 Hello, I welcome you all once again to my channel Explore Education and I am Dr. Rashmi Singh, Assistant Professor of the Department of Education, SS Khanna Girls from the College, University of Allahabad. It is my email ID and in the process of discussing educational thinkers, today I am going to discuss Jya Jyax Russo on education or you can say educational philosophy of Russo or you can say Russo on educational thoughts Russo educational thoughts of Russo, anything you can say the lecture will be in bilingual mode and it must be useful for your various examinations competitive as well as your general regular and professional courses. Let's start. First of all, Russo on education. What was the vision of Russo on education? So, you should understand that all the thinkers we are reading, they all had a long vision. They had that vision, they could see how the future society would be and what kind of education they needed. So, 200 years ago, they said that even today, there are true views and even today, we are not able to get them on the path of Dharat al-Qiyath. Okay, so let's see what Russo has said on education. So, he was one of the prominent naturalistic philosophers of education. When you read the pre-Ujjan, the pre-Ujjan, the pre-Ujjan, the pre-Ujjan, the pre-Ujjan, the pre-Ujjan, the pre-Ujjan, so, his prominent, he was the most famous philosopher. His notions on education have been written in his important publications, like the Progress of Arts and Science, he wrote the Social Contract, he wrote the New Helloys, he wrote the Emile, the most famous publication of the Emile. Russo's naturalist philosophy shows in three forms, Social Naturalism, Psychological Naturalism and Physical Naturalism. Russo's pre-Ujjan, the pre-Ujjan, So, because there is no focus on naturalism, there is no focus on educational philosophy, so we will not discuss naturalism here, we will study it separately in naturalism. His philosophy concepts of natural state, natural man and natural civilization. His philosophy, his educational philosophy has three main concepts, which he talks about again and again. He talks about natural state, natural person, natural human, natural human and natural civilization. So, what is the meaning of natural state, natural man and natural civilization? Natural state means that simple framing, community or state without evils, corruption and social classes. He is saying that we talk about natural state, which means that state in which there will be no evils, corruption and social class. Why is he saying that? Because the time he used to live in the society, there was corruption in the society. There were evils, which were social class, which were the upper class, which used to make the lower class sleep. He even felt that, that's why he wants the state to be natural. What is the meaning of man being natural? Natural man means man is governed and directed by laws of his own nature, rather than those of social institutions. He is saying that natural man is the one who is governed by his rules, not by social institutions. He is saying that civilized man, born, lives and dies in a state of slavery. He is saying that every human being is born, lives and dies in the state of civilization. He is saying that civilized man is not good and civilization is not good. Rousseau has remarked that leave the child alone, let him be a natural man rather than a civilized man. He had a saying that leave the child alone. Let him be a natural human, not a civilized man. According to Rousseau, civilization is getting dirty and dirty. Let him have a state of natural rather than artificial surroundings that shunt his proper growth and arrest his natural development. He is saying that let him live in a natural state. Don't give artificial surroundings to him, because the artificial surroundings that we give to him stop his proper growth and his natural development. According to Rousseau, natural civilization is free from artificial surroundings and barriers that pollute the goodness of our nature. He is saying that natural civilization is free from artificial surroundings and barriers that pollute the goodness of our nature. They pollute the goodness of our nature. They pollute the goodness of our nature. What else did Rousseau say? He is saying return to nature or return to natural things. This is his main motto. Was his method to cure all troubles. He said that every problem in the society is that you should return to nature. In the social contract, which is his publication, he says he was stated that man is born free but everywhere he is in change. He is saying that man was born free. We have taken him to places where he is living. What is Rousseau? Social institutions, social laws, civilization, all these things. Rousseau admired the simplicity and purity of nature. He says that nature is the most important part of nature. He is saying that nature is pure. In nature, simplicity and simplicity were his impressions. He stated that God makes all things good. He said that God made everything good. Man meddles with them and they become evil. He said that when man established a medium from it, when we touched it, it became evil. He declares that everything is good as it comes from the hands of the author of nature. Everything we get from God is good. In this way, you can see that Rousseau is also idealistic because he is accepting the power of God. But everything degenerates in the hands of man. He is saying that everything becomes evil in the hands of man. According to Rousseau, there are three meanings of nature. Whenever they talk about nature, there can be three meanings. What is it? Isolation from society. Whenever you are away from society, you are with nature. The tendency of the child, the tendency of the child, the nature of nature is born. That is nature. And contact with natural environment. And in terms of nature, is nature or nature. His famous book, Emeel. Look, what Emeel did? He thought of an imaginary child. He thought of the character. And whatever education he is giving to him, whatever education he wants, he has done with Emeel. His famous book, Emeel is in the field of child education. You can understand that Baal is a very famous book about education. Here he described the process of education through education of an imaginary child. He took a path and he thought of his education that this should be the way it should be. Who was given education in a natural environment away from society and school. He gave education to that child in social and academic terms. In this book, psychological principles of education were given. In his book, you will also get the spiritual knowledge of education. Why? Because he is saying that much more importance as this child was left free to explore nature. He is saying, give the child the most importance. Leave him alone. Leave him alone. Explore nature. So that she could develop physically as well as mentally in the lap of nature. For example, Emeel, in the nature of nature, develop her mind, her body. Develop her, leave her. Don't teach her anything. Don't give her a book. Nature is the greatest teacher. In accordance to Rousseau. Rousseau is such a saying. But negative education is a very famous concept. And if you don't read it, then you will be asked in the exam that you comment on negative education. If you have read it, then you have not read it. Then you will write that he said that education is bad. Education should not be given. This is bad in education. He didn't say anything like that. Look at the concept of negative education for him. He is saying, it involves negative education. Negative education means not in teaching the morality. Not in teaching the moralities of virtue and truth. But in protecting the heart, counter to voice, in the mind, counter to mistake. He is saying, don't teach the child a lesson. Don't teach him to speak the truth. Instead, teach the child's heart how to stay away from the avogams. How can you save yourself from the avogams? And teach the teacher how to stop him from making a mistake. Don't teach him this. This is the rule. This is the truth. How can you save yourself from the avogams? How can you tackle a lie? How can you not speak a lie? So, negativity is here. Negative education means not in teaching the moralities of virtue and truth. Don't teach him education. How to protect the heart? How to protect the mind? According to Rousseau, negative education is that education which shapes the faculties and organs which exist as the pools of knowledge before giving the direct experience. He is saying, what are you saying to the child? Do you want to learn from nature? So, how will you learn from nature? Nature will give you the experience. So, the direct experience that we are getting before that child, the organs of the child, the sense organs, the body's organs, train them. This is the concept of negative education. It makes path for motive by the appropriate exercise of the senses. They are saying, whose path will make the proper exercise of the mind? It facilitates the individual to opt the way. It will lead them to reality. They are saying that the individual will have the ability to do so so that they can go to reality when they will reach the age to understand it. They are saying that when they reach that age when they can understand it, they will understand it. Rousseau also believed that the child does not have the capacity to understand it. When the child grows up, who else says that? Negative education is without any ties and control mechanism. What is not to be done in negative education is not to be controlled. What is not to be done is not to be tied up. It is tied up. It is tied up. It is not taught. In this, the child learns according to his own pace. He is talking about psychological principles. He is talking that the child learns in the words of Rousseau I call negative education that which tends to perfect the organs that are the instruments of knowledge. They are saying that the senses are the gateway of knowledge. The senses are the gateway of knowledge. The senses are the gateway of knowledge. The senses are the gateway of knowledge. Because we experience knowledge through our sense organs. It is said that negative education means that the organs Why? Because they are the source of knowledge. Giving this knowledge directly is true education and this is the knowledge that is taught in the right minds. And that endeavours to prepare the way for reason. They say, what will happen to us that we will have the chance to make progress? Why? Because if our knowledge will be obtained. And negative education does not mean the time of idealism. They are not saying that you should become an Alasya. You should accept Alasya, that is not the purpose of Shraddha. In fact, you should stay away from it. This is Nishidatmoksha. It disposes the child to take the faith that will lend him to truth when he has reached the age to understand it. They are saying that when he reaches that age, when he understands truth, understanding, then he will understand it only when you develop his sense organs, training, and to goodness when he has acquired the faculty of recognising and loving. Here, the faculty does not mean the teacher, the faculty means the person's anger. In negative education, Russo has laid stress on training of sense organs. This has been clarified that we have to train sense organs. Why? Because through sense organs, we can experience the knowledge. Learning by experience is coming out again and again. In place of bookish knowledge. We do not have to give bookish knowledge to keep the child away from education. Children are not bound. The child is not bound. They are independent to bring about their development in natural environment according to their nature. Every child has a different nature and when you leave it in nature, it will become their own development according to their own nature. This is what Russo was saying. In his own words, if we say that education is a development from within, what is inside us is a development of education and not an equation from without. It comes through the working of natural instincts and not through response to external forces. So, all these were Russo's thoughts on education. If we talk about Karikulam, Patthikram used to say that he divided the child from infancy to youth. He said that he has been in infancy for 5 years. He lives in Balya in 5 to 12 years. He lives in Kishora in 12 to 15 years. He lives in Uva in 15 to 20 years. When we talk about infancy, what should be the Karikulam? When the child is in Sheshwa, what should you teach him? What should you teach him about his body and his sense organs? What should you teach him about his moral conversation in his mother tongue? It has been said for the past 100 years that teach a child in his mother tongue. Or at least teach a child in his mother tongue. And what should you teach him? Dibar from developing any bad habit. Don't let any bad habit affect him. And for that, what should you teach him? Just teach him about his senses. And let him do counselling. When he reaches Balya in childhood, you should learn everything through direct experience and observation. If you want to put him in nature, if you want to keep him away from books, then you will learn from experience, from practice. Don't tell anyone about his text book. Give him negative education. Meaning, keep him away from the foundation. Don't teach him about virtue, don't teach him about vice. Don't teach him to talk, don't make mistakes. Let him play, play, do movement, do action. And no rigid Karikulam should be present. So what should be the method? What should be the method? When he reaches adolescence, then you can give him a formal Karikulam where you can teach him natural sciences, learn languages, learn mathematics, learn some hands on experiences, like do woodwork, painting, painting is spelling wrong. He himself was a very good musician. And an active work based Karikulam shouldn't be book based. Meaning, he is opposing the theoretical aspect and is telling the practical aspect to follow. He is telling the practical aspect of learning by doing, learning by doing, learning by looking, learning by searching, learning by using. When he reaches youth, when he reaches youth, then you give him moral and religious education but actual experience. Not from a formal lecture. You can't teach him morality from lecturing. Education for bodily health, music and hands on. And learn from heuristic methods by searching and learning. Demonstration of real objects in teaching. Real objects. Then, what should be the aim of education? The purpose of education. The child has physical development, his sense organs training, he is well-developed in body group, he has the art of living, he has the knowledge of his rights and he can develop an independent personality. This is the purpose of education. This is the purpose of education. Then, some repetition in methods of teaching. No doubt, training of senses. The most important thing is learning of the mind. You teach him the knowledge of his knowledge, learning from his game, learning from his experience, learning from his child, learning from his research, learning from his experimental method, learning from his study method. Example is better than perception. You give him inspiration, how he gets social knowledge, how he gets social participation. You give him individual instruction Then if we talk about educational thoughts, then more or less they are saying that all is worthy when it comes from God's hand. They are saying that whatever we get from the hands of the Lord of nature, everything is precious, everything is good. But due to its impact of the society. But when you touch the society, this gradually gets spoiled. He was a supporter of negative education. He was a member of the school. He said, don't send the child to school. Leave the child in nature. Society is repeated with several effects and nature is completely true. They are saying that the society is full of bad things. It is just nature that is good. Man's behaviour has become unnatural and artificial due to civilization. They are saying that when we do civilization, we make the child un-natural. Since our organs are the gate-base of knowledge, they are saying that the knowledge of Manusha is the same. It is the same path that you can take knowledge from. That is why they are saying about his training again and again. And education by sense organs is free education. They are saying that you get education from the knowledge of Manusha. That is the real education. They were saying about discipline. They are saying that leave the child open. Don't call the child as a foundation or a rule. So their discipline is very famous quote that discipline by natural consequences. That means the child will learn from what he will get. So here they have a big critique. They said that how can you leave the child like this? The child doesn't know. He doesn't have so much wisdom, logic, reasoning. How will he be able to decide what to do? That is why the child should be checked. But the rules are extremely naturalistic. They said that leave the child in nature. Nature will teach him what is wrong and what is right. And from there he will be tested. So you will get the answer to this question. In the role of teacher, Rousseau said that teachers should protect the child from mental conflicts, repressions and mental disorders of all kinds. He said that the teacher should not interfere with the activities of the children. Because he didn't want to leave the child open. So he said that the teacher should not interfere with them. The teacher's duty is that he should see that the education of the students is the free development of their interests and motives. So what will the teacher do? He has to see whether the child's development is based on his interest and motives or not. The teacher has so much work. If we want to give a concluding statement about Rousseau, then his main concept is freedom. Natural thing. Let it grow naturally. Let it develop naturally. He said that freedom is the most important thing. He says that freedom requires two reasons. Because natural man is physically free.。 When nature's man is physically free, he doesn't feel any pressure from his body. Neither does he feel the state of the country, nor does he feel the state of the fellow men, or his principles. Secondly, he says that he is psychologically and spiritually free. He is not enslaved to any of the artificial needs that characterize modern society. Modern society should have a fridge, be an AC, be an AC car, The second sense of freedom, the freedom from need, makes up a particularly insightful and revolutionary component of Rousseau's philosophy. They say that the vision of Rousseau is not an insightful thing and it is revolutionary and revolutionary that we become free from the need. If we do not have any need, then we are not a slave to anything. This is a very big thing. Rousseau was very far-sighted and he thought that school is important, civilisation is important, civilised man is good. Then he said, keep away from civilisation. Let the child be natural, let the child be in nature. There is no greater education than nature. Nature can teach you a lesson. Sometimes these things become extremist, but most of the things, most of the things are right. This is Rousseau's philosophy. So you can elaborate on it and give your long answer, short answer, at least concept to it. I think it is good for you and enough for you. So thank you and don't forget to like and subscribe my channel, Explore Education. Done from my side.