"The necessity of making education and instruction attractive has been propounded by all pedagogists worthy of the name, such as Fenelon, Rousseau, Pestalozzi, Herbart, and Spencer," says Claparede, "but it is still unrecognized in the everyday practise of the schools" (_op. cit._). "By common consent, the first duty of the educator is that of doing no harm: first do no harm, a precept also accepted in the practise of medicine. To obey it to the letter is, indeed, _impossible, because every method of scholastic education is in some way prejudicial to the normal development of the child_. But the educator will seek to _alleviate the injury which instruction necessarily entails_" (_op. cit._). This is indeed cold comfort, after all these studies and researches! A confession that problems have arisen at every step, and that not a single one has been solved! Indeed, underlying all this is the _problem of problems_: how to make that place attractive and joyous where hitherto the body has been tortured and contorted, and the blood poisoned by weariness! It is impossible to educate without doing harm; but we must do harm that will give pleasure! This is truly an embarrassing position! And this is why an interminable string of notes of interrogation serves as the decorative motive of this new science, which might be more appropriately styled: _ignorabimus_. And it is for this reason that the considerations indicated by hygiene and psychology now tend to do away altogether with the sum total of irreparable evils, "commuting the sentence," that is to say, abbreviating hours of study, cutting down the curriculum, avoiding written exercises. Thus a new specter, that of ignorance, and henceforth the abandonment of the child for the greater part of the day, present themselves as a substitute for the specter of destruction. Meanwhile our epoch demands an intensive care of the new generation, and the preparation of a culture ever vaster and more complex.