and science.