Pedagogical Anthropology, Maria Montessori [online e book reader TXT] 📗

the actual size of that of the ox, while considered in its relation to bodily bulk, he has more brain than the smallest rat (man = 1/40; rat = 1/43). A volume so far exceeding the proportions found in animals, is beyond doubt directly related to human intelligence.

Relation between Cerebral and Intellectual Development in Man.—This ends our examination of the generic question of the relation between cerebral volume and intellect.

Granting these biological principles, and wishing to apply them to normal man, let us go back to our first question: "Do persons of greater intelligence have a greater cerebral volume, and consequently a larger head?"

There is an extensive literature upon this question, the tendency of which is to decide it affirmatively.

Parchappe has made a comparative study between writers of recognized ability and simple manual workers, and has found that the former have a development of the head notably in excess of the latter.

Broca took measurements, in various hospitals, of the heads of physicians and male nurses, and found a greater development of head in the case of the physicians.

Lebon made a study of cranial measurements in men of letters, tradesmen, the nobility and domestic servants, and found the maximum development among the men of letters and the minimum among the servants. The tradesmen, who at all events are performing a work of social utility, stand next to the men of letters; while the aristocrats show some advantage over the domestics. Bajenoff took his measurements from famous persons on the one hand and from convicted assassins on the other, and found a greater head development among the former.

Enrico Ferri has made similar researches among soldiers who have had a high-school education and those who are uneducated, and has found a more developed cranium among the educated soldiers.

I also have made my own modest contribution to this important question, by seeking to determine the difference in cranial volume between the school-children who stand respectively at the head and foot of their class, and have found among children of the age of ten a mean cranial circumference of 527 millimetres for the more intelligent and of only 518 millimetres for the less intelligent.

Similar results were obtained by Binet in his researches among the elementary schools of Paris. He found among children of the age of twelve that the brightest had a mean cranial circumference of 540 millimetres and those at the foot of their class a mean of only 530 millimetres. The following table gives a parallel between these various cranial measurements:

CRANIAL MEASUREMENTS (in Millimetres)[39]

Binet Children in the elementary schools of Paris, from 11 to 13 years of age
Montessori Children in the elementary schools of Rome, from 9 to 11 years of age

Measurements Binet's figures Montessori's figures Pupils chosen for intelligence Pupils chosen as backward Difference Pupils chosen for intelligence Pupils chosen as backward Difference Maximum circumference of cranium. 540 530 +10 527 518 +9 Length of cranium 181 177 +4 180 177 +3 Breadth of cranium 150.4 146.2 +4.2 143 140 +3 Height of cranium 123.3 124 -0.7 130 127 +3 Minimum frontal diameter. 104 102 +2 99 98 +1 Height of forehead 46 45.5 +0.5 57 56 +1

By calculating the cranial capacities according to Broca'a method, I obtained:

Cranial capacity in the best pupils chosen 1557 cu. cm. the worst pupils chosen 1488 cu. cm.

From all these manifold researches above cited, we can reach no other conclusion than that individuals of greater intelligence have a larger quantity of brain; or else that individuals with a greater quantity of brain are more intelligent.

There is a subtle distortion of this principle, which many sociological anthropologists have taken as their starting-point, especially in Germany, in their attempt to establish a biological basis for the Schopenhauerian theories of Friedrich Nietzsche.

According to these, the persons who have acquired high social positions are biologically superior (possessing a greater cerebral mass), and the same may be said of conquering races as compared with the conquered. Differences in caste are to be explained in the same way, and on this ground nature sanctions the social inferiority of woman.

This is a question of the greatest importance, which merits a vast amount of discussion.

What Sort of Man is the Most Intelligent?—Straightway, a first serious objection suggests itself: What sort of persons are the most intelligent? Are they really those who have attained the higher academic degrees and the most eminent social positions? Consequently, is the Prime Minister more intelligent than the Assistant Secretary of State, and the latter more intelligent than the Head of a Department, and he again than the door-keeper?

Are literary productions and the acquisition of laurels reliable tests of intelligence? Is this man a doctor because he is more intelligent, and that man a hospital attendant because he is less intelligent?

It is evident that there exist in the social world certain privileges of caste, which may raise to the pinnacle of literary glory or to a clamorous notoriety certain persons who owe their rise to favoritism and trickery; or at least, so-called "literary fame" must be dependent upon the possibility of getting writings published, which another man perhaps would have had no way of bringing before the public so as to make them known and appreciated; just as, on the other hand, there are men of genius who are destined to feel their inborn intelligence suffocating under the cruel tyranny of existing economic conditions, which punish pauperism with obscurity and hold protection and favours at a distance.

A thousand various conditions of our social environment hinder powerful innate activities from finding expression and attaining elevated social positions. Now, when we start to measure these different categories of persons, shall we measure the more or the less fortunate individuals, those more or those less favoured by economic conditions of birth and environment, or shall we measure those persons who are actually the more and the less intelligent?

And even in school can we be sure that the child whom we judge the most intelligent is actually so? Studies in experimental psychology made in quite recent times of men whose works justify their being placed in the ranks of geniuses, have shown that these men of genius were never, in their school-days, either at the head of their class, or winners of any competitions. Consequently, we have not yet learned the means of judging intelligence.

If we stop to think of the way in which the intelligence of pupils was judged up to only a few years ago, according to pedagogic methods that were a remnant of the pietistic schools, this will help us to form some idea. The more intelligent ones were those best able to recite dogmatic truths from memory. And even to-day we have not advanced very far above that level.

As a general rule that pupil is considered the most intelligent who best succeeds in echoing his teacher and in modeling his own personality as closely as possible upon that of his preceptor.

This fact is so well known that it has come to be utilised as one of the clever tricks for obtaining higher marks even in university examinations, and for winning competitions; it is known that the prize is reserved for the student who can repeat most faithfully and proclaim most eloquently the master's own ideas.

Here is precisely one of the most fundamental problems offered by scientific pedagogy: how to diagnose the human intelligence, and distinguish the person who is intelligent from the person who is not. A difficult task, or rather a difficult problem.

The Influence of Economic Conditions upon the Development of the Brain.—Certain factors, due to environment, exert an influence upon the development of the cerebral volume; this fact opens up another whole series of interesting questions.

Among the factors due to environment, the leading place is held by nutrition, dependent upon economic conditions.

Niceforo contends that among the various social classes, those who can obtain the best nourishment have the greatest development of brain, and consequently of head. He offers in evidence the figures summarised in the following table:

CIRCUMFERENCE OF THE HEADS OF

Boys of the age of Rich Sons of small tradesmen and clerks Poor 11 years 534.9 529.7 524.8 12 years 537.1 530.3 524.9 13 years 537.8 532.4 528.6 14 years 545.4 533.3 528.4

In short, there is a gradation of cranial volume corresponding to the economic status in society. This is a condition easy to understand: we simply find repeated in this particular the same thing that we have already seen happen to the body as a whole; the organism in its entirety and consequently each separate part of it—if it is to develop in accordance with its special biological potentiality and so attain the limits of finality set for it—must receive nourishment. It is only natural that children who, during their period of growth, are deprived of sufficient and suitable nutrition should remain inferior in development to those who had the advantage of an abundance of the proper kind of food. The influence of the economic factor is indisputable. Consequently, reverting once more to the studies above cited, may we not conclude that the man of letters, the physician, the person of distinction have a greater development of head than the manual labourer, the hospital attendant, the illiterate, simply because it was their good fortune to obtain better nutriment, through belonging to the wealthy social classes?

The Influence of Exercise upon Cerebral Development.—The second interesting question is in reference to the influence which exercise may have upon the development of the brain. As early as 1861 Broca investigated this question in a classic work: De l'influence de l'éducation sur le volume et la forme de la tête ("The influence of education on the volume and form of the head"), in which he arrived at the following conclusion: that a suitable exercise (intellectual culture, education, hygiene) does have an influence on the development of the brain, in the same way as with any other organ, as, for example, the striped muscles, which gain in volume and strength and beauty of form through gymnastic exercise. "Consequently," exclaims Broca enthusiastically, "education not only has the power of rendering mankind better; it has also the marvellous power of rendering man superior to himself, of enlarging his brain and perfecting his form!"

"Popular education means the betterment of the race."

Accordingly we might say, relying on the above-mentioned studies, that the man of letters, the physician, the person of distinction have a more highly developed head than the manual workman, the hospital attendant and the illiterate, because they exercised their brain to a greater extent, and not because they were more intelligent. This, however, is a question which differs profoundly from that which we were previously considering, nutrition, because in this case exercise, in addition to developing the organ, gives its own actual and personal contribution to the intelligence.

Therefore, we are able to be creators of intelligence and of brain tissue, which in turn becomes the creative force of our civilisation. A system of instruction which, in place of over-straining the brain, should aid it to develop and perfect itself, stimulating it to a sort of auto-creation, would truly be, as Broca says, "capable of rendering man superior to himself." This is what is being sought by scientific pedagogy, which has already laid the foundation of "cerebral hygiene."

We are still very far to-day from realising this highest human ambition! We do not yet know the basic laws of the economy of forces that would lead to a stimulation of the human activities to the point of creation; on the contrary, we are still at a primitive period, in which many of the environing conditions interfere, to the point of preventing the human germ to attain its natural biological finality. In short, we know how to obtain artificially an arrest of development; but we have not yet learned the art of aiding and enriching nature!

The Influence of the Biological Factor upon Cerebral Development.—What conclusion ought we to reach from what has been said up to this point? Upon what does the cerebral volume depend, in all its individual variations, resting on the common biological bases of race, normality and