The child is brought to realise what he is by looking at the various societies which co-operate in making him what he is. Being asked what he would say, If somebody meeting him in America asked him what he was and who he was, what would he say? He usually answers to such a question that he would say: “I am so-and-so,” but he is then asked: “What does that mean?” which brings the child to realise that the meaning of his name is that he is the son of his father and mother, he is what he is first of all as belonging to his particular family. Again: “I am so-and-so” conveys but little to a perfect stranger. What would he say next. “I am an Italian.” Very well, and “what kind of man in Italy?”... The child here usually pauses in great perplexity. It takes some time before he comes to speak of a possible profession and of his religion; and for this last point it is necessary to point out to him that there are several religions. Once he has got there, however, he realises so fully all that is implied in this kind of definition that one can hardly help being astonished by the readiness with which children or older boys work out Gentile’s ideas. The author has had the opportunity of noting how easily children grasped the true nature of their relation to family, country, religion, and school, and the fact that what they were depended on their consciousness of being a living member of such societies. The child thus acquires a religious attitude towards them. He realises the sacred character of the family, as based solely upon his own moral realisation of his relation to the members of his family. The family blood running in his veins, he is told has nothing to do with that relation. His father is his father in the spiritual way which alone binds them together, because he calls him his son and acknowledges paternal relationship to him with all the duties and claims that it involves. Gradually he comes to realise that he draws all his importance—his reality—from his conscious relation to the societies to which he belongs and which together make up the not-self; and that such societies are merely the various consciousness of single members transcending their poor, limited, empirical little selves and calling into existence their better and greater, transcendental selves. Man as a thing-in-itself is nowhere to be found; mankind vanishes like a phantom as soon as you try to meet it. If every man and boy in the world discharged his duty as a member of a family, of a school, of a club, of a calling, and finally of a church and of a state, mankind would certainly know peace and well-being, for man then would consider his relations, school, club and trade fellows, religious brethren and fellow citizens as belonging to his own self. But no man can do so perfectly, and it is as much as can be expected from him if he does what, in the sincerity of his soul, he knows to be the very best he can do and loves his neighbour merely so far as he realises