The state educationists ignore the educational significance of the natural relationships between parent and children. “In these strong affections and mutual dependencies observers believed they saw an admirably arranged chain of influences, calculated to secure the mental and physical development of successive generations; and in the simplicity of their faith had concluded that these divinely appointed means were fully sufficient for this purpose.” But, according to them, “this combination of affections and interests was not provided for such a purpose, or what is the same thing, that it has no purpose at all. And so, in default of any natural provision for supplying the exigency, legislators exhibit to us the design and specification for a state machine, made up of masters, ushers, inspectors, and councils, to be worked by a due proportion of taxes, and to be plentifully supplied with raw material, in the shape of little boys and girls, out of which it is to grind a population of well-trained men and women, who shall be ‘useful members of the community’” (9: pp. 366-367). They forget that “educational systems, like political and other institutions, are generally as good as the state of human nature permits,” and that no hasty reform in education, which is not coördinated with that of other departments of life and the general elevation of the whole social organism, can succeed. Any attempt at uniformatization, at the present stage of progress, of educational system by an authoritative hand would bring more harm than benefit. For “were we in possession of the true method, divergence from it would, of course, be prejudicial; but the true method having to be found, the efforts of numerous independent seekers carrying out their researches in different directions constitute a better agency for finding it than any that could be devised” (7: p. 101). Moreover, the use and function of government is, according to Spencer, only negative. “To the bad, it is essential; to the good, not. It is the check which national wickedness makes to itself, and exists only to the same degree.” So the extension of government authority or interference is rather a retrogression of society. “As civilization advances does the government decay,” and ought to decay (9: p. 25).