n lead, every
individual will be prepared to deal with even the greatest obstacles,
and must possess even the capacity to represent externally what has
been perceived and thought--that is, to speak and write clearly and
accurately--for in this way the intellectual power of the individual
will first be made active and visible to others. We perceive that
Froebel strongly antagonizes the Roman postulate that knowledge
should be imparted to boys according to a thoroughly tested method and
succession approved by the mature human intellect, and which seem most
useful to it for later life.

The systematic method which, up to the time of Pestalozzi, prevailed in
Germany, and is again embodied in our present mode of education, seemed
to him objectionable. The Swiss reformer pointed out that the mother's
heart had instinctively found the only correct system of instruction,
and set before the pedagogue the task of watching and cultivating the
child's talents with maternal love and care. He utterly rejected the old
system, and Froebel stationed himself as a fellow-combatant at his side,
but went still further. This stand required a high degree of courage
at the time of the founding of Keilhau, when Hegel's influence was
omnipotent in educational circles, for Hegel set before the school the
task of imparting culture, and forgot that it lacked the most essential
conditions; for the school can give only knowledge, while true education
demands a close relation between the person to be educated and the world
from which the school, as Hegel conceived it, is widely sundered.

Froebel recognized that the extent of the knowledge imparted to each
pupil was of less importance, and that the school could not be expected
to bestow on each individual a thoroughly completed education, but an
intellect so well trained that when the time came for him to enter into
relations with the world and higher instructors he would have at his
disposal the means to draw from both that form of culture which the
school is unable to impart. He therefore turned his back abruptly on
the old system, denied that the main object of education was to meet
the needs of afterlife, and opposed having the interests of the child
sacrificed to those of the man; for the child in his eyes is sacred, an
independent blessing bestowed upon him by God, towards whom he has the
one duty of restoring to those who confided it to him in a higher degree
of perfection, with unfolded mind