The Pursuit of Wisdom and Happiness in Education: Historical Sources and Contemplative Practices

4. Moses Maimonides’s Warnings against the Pursuit of Wisdom in Schools

87 4 Moses Maimonides’s Warnings against the Pursuit of Wisdom in Schools Maimonides on Why Mass Education of the Youth Should NOT Include Philosophy The twelfth‑century Jewish philosopher Moses Maimonides brings forth a very difficult challenge to the main contention of this book that the pursuit of wisdom is not only appropriate in the modern public school, but of central importance, and that an atmosphere in which such a pursuit might be promoted ought to be of the greatest concern both to educators and policymakers. In his Guide for the Perplexed, Maimonides states: You must know that it is very injurious to begin with this branch of philosophy, viz., Metaphysics; or to explain [at first] the sense of the similes occurring in prophecies, and interpret the metaphors which are employed in historical accounts and which abound in the writings of the Prophets. On the contrary, it is necessary to initiate the young and to instruct the less intelligent according to their comprehension; those who appear to be talented and to have capacity for the higher method of study, i.e., that based on proof and on true logical argument, should be gradually advanced towards perfection, either by tuition or by self‑instruction. He, however, who begins with Metaphysics, will not only become confused in matters of religion, but will fall into complete infidelity. I compare such a person to an infant fed with wheaten bread, meat and wine; it will undoubtedly die, not because such food is naturally unfit for the human body, but because of the weakness of the child, who is unable to digest the food, and cannot derive benefit from it. The same is the case with the true principles of science. They were presented in enigmas, clad in riddles, and taught by all wise men in the most mysterious way that could be devised, not because they contain some secret evil, or are contrary to the fundamen‑ tal principles of the Law (as fools think who are only philosophers in 88 The Pursuit of Wisdom and Happiness in Education their own eyes), but because of the incapacity of man to comprehend them at the beginning of his studies: only slight allusions have been made to them to serve for the guidance of those who are capable of understanding them. These sciences were, therefore, called Mysteries (sodoth), and Secrets of the Law (sitre torah).1 In this passage, Maimonides contends first that young people are not only unfit for philosophy, but that philosophy is unfit for young people. Children lack the ability to digest the unadorned truth that philosophy seeks; in order to make truth palatable to them—that they might be able to receive it and grow from its influence—it must be told to them by means of story, enigma, and riddle. In Maimonides’s view, young people require myth rather than philosophy; they ought to receive schooling in the stories, prophecies, orthodoxy, and traditions of their surrounding society so that the order that is prescribed in such stories might inform and order their own inner lives and actions, which in turn might later serve as the basis for more perfect philosophic studies where aptitude and interest is shown. A solid foundation in cultural myth and religious tradition is the neces‑ sary groundwork for philosophy; to try philosophizing before mythologizing is to put the proverbial cart before the horse, in Maimonides’s view. A second contention suggested by this passage is that youth who are too early exposed to the truth that such tales are metaphors, or that orthodox teachings may themselves be made subject to argumentation and dialectical scrutiny, become confused and full of infidelity. Premature exposure to dialectic and argumenta‑ tion breeds in young people a kind of skepticism and contempt for all tradition. Nothing spoken to such youths as true is accepted as true. Truth itself becomes subject to doubt, since every truth purported by their elders appears to fall victim to criticism and argumentation. Where the processes of “metaphysical” inquiry are engaged in too early by a student, the end result is that no teaching has time to abide or to mold the inner life of such a student; indeed, such a student lacks any ability whatsoever to be taught inasmuch as he is bereft of docility (docilitas). On “docility,” philosopher and educator James Schall writes: It means the virtue of being able to be taught. The very name of this striking virtue implies that we must at some...