The sentiment one of Rousseau's most famous quotes: "man is born free; and everywhere he is in chains," is certainly seen in his essay Emile.  In Emile, Rousseau shows that human beings are best when they are natural, and excluded from the corrupting company of others.  This essay describes the ways that Rousseau, as the tutor of Emile, an imaginary student, would foster and care for his development.  Emile will do what pleases him, without specific studies, duties, or expectations.  Rousseau writes "there is no original perversity in the human heart."  At age twelve Emile is ready to begin a more formal education, although Rousseau warns that children should not be exposed to religion too early.  The selection from Emile ends with Rousseau's comments on the education required of women, who are, according to him, in existence to please men.

One of my prime arguments against Rousseau's theory is that it is almost entirely impossible to make it real.  If, as Rousseau suggests, children flourish in isolation away from society and formal education, then why does "nature" have them born into a family of two parents?  I think children learn best in a community with teachers, family, and peers.  Also, I do not believe that there is a natural judgement of children.  For example, children will not make "good" judgements on food and clothing.  In my childhood I recall several arguments between my parents and myself over whether I ought to wear a winter coat or eat my vegetables.  As a child I was not best aware of what was good for me.  Now Rousseau might say that if I hadn't worn a winter coat I would have been "naturally" punished by the discomfort of the cold and I would have learned to wear a coat.  But, what if I did not learn?  Or what if I become ill from not wearing a coat?  I think children need the guidance of adults to maintain, at the very least, their health.  I also think that ideas and thoughts are cultivated by discussion within a community.  I think a child who had only experience might fail to make some critical connections that children with an early formal education could make.  Finally, it is hardly necessary to mention that I disagree with Rousseau's sexist gender role ideas.  In schools, though, it is important to mention that these are not valid arguments, so that our female students will not be negatively influenced by these archaic thoughts.

As teachers, I think it is important to maintain a balance.  Though school is important, it is also important for students to have the time to enjoy the wonder of their childhood.  Long division is important, but so are snow forts and hopscotch.  I believe we discussed the importance of childhood in class, as several of my classmates voiced concern about the difficulty of school and stressed that children should be given opportunity to play.

Rousseau Web Resources
http://www2.lucidcafe.com/lucidcafe/library/96jun/rousseau.html
http://www.wabash.edu/Rousseau/
http://www.utm.edu/research/iep/r/rousseau.htm
http://www.knuten.liu.se/~bjoch509/philosophers/rou.html
 
Methods
In our discussion of Rousseau, In our discussion of Rousseau, Mr. Hilton mentioned two outside books that related to what we were discussing: The Courage to Teach and Jefferson's Children.  I think connections like this are very valuable, and increase the possibility that we will be able to find something useful in a particular philosophy.