and of our professors spreading far and wide the elements of a noble
humanised life. To bring this into a practical scheme I held to be my
highest duty, a duty which I could never evade, and one which I could
never shake off, since a man cannot shake off his own nature.

Our greatest teachers, even Pestalozzi himself not excepted, seemed to
me too bare, too empirical,[105] and arbitrary, and therefore not
sufficiently scientific in their principles--that is, not sufficiently
led by the laws of our being; they seemed to me in no wise to recognise
the Divine element in science, to feel its worth, and to cherish it.
Therefore I thought and hoped, with the courage and inexperience of
youth, that all scientific and learned men, that the universities, in
one word, would immediately recognise the purport of my efforts, and
would strive with all their might to encourage me by word and deed.

In this I was egregiously mistaken; nevertheless I am not ashamed of the
error. But few persons raised their voices for me or against me; and,
indeed, your article in the _Isis_ is the single sun-ray which really
generously warmed and enlightened my life and lifework. Enough! the
Universities paid no heed to the simple schoolmaster.[106] As to the
"able editors," they, in their reviews, thought very differently from
me; but why should I trouble myself further with remembering their
performances, which were written simply with the object of degrading me
and my work? They never succeeded in shaking my convictions in the
least.

I regard the simple course of development, proceeding from analysis to
synthesis, which characterises pure reasoned thought, as also the
natural course of the development of every human being. Such a course of
development, exactly opposite to the path taken by the old-fashioned