we will require of them no promises
they may be tempted to break. If in my absence some anonymous mischief
has been done, I will beware of accusing Emile, or of asking "Was it
you?"[8] For what would that be but teaching him to deny it? If his
naturally troublesome disposition obliges me to make some agreement
with him, I will plan so well that any such proposal shall come from
him and never from me. Thus, whenever he is bound by an engagement he
shall have an immediate and tangible interest in fulfilling it. And if
he ever fails in this, the falsehood shall bring upon him evil results
which he sees must arise from the very nature of things, and never from
the vengeance of his tutor. Far from needing recourse to such severe
measures, however, I am almost sure that Emile will be long in learning
what a lie is, and upon finding it out will be greatly amazed, not
understanding what is to be gained by it. It is very plain that the
more I make his welfare independent of either the will or the judgment
of others, the more I uproot within him all interest in telling
falsehoods.

When we are less eager to instruct we are also less eager to exact
requirements from our pupil, and can take time to require only what is
to the purpose. In that case, the child will be developed, just
because he is not spoiled. But when some blockhead teacher, not
understanding what he is about, continually forces the child to promise
things, making no distinctions, allowing no choice, knowing no limit,
the little fellow, worried and weighed down with all these obligations,
neglects them, forgets them, at last despises them; and considering
them mere empty formulas, turns the giving and the breaking of them
into ridicule. If then you want to make him faithful to his word, be
discreet in requiring him to give it.

The details just entered upon in regard to falsehood may apply in many
respects to all duties which, when enjoined upon children, become to
them not only hateful but impracticable. In order to seem to preach
virtue we make vices attractive, and actually impart them by forbidding
them. If we would have the children religious, we tire them out taking
them to church. By making them mumble prayers incessantly we make them
sigh for the happiness of never praying at all. To inspire charity in
them, we make them give alms, as if we disdained doing it ourselves.
It is not the child, but his teacher, who ought to do the giving.
However