Here we may set out with those exhibitions of something like remorse
which often follow disobedience and punishment in the first tender
years. These may, at first, be little more than physical reactions, due
to the exhaustion of the passionate outbursts. But they soon begin to
show traces of new feelings. A child in disgrace, before he has a clear
moral sense of shame, suffers through a feeling of estrangement, of
loneliness, of self-restriction. If the habitual relation between mother
and child is a loving and happy one the situation becomes exceedingly
painful. The pride and obstinacy notwithstanding, the culprit feels that
he is cut off from more than one half of his life, that his beautiful
world is laid in ruins. The same little boy who said: ‘I’d be a worse
mother,’ remarked to his mother a few months later that if he could say
what he liked to God it would be: ‘Love me when I’m naughty’. I think
one can hardly conceive of a more eloquent testimony to the suffering of
the child in the lonesome, loveless state of punishment.
Is there any analogue of our sense of remorse in this early suffering?
The question of an instinctive moral sense in children is a perplexing
one, and I do not propose to discuss it now. I would only venture to
suggest that in these poignant griefs of child-life there seem to be
signs of a consciousness of violated instincts. This is, no doubt, in
part the smarting of a loving heart on remembering its unloving action.
But there may be more than this. A child of four or five is, I conceive,
quite capable of reflecting at such a time that in his fits of
naughtiness he has broken with his normal orderly self, that he has set
at defiance that which he customarily honours and obeys.
What, it may be asked, are these instincts? In their earliest
discernible form they seem to me to be respect for rule, for a regular
manner of proceeding as opposed to an irregular. A child, as I
understand the little sphinx, is at once the subject of ever-changing
caprices—whence the delight in playful defiance of all rule and
order—and the reverer of custom, precedent, rule. And, as I conceive,
this reverence for precedent and rule is the deeper and stronger,
holding full sway in his serious moments.
If this view is correct the suffering of naughty children is not, as has
been said by some, wholly the result of the externals of discipline,
punishment, and the loss of the agreeable things which follow good
behaviour, though this is commonly an element; nor is it merely the
sense of loneliness and lovelessness, though that is probably a large
slice of it; but it contains the germ of something nearer a true
remorse, _viz._, a sense of normal feelings and dispositions set at
nought and contradicted.
And now we may ask what evidence there is for the existence of this
respect for order and regularity other than that afforded by the
childish protests against apparent inconsistencies in the administration
of discipline.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account