Discussions with Teachers
GA 295
26 August 1919, Stuttgart
Translated by Helen Fox
Discussion Five
RUDOLF STEINER: It is most important that, along with all our other work, we should cultivate clear articulation. This has a kind of influence, a certain effect. I have here some sentences that I formulated for another occasion; they have no especially profound meaning, but are constructed so that the speech organs are activated in every kind of movement, organically. I would like you to pass these sentences around and repeat them in turn without embarrassment so that by constant practice they may make our speech organs flexible; we can have these organs do gymnastics, so to speak. Mrs. Steiner will say the sentences first as it should be done artistically, and I will ask each one of you to repeat them after her. These sentences are not composed according to sense and meaning, but in order to “do gymnastics” with the speech organs.1Elsewhere, Steiner stated: “In giving artistic shape and form to speech, healthy cooperation and harmonization of body, soul, and spirit manifests. The body shows whether it can incorporate the spirit correctly; the soul reveals whether the spirit truly lives in it; and the spirit is vividly present, working directly into the physical.” Creative Speech, Rudolf Steiner Press, London, 1978, p. 33. The original German speech exercises may be found in the appendix.
Dart may these boats through darkening gloaming
Name neat Norman on nimble moody mules
The N is constantly repeated, but in different combinations of letters, and so the speech organ can do the right gymnastic exercises. At one point two Ns come together; you must stop longer over the first N in “on nimble.”
Rattle me more and more rattles now rightly
In this way you can activate the speech organs with the right gymnastics.
I would recommend that you take particular care to find your way into the very forms of the sounds and the forms of the syllables; see that you really grow into these forms, so that you consciously speak each sound, that you lift each sound into consciousness. It is a common weakness in speech that people just glide over the sounds, whereas speech is there to be understood. It would even be better to first bring an element of caricature into your speech by emphasizing syllables that should not be emphasized at all. Actors, for example, practice saying friendly instead of friendly! You must pronounce each letter consciously. It would even be good for you to do something like Demosthenes did, though perhaps not regularly. You know that, when he could not make any progress with his speaking, he put pebbles on his tongue and through practice strengthened his voice to the degree that it could be heard over a rushing river; this he did to acquire a delivery that the Athenians could hear.
I will now ask Miss B. to introduce the question of temperaments. Since the individual child must be our primary consideration in teaching, it is proper that we study the basis of the temperaments with the maximum care. Naturally when we have a class it is not possible to treat each child individually. But you can give much individual treatment by having on one side, let’s say, the phlegmatics and melancholics, and the sanguine and choleric children on the other side; you can have them take part in a lively interchange, turning now to the group of one temperament, and then calling on another group for answers, saying this to one group and that to another. In this way individualization happens on its own in the class.
A comprehensive picture was presented of the temperaments and their treatment.
RUDOLF STEINER: You have given a good account of what was spoken of in our conversations together on this subject. But you may be going too far when you assert, with regard to the melancholic temperament, that it has a decided inclination toward piety. There is only one little word lacking: “often.” It is also just possible that the melancholic disposition in children is rooted in pronounced egoism, and in no way has a religious tendency. With adults you can leave out the little word “often,” but in young children the melancholic element often masks a pronounced egoism. Melancholic children are often dependent on atmospheric conditions; the weather often effects the melancholic temperament. The sanguine children are also dependent on atmospheric conditions, but more in their moods, in the soul, whereas the melancholic children are affected more unconsciously by the weather in the physical body.
If I were to go into this question in detail from the standpoint of spiritual science, I would have to show you how the childish temperament is actually connected with karma, how in the child’s temperament something really appears that could be described as the consequence of experiences in previous lives on Earth. Let’s take the concrete example of a man who is obliged in one life to be very interested in himself. He is lonely and is thus forced to be interested in himself. Because he is frequently absorbed in himself, the force of circumstances causes him to be inclined to unite his soul very closely with the structure of his physical body, and in the next incarnation he brings with him a bodily nature keenly alive to the conditions of the outer world. He becomes a sanguine individual. Thus, it can happen that when someone has been compelled to live alone in one incarnation, which would have retarded the person’s progress, this is adjusted in the next life through becoming a sanguine, with the ability to notice everything in the surroundings. We must not view karma from a moral but from a causal perspective. When a child is properly educated, it may be of great benefit to the child’s life to be a sanguine, capable of observing the outer world. Temperament is connected, to a remarkable degree, with the whole life and soul of a person’s previous incarnation.
Dr. Steiner was asked to explain the changes of temperaments that can occur during life, from youth to maturity.
RUDOLF STEINER: If you remember a course of lectures that I once gave in Cassel about the Gospel of St. John, you will recall the remarks I made concerning the relationship of a child to his or her parents.2The Gospel of St. John: And Its Relation to the Other Gospels, Anthroposophic Press, Hudson, NY, 1982. It was stated there that the father-principle works very strongly in the physical body and the I, and that the mother-principle predominates in the etheric and astral bodies. Goethe divined this truth when he wrote the beautiful words:
From my father I have my stature [connected with the physical body] and the serious conduct of life [connected with the I], from my dear mother my happy nature [connected with the etheric body] and joy in creative fantasy [connected with the astral body].
There is extraordinary wisdom in these words. What lives in the human being is mixed and mingled in a remarkable way. Humankind is an extremely complicated being. A definite relationship exists in human beings between the I and the physical body, and again a relationship between the etheric body and the astral body. Thus, the predominance of one can pass over into the predominance of another during the course of life. For example, in the melancholic temperament the predominance of the I passes into the predominance of the physical body, and in a choleric person it even cuts across inheritance and passes from the mother element to the father element, because the preponderance of the astral passes over into a preponderance of the I.
In the melancholic temperament the I predominates in the child, the physical body in the adult. In the sanguine temperament the etheric body predominates in the child and the astral body in the adult. In the phlegmatic temperament the physical body predominates in the child and the etheric body in the adult. In the choleric temperament the astral body predominates in the child, the I in the adult. But you can only arrive at a true view of such things when you strictly remember that you cannot arrange them in a tabulated form, and the higher you come into spiritual regions, the less this will be possible.
The observation was expressed that a similar change can be found in the sequence of names of the characters in The Guardian of the Threshold and The Souls’ Awakening.3See Rudolf Steiner, The Four Mystery Plays: The Portal of Initiation, The Soul’s Probation, The Guardian of the Threshold, and The Souls’ Awakening, trans. Adam Bittleston, Rudolf Steiner Press, London, 1983. The four plays will be published individually; see The Souls’ Awakening: Soul and Spiritual Events in Dramatic Scenes, trans. Ruth and Hans Pusch, Anthroposophic Press, Hudson, NY, 1995 (the other plays will follow).
RUDOLF STEINER: There is a change there that is definitely in accordance with the facts; these Mystery Plays must be taken theoretically as little as possible. I cannot say anything if the question is put theoretically, because I have always had these characters before me just as they are, purely objectively. They have all been taken from real life. Recently, on another occasion, I said here that Felix Balde4Felix Balde is a character in the Mystery Plays. was a real person living in Trumau, and the old shoemaker who had known the archetype of Felix is called Scharinger, from Münchendorf. Felix still lives in the tradition of the village there. In the same way all these characters whom you find in my Mystery Plays are actual individual personalities.
Question: In speaking of a folk temperament can you also speak of someone as belonging to the temperament of one’s nation? And a further question: Is the folk temperament expressed in the language?
RUDOLF STEINER: What you said first is right, but your second suggestion is not quite correct. It is possible to speak of a folk temperament in a real sense. Nations really have their own temperaments, but the individual can very well rise above the national temperament; one is not necessarily predisposed to it. You must be careful not to identify the individuality of the particular person with the temperament of his whole nation. For example, it would be wrong to identify the individual Russian of today with the temperament of the Russian nation. The latter would be melancholic while the individual Russian of today is inclined to be sanguine.
The quality of the national temperament is expressed in the various languages, so one could certainly say that the language of one nation is like this, and the language of another nation is like that. It is true to say that the English language is thoroughly phlegmatic and Greek exceptionally sanguine. Such things can be said as indications of real facts. The German language, being two-sided in nature, has very strongly melancholic and also very strongly sanguine characteristics. You can see this when the German language appears in its original form, particularly in the language of philosophy. Let me remind you of the wonderful quality of Fichte’s philosophical language or of some passages in Hegel’s Aesthetics, where you find the fundamental character of German language expressed with unusual clarity. The Italian folk-spirit has a special relationship to air, the French a special connection with fluids, the English and American, especially the English, with the solid earth, the American even with the sub-earthly—that is, with earth magnetism and earth electricity. Then we have the Russian who is connected with the light—that is, with earth’s light that rays back from plants. The German folk-spirit is connected with warmth, and you see at once that this has a double character—inner and outer, warmth of the blood and warmth of the atmosphere. Here again you find a polaric character even in the distribution of these elementary conditions. You see this polarity at once—this cleavage in the German nature, which can be found there in everything.
Question: Should the children know anything about this classification according to temperament?
RUDOLF STEINER: This is something that must be kept from the children. Much depends on whether the teacher has the right and tactful feeling about what should be kept hidden. The purpose of all these things we have spoken of here is to give the teacher authority. The teacher who doesn’t use discretion in what to say cannot be successful.
Students should not be seated according to their attainments, and you will find it advantageous to refuse requests from children to sit together.
Question: Is there a connection between the temperaments and the choice of foreign languages for the different temperaments of the children?
RUDOLF STEINER: Theoretically that would be correct, but it would not be advisable to consider it given current conditions. It will never be possible to be guided only by what is right according to the child’s disposition; we have to remember also that children must make their way in the world, and we have to give them what they need to do that. If in the near future, for example, it appeared as if a great many German children had no aptitude for learning English, it would not be good to give in to this weakness. Just those who show a weakness of this kind may be the first to need to know English.
There was a discussion on the task given the previous day: to consider the case of a whole class that, incited by one child, was guilty of very bad behavior; for example, they had been spitting on the ceiling. Some views were expressed on this matter.
RUDOLF STEINER interjected various remarks: It is a very practical method to wait for something like this to wear out, so that the children stop doing it on their own. You should always be able to distinguish whether something is done out of malice or high spirits.
One thing I would like to say: Even the best teacher will have naughtiness in the class, but if a whole class takes part it is usually the teacher’s fault. If it isn’t the teacher’s fault, you will always find that a group of children are on the teacher’s side and will be a support. Only when the teacher has failed will the whole class take part in insubordination.
If there has been any damage, then of course it is proper that it should be corrected, and the children themselves must do this—not by paying for it, but with their own hands. You could use a Sunday, or even two or three Sundays to repair any damage. And remember, humor is also a good method of reducing things to an absurdity, especially minor faults.
I gave you this problem to think on to help you see how to tackle something that occurs when one child incites the others. To demonstrate where the crux of the matter lies, I will tell you a story of something that actually occurred. In a class where things of this kind often happened, and where the teachers could not cope with them, one of the boys between ten and twelve years old went up to the front during the interval between two lessons and said, “Ladies and gentlemen! Aren’t you ashamed of always doing things like this, you good-fornothings? Just remember, you would all remain completely stupid if the teachers didn’t teach you anything.” This had the most wonderful effect.
We can learn something from this episode: When a large proportion of the class does something like this because of the instigation of one or more of the children, it may very well happen that, also through the influence of a few, order may be restored. If a few children have been instigators there will be others, two or three perhaps, who express disapproval. There are almost always leaders among the children, so the teacher should pick out two or three considered suitable and arrange a conversation with them. The teacher would have to make it clear that behavior of this kind makes teaching impossible, and that they should recognize this and make their influence felt in the class. These children will then have just as much influence as the instigators, and they can make things clear to their classmates. In any situation like this you must consider how the children affect one another.
The most important thing here is that you should evoke feelings that will lead them away from naughtiness. A harsh punishment on the part of the teacher would only cause fear and so on. It would never inspire the children to do better. The teacher must remain as calm as possible and adopt an objective attitude. That does not mean lessening the teacher’s own authority. The teacher could certainly be the one to say, “Without your teachers you would learn nothing and remain stupid.” But the teacher should allow the correction be carried out by the other children, leaving it to them to make their schoolmates feel ashamed.
We thus appeal to feelings rather than to judgment. But when the whole class is repeatedly against the teacher, then the fault must be looked for in the teacher. Most naughtiness arises because the children are bored and lack a relationship with their teacher.
When a fault is not too serious it can certainly be very good for the teacher to do just what the pupils are doing—to say, for example, when the pupils are grumbling, “Well I can certainly grumble too!” In this way the matter is treated homeopathically, as it were. Homeopathic treatment is excellent for moral education. It’s also a good way to divert the children’s attention to something else (although I would never appeal to their ambition). In general, however, we seldom have to complain of such misdemeanors. Whenever you allow mischievousness of this kind to be corrected by other children in the class, you work on the feelings to reestablish weakened authority. When another pupil stresses that gratitude must be felt toward the teacher, then the respect for authority will be restored again. It is important to choose the right children; you must know your class and pick those suited to the task.
If I taught a class I could venture to do this. I would try to find the ringleader, whom I would compel to denounce, as much as possible, such conduct, to say as many bad things about it as possible, and I would ignore the fact that it was this student who had done it. I would then bring the matter quickly to a close so that a sense of uncertainty would be left in the minds of the children, and you will come to see that much can be gained from this element of uncertainty. And to make one of the rascals involved describe the incident correctly and objectively will not in any way lead to hypocrisy. I would consider any actual punishment superfluous, even harmful. The essential thing is to arouse a feeling for the objective damage that has been caused and the necessity of correcting it. If teaching time has been lost in dealing with this matter, then it must be made good after school hours, not as a punishment but simply to make up the time lost.
I will now present a problem of a more psychological nature: if you have some rather unhealthy “goody-goodies” in the class—children who try to curry favor in various ways, who have a habit of continually coming to the teacher about this, that, and the other, how would you treat them? Of course you can treat the matter extremely simply. You could say: I am simply not going to bother with them. But then this peculiarity will be turned into other channels: these “good” children will gradually become a harmful element in the class.
Fünfte Seminarbesprechung
Rudolf Steiner: Es ist wirklich von einer großen Bedeutung, daß wir auch nebenhergehend etwas pflegen von deutlichem Sprechen. Es hat einen gewissen Einfluß, eine gewisse Wirkung. Nun sind bei einer anderen Gelegenheit einmal Sätze von mir formuliert worden, die weniger daraufhin ausgebildet sind, einen besonders tiefen Sinn zu geben, als darauf, daß man die Sprachorgane dabei in einer eben organischen Weise in Bewegung bringt, auch in allseitige Bewegung bringt. Ich möchte nun, daß Sie, ganz ohne Genieren, diese Sätze herumgehen lassen und jeder sie nachspricht, auf daß wir an solchen Sätzen, indem wir sie öfter üben, unsere Sprachorgane elastisch machen, sie gleichsam in Turnen versetzen. Frau Dr. Steiner wird diese Sätze kunstgerecht vorsprechen, und ich bitte die einzelnen Teilnehmer, die Sätze dann nachzusprechen. Diese Sätze sind nicht auf das Verstehen, nicht auf den Sinn, sondern auf das Turnen der Sprachorgane hin gebildet.
Daß er dir log uns darf es nicht loben
Im wirklichen Konversationston wird es nicht so ausgesprochen, aber jetzt sollten Sie sich in die Silben hineinlegen und jeden Buchstaben abwechselnd sprechen.
Nimm nicht Nonnen in nimmermüde Mühlen
Das n kehrt immer wieder, aber in anderen Verbindungen, und da turnt das Sprachorgan in richtiger Weise. Auch das ist darin, daß zwei n zusammenkommen; bei den m «in nimm» länger verweilen. Lange i, kurze i.
Rate mir mehrere Rätsel nur richtig
Die Organe kommen so in richtige turnerische Tätigkeit. Ich würde Ihnen empfehlen, besonders darauf zu achten, sich in die Laute, in die Silben förmlich hineinzulegen, förmlich hineinzuwachsen, auf ein solch deutliches Hineinwachsen wirklich aufmerksam zu sein, so daß Sie sich bewußt sind: Sie sprechen jeden Laut. Sie heben jeden einzelnen Laut ins Bewußtsein herauf. Das ist ja die Schwäche, die man sehr häufig im Sprechen hat, daß man hüpft über Laute, während das Sprechen dazu bestimmt ist, verstanden zu werden, und eher so lauten soll, daß man zunächst in einer gewissen karikierten Weise Silben betont, die gar nicht betont werden. Schauspieler üben sich, nicht «Freunderl» zu sagen, sondern «Freunderl». Also mit Bewußtsein jeden Buchstaben aussprechen! Es wird sogar gut sein, daß Sie solche Prozeduren machen, wenn auch nicht regelmäßig, wie der Demosthenes. Sie wissen ja, als es gar nicht mehr ging, hat er Steinchen auf die Zunge gelegt und seine Stimme durch Übung so gestärkt, daß sie das Rauschen des Stromes übertönte, um eine Sprache sich anzueignen, in der er von den Athenern gehört werden konnte.
Jetzt würde ich Fräulein B. bitten, uns die Sache der Temperamente vorzubringen. Da wir auf das Individuum hin orientiert den Unterricht geben wollen, ist es richtig, daß wir gerade auf die Grundlage der Temperamente eine große Sorgfalt verwenden. Natürlich kann man, wenn man eine Klasse hat, nicht auf jedes Kind hin individualisieren. Aber dadurch wird viel individualisiert, daß Sie auf der einen Seite, sagen wir, phlegmatische und melancholische, auf der anderen Seite sanguinische und cholerische Kinder haben, und nun lebendig durcheinander bald diese, bald jene teilnehmen lassen, bald zu der Gruppe dieses Temperaments sich wenden, und wiederum in den Antworten die anderen vornehmen, zu den einen dieses, zu den anderen jenes sprechen. Dadurch wird von selbst in der Klasse individualisiert.
B. gibt ihre zusammenfassende Darstellung der Temperamente und ihrer Behandlung.
Rudolf Steiner: Das ist Ihre Ausführung. Nun, das ist sehr schön durchgeführt, was hier konversierend gesprochen worden ist. Es geht aber doch vielleicht zu weit, wenn Sie vom melancholischen Temperament geradezu behaupten, daß es zu ausgesprochener Frömmigkeit neigt. Es fehlt hier nur das kleine Wörtchen «oft». Es kann aber durchaus auch der Fall vorkommen, daß die melancholische Anlage bei Kindern auf einem ausgesprochenen Egoismus beruht, und daß es durchaus nicht religiöser Hang ist. Beim Erwachsenen wird man das Wörtchen «oft» weglassen können; beim kleinen Kinde ist das Melancholische sehr oft die Maske für einen ausgesprochenen Egoismus. — Melancholische Kinder sind oftmals abhängig von der Witterung, sie kündet sich auch an in melancholischen Kindern. Das sanguinische Kind ist auch abhängig von der Witterung, aber stimmungsgemäß, mehr seelisch, während das melancholische Kind mehr leiblich unbewußt davon abhängt.
Wenn ich diese Frage eingehend geisteswissenschaftlich besprechen wollte, müßte ich Ihnen zeigen, wie sich namentlich das kindliche Temperament in das Karma einreiht, wie wirklich in dem kindlichen Temperament etwas herauskommt, was man als Folge bezeichnen kann von Erlebnissen in früherem Erdendasein. Nehmen wir im Konkreten einmal einen Menschen, der sich in einem Leben sehr stark für sich selbst interessieren muß. Dadurch, daß er einfach einsam ist, muß er sich für sich selber interessieren. Dadurch, daß er sehr häufig sich mit sich beschäftigen muß, dadurch kommt er insbesondere in die Lage, das Seelische in dem Gefüge seines Körperlichen auszugestalten, gezwungen durch die Verhältnisse, und er bringt in die nächste Inkarnation mit ein sehr stark ausgebildetes Leibliches mit Bezug auf sein Verhältnis zur Außenwelt. Er wird ein Sanguiniker. Dadurch kann es vorkommen, wenn einer durch seine Inkarnation zur Einsamkeit gezwungen ist und dadurch zurückgeblieben wäre, so gleicht er das in der nächsten Inkarnation dadurch aus, daß er ein Sanguiniker ist, der auf alles aufmerksam sein kann. Wir dürfen ja das Karma nicht moralisch betrachten; wir müssen es kausalisch betrachten. Daß er ein Sanguiniker werden kann, angewiesen auf die Beobachtung der Außenwelt, das kann ja ein sehr Gutes für das Leben abgeben, wenn es in der richtigen Weise erzogen wird. Das Temperament hängt ja in hervorragendem Maße mit den allgemeinen Antezedenzien des Menschenwesens, des menschlichen Gemütslebens zusammen.
T. fragt, was der Verschiebung der Temperamente im Laufe des Lebens von der Jugend zum Erwachsenen zugrunde liegt.
Rudolf Steiner: Wenn Sie sich erinnern an einen Vortragszyklus, den ich einmal in Kassel gehalten habe, «Das Johannes-Evangelium im Verhältnis zu den drei anderen Evangelien», so werden Sie darin Bemerkungen finden über die Beziehungen eines Kindes zu seinen Eltern. Sie werden darin ausgeführt finden, wie in dem physischen Leib und in dem Ich das väterliche Prinzip sehr stark nachwirkt, wie in dem Ätherleib und Astralleib das mütterliche Prinzip vorherrscht. Goethe hat das geahnt, indem er den schönen Ausspruch getan hat:
Vom Vater hab’ ich die Statur, - was sich auf den physischen Leib bezieht
Des Lebens ernstes Führen, — was sich auf das Ich bezieht
Vom Mütterchen die Frohnatur - was an den Ätherleib gebunden ist
Und Lust zu fabulieren - was an den Astralleib gebunden 1st.
In diesen Worten liegt eigentlich eine ganz außerordentliche Weisheit. Sie sehen, daß in einer merkwürdigen Weise zusammengemischt ist, was eigentlich im Menschen ist. Der Mensch ist eben eine durchaus komplizierte Wesenheit. Es besteht eine bestimmte Verwandtschaft zwischen Ich und physischem Leib, und eine Verwandtschaft zwischen Atherleib und Astralleib. Im Laufe des Lebens kann daher eines in das andere übergehen. Es geht also zum Beispiel über beim melancholischen Temperament das Vorherrschen des Ich in das Vorherrschen des physischen Leibes. Und beim Choleriker überspringt es sogar die Vererbung und geht über vom Mütterlichen ins Väterliche, denn es geht über vom Überwiegen des Astralischen zum Überwiegen des Ich.
Beim melancholischen Temperament des Kindes herrscht vor das Ich, beim Erwachsenen der physische Leib. Beim sanguinischen Temperament des Kindes herrscht vor der Ätherleib, beim Erwachsenen der Astralleib. Beim phlegmatischen Temperament des Kindes herrscht vor der physische Leib, beim Erwachsenen der Ätherleib. Beim cholerischen Temperament des Kindes herrscht vor der Astralleib, beim Erwachsenen das Ich.
Sie werden eben solche Dinge nur richtig ansehen, wenn Sie streng festhalten, daß man nicht die Dinge nebeneinanderstellen kann, um so weniger, je höher Sie in geistige Gebiete kommen.
J.: Es findet sich ein ähnlicher Übergang in der Personenanordnung im Personenverzeichnis im «Hüter der Schwelle» und «Der Seelen Erwachen».
Rudolf Steiner: Dort drinnen ist eine Verwandlung, die durchaus den Tatsachen entsprechen kann. Diese Mysterien müssen Sie so nehmen, daß Sie sie möglichst wenig theoretisch aufnehmen. Ich kann gar keine Auskunft geben, wenn die Frage theoretisch gestellt wird, weil ich sie eben nur so, wie sie dastehen, rein gegenständlich vor mir gehabt habe. Die Personen sind alle nur der Wirklichkeit entnommen. Ich habe neulich bei einem gewissen Anlaß hier vorgetragen, daß es den Felix Balde gegeben hat, in Trumau, und jener alte Schuhmacher, der den Urtyp des Felix Balde noch gekannt hat, heißt Scharinger, aus Münchendorf. Es ist auch der Felix dort noch in der Tradition vorhanden. So sind alle diese Gestalten, die Sie in meinen Mysterien finden, einzelne wirkliche Persönlichkeiten.
N.: Wenn man von Volkstemperament spricht, kann man dann auch von der Zugehörigkeit eines einzelnen zu dem Temperament seines Volkes reden? — Und weiter: drückt sich das Volkstemperament in der Sprache aus?
Rudolf Steiner: Das erste ist richtig, das zweite nicht ganz. In realem Sinne kann man von einem Volkstemperament sprechen. Völker haben wirklich ihre Temperamente, doch der einzelne kann sich gut herausheben aus dem Volkstemperament, es wirkt nicht prädisponierend auf das Individuum. Man muß darauf Rücksicht nehmen, daß man ja nicht die Individualität des einzelnen identifiziert mit dem Temperament des ganzen Volkes. Es würde zum Beispiel ganz falsch sein, wenn man den Russen als einzelnen von heute identifizierte mit dem Temperament des russischen Volkes. Dieses wäre melancholisch, während der einzelne Russe als solcher heute vielleicht mehr sanguinisch ist. Jeder hat die Möglichkeit, zu seinem eigenen Temperament zu kommen.
Die Art des Volkstemperamentes drückt sich selbst in den einzelnen Sprachen aus. Man kann daher durchaus sagen: die Sprache des einen Volkes ist so, die des anderen so. Man kann sagen: Die englische Sprache ist durchaus phlegmatisch und die griechische im eminentesten Sinne sanguinisch. Solche Dinge lassen sich durchaus als Bezeichnung von realen Wirklichkeiten sagen. Die deutsche Sprache hat, wie ja im Deutschen vielfach ein Mittelding gegeben ist, sehr starke melancholische und sehr starke sanguinische Züge. Das können Sie sehen, wenn die deutsche Sprache in ihrer Grundform zum Ausdruck kommt, wie namentlich in der mehr philosophischen Rede. Ich erinnere an die wunderbare Prägung der philosophischen Rede bei Fichte und an einzelne Stellen von Hegels «Ästhetik». Da werden Sie finden, daß da der Grundcharakter der deutschen Sprache ganz besonders deutlich zum Ausdruck kommt.
Der italienische Volksgeist hat eine besondere Verwandtschaft mit der Luft; der französische einen besonderen Zusammenhang mit allem Flüssigen; der englisch-amerikanische, namentlich der englische, einen Zusammenhang mit dem Festen, der amerikanische sogar mit dem Unterirdischen, nämlich mit dem Erdmagnetismus und der Erdelektrizität. Dann der russische mit dem Licht, aber mit dem von der Erde, von den Pflanzen zurückgestrahlten Licht. Der deutsche mit der Wärme, von der Sie gleich finden werden, daß sie einen Doppelcharakter hat: nämlich innere und äußere, Blutwärme und atmosphärische Wärme. Da finden Sie gleich einen polarischen Charakter, auch bei der Zuteilung zu diesen Elementarzuständen. Auch da finden wir dieses Polarische, dieses Zwiespältige des deutschen Wesens, das also in allem drinnen ist.
Es wird gefragt: Dürfen die Kinder etwas wissen von dieser Einteilung in Temperamente?
Rudolf Steiner: Das ist dasjenige, was man hinter den Kulissen halten muß. Es kommt sehr viel darauf an, daß der Lehrer taktvoll weiß, was er hinter den Kulissen zu halten hat. Alles dasjenige, was wir hier besprechen, das ist dazu da, um dem Lehrer die Autorität zu verleihen. Wenn er sich verraten würde, würde er nicht durchkommen.
Die Schüler sollen nicht nach ihren Leistungen gesetzt werden. Wünsche der Schüler, einmal nebeneinander zu sitzen, nicht zu berücksichtigen, ist gerade nützlich.
Frage: Können auch ältere Schüler nach Temperamenten gesetzt werden?
Rudolf Steiner: Ja, selbst bis in die Hochschule hinein; aber nach dem fünfundzwanzigsten Jahr ist das nicht mehr nötig. Sie würden Ihnen auch dann nicht mehr folgen.
L. fragt: Gibt es einen Zusammenhang zwischen den Temperamenten und der Auswahl der Sprachen für die verschiedenen Temperamente der Kinder?
Rudolf Steiner: Das würde theoretisch schon richtig sein, aber es empfiehlt sich nicht, unter den heutigen Verhältnissen darauf Rücksicht zu nehmen. Man wird gar nicht in die Möglichkeit versetzt sein, allein dasjenige zu berücksichtigen, was nur nach der Anlage des Kindes richtig ist, sondern auch, daß das Kind in der Welt fortkommen muß, und daß man ihm das gibt, was es zu seinem Fortkommen brauchen wird. Wenn sich in der nächsten Zeit herausstellen sollte, daß sehr viele deutsche Kinder nicht geeignet sein sollten für die Aufnahme der englischen Sprache, so wäre es gut, dieser Schwäche nicht nachzugeben. Gerade diejenigen, die eine solche Schwäche zeigen, die werden erst recht die englische Sprache brauchen.
Es folgt die Besprechung der gestern gestellten Aufgaben: daß die ganze Klasse, von einem einzelnen angestiftet, eine große Ungezogenheit begeht, daß sie zum Beispiel an die Decke spucken. Es werden einige Ansichten darüber vorgebracht.
Rudolf Steiner macht dazu verschiedentlich Zwischenbemerkungen: Das Hinarbeiten auf das Langweiligwerden einer solchen Sache, so daß die Kinder dann von selber aufhören, sie fortzusetzen, das ist schon ganz zweckmäßig. -— Man muß stets unterscheiden, ob etwas aus Bosheit oder aus Übermut geschieht.
Etwas möchte ich bemerken: Auch der beste Lehrer wird die Ungezogenheiten nicht vermeiden können. Wenn aber die ganze Klasse mittut, dann ist wohl meist der Lehrer schuld. Liegt die Schuld nicht am Lehrer, so ist immer ein Teil der Schüler auf Seite des Lehrers und wird für ihn Partei ergreifen. Nur wenn er schuldig ist, macht die ganze Klasse mit.
Ist aber eine Sachbeschädigung vorgekommen, dann ist es schon richtig, daß sie wieder gutgemacht werden muß, und die Kinder selbst müssen sie wieder gutmachen, aber durch ihre eigene Tätigkeit, nicht nur indem sie dafür zahlen. Man kann ja den Sonntag oder zwei bis drei Sonntage dafür benützen, daß sie zusammen die Sache wieder gutmachen.
Dann ist ja wahr, ein gutes Mittel zum Ad-absurdum-Führen ist auch der Humor, besonders bei kleinen Ungezogenheiten. Aber hier beruhte das Ganze auf Anstiften.
Ich habe diese Aufgabe gestellt, damit man sieht, wie man eingreift in etwas, was auf Anstiften geschieht. Da muß man die Voraussetzung dieses Falles in Betracht ziehen.
Um auf das Wesentliche hinzuweisen, will ich Ihnen folgende tatsächliche Begebenheit erzählen: In einer Klasse, wo solche Dinge oft vorgekommen waren, und die Lehrer sich gar nicht zu helfen wußten, ging in einer Zwischenpause einer der Jungen, der etwa zehn bis zwölf Jahre alt war, auf das Katheder hinauf und sagte: Meine Herren Lausbuben, schämt ihr euch nicht, immer wieder solche Sachen zu machen? Bedenkt doch, daß ihr alle ganz dumm bleiben würdet, wenn die Lehrer euch nichts lehren würden. — Dieses hatte die größte Wirkung.
Wir können aus diesem Fall das Folgende lernen: Wenn so etwas vorkommt, daß auf Anstiftung eines einzelnen oder einiger weniger ein großer Teil der Klasse so etwas tut, dann ist ja wohl zu erwarten, daß wiederum durch den Einfluß einiger weniger die Sache wieder gutgemacht werden kann. Wenn einige da sind, die die Anstifter sind, so werden andere da sein, zwei bis drei, die der Klasse ihre Meinung sagen. Meistens gibt es Führer. Es müßte daher der Lehrer zwei oder drei solche Führer heraussuchen, müßte eine Besprechung veranstalten mit zweien oder dreien, die er für eine solche Besprechung für geeignet hält. Denen hätte der Lehrer klarzumachen, wie ja eine solche Sache den Unterricht unmöglich macht, und wie sie dieses erkennen und ihren Einfluß auf die Klasse geltend machen sollten. Die haben dann ebensoviel Einfluß wie die Anstifter und können es ihren Mitschülern klarmachen. Man muß eben bei einer solchen Sache in Rücksicht ziehen, wie die Kinder aufeinander wirken.
Es handelt sich hier vor allem um Hervorrufen von Gefühlen, die bewirken, daß man zurückkommt von der Sache. Ein rohes Bestrafen seitens des Lehrers würde ja nur Furcht und ähnliches bewirken. Es werden da nicht die Gefühle hervorgerufen, die zur Besserung führen. Es wird schon der Lehrer möglichst gelassen bleiben und sich dann objektiv verhalten müssen. Damit ist nicht gemeint, daß er sich selber nicht sollte als Autorität behandeln. Das kann er schon sagen: «Ihr würdet nichts lernen und dumm bleiben ohne den Lehrer». Der Lehrer soll nicht zu bescheiden sein, mit den drei von den Schülern das zu besprechen, die für ihn eintreten. Aber die Strafe sollte er schon von den Mitschülern ausführen lassen, indem diese bei ihren Kameraden das Gefühl der Beschämung erzeugen. Dadurch wird an das Gefühl appelliert, nicht an das Urteil. Wenn man aber die ganze Klasse wiederholt gegen sich hat, dann muß man die Schuld bei sich selber suchen. Ein guter Teil der Ungezogenheit liegt in dem Umstand, daß die Kinder sich langweilen und keine Beziehung zum Lehrer haben.
Sehr gut ist es auch, wenn es sich nicht um eine allzuschlimme Sache handelt, dasjenige, was die Schüler tun, nun seinerseits auch zu tun; etwa indem der Lehrer sagt, wenn die Schüler brummen: «Nun ja, brummen kann ich ja auch», und die Sache sozusagen homöopathisch behandelt. Homöopathisch zu sein, ist für die moralische Erziehung etwas außerordentlich Gutes. Auch das Interesse einfach auf etwas anderes abzulenken, ist eine gute Methode. Niemals aber würde ich an den Ehrgeiz der Schüler appellieren.
Wir werden im allgemeinen nicht viel über solche Ungezogenheiten zu klagen haben.
Wenn man die Korrektur der Ungezogenheit einer Klasse durch Mitschüler selbst vornehmen läßt, dann wird auf das Gefühl gewirkt, um dadurch die geschädigte Autorität wieder zu heben. Wenn ein anderer Schüler die Dankbarkeit hervorhebt, die man dem Lehrer gegenüber haben muß, dann wird die Autorität wieder aufgerichtet.
Es wird sich darum handeln, daß man die Richtigen herausnimmt. Man muß die Klasse kennen und diejenigen herausfinden, die zu einer solchen Mission geeignet sein könnten. Würde ich eine Klasse unterrichten, ich könnte das wagen. Ich würde versuchen, gerade den Rädelsführer herauszufischen und ihn zwingen, zu schimpfen, so sehr er nur kann über die Sache zu schimpfen, und würde mir gar nichts merken lassen, daß er es selbst getan hat. Ich würde die Sache dann schnell beendigen, daß ein Rest von Unklarheit zurückbleibt, und Sie werden sehen, daß gerade unter diesem Rest von Unklarheit, der da bleibt, manches erreicht würde. Einen an der Sache beteiligten Schlingel zu veranlassen, die Sache richtig und objektiv zu charakterisieren, das wird nicht zu Scheinheiligkeit führen. Alles wirkliche Strafen würde ich für überflüssig halten, ja sogar für schädlich. Das, worauf es ankommt, ist, ein Gefühl zu erzeugen vom objektiven Schaden, der angerichtet worden ist, und von der Notwendigkeit, diesen Schaden wieder gutzumachen. Und wenn eine Zeitversäumnis eingetreten ist durch eine Störung im Unterricht, so ist es, nicht um zu strafen, sondern um Versäumtes nachzuholen, notwendig, dieses zu einer anderen als zur Schulzeit nachzuholen. Die Gebärde des Strafens darf gar nicht gebraucht werden. Man muß den Status quo ganz ruhig wieder herstellen lassen, in der Form einer Notwendigkeit.
Nun würde ich eine schon mehr ins Psychologische gehende Frage vorlegen: Wenn in der Klasse sogenannte schädliche Frömmlinge sind, die in der verschiedensten Weise sich Liebkind machen wollen, die diesen Charakter haben, daß sie einem mit allerlei kommen und immer wieder kommen, wie Sie diese behandeln möchten.
Sie können natürlich die Sache furchtbar einfach machen. Sie können sagen: Ich kümmere mich einfach nicht um sie. -— Dann aber wird diese Eigenschaft auf andere Weise abgelenkt bei Kindern, die so veranlagt sind. Sie entwickeln sich, diese Brävlinge, zu irgend etwas, was der Klasse nachteilig ist, wenn man sich bloß ablehnend verhält. Man muß nachdenken, was mit ihnen am besten gemacht wird im ganzen Verlauf des Unterrichts und der Erziehung.
Fifth Seminar Discussion
Rudolf Steiner: It is really very important that we also cultivate clear speech. It has a certain influence, a certain effect. On another occasion, I formulated some sentences that are designed less to convey a particularly deep meaning than to set the speech organs in motion in an organic way, in all directions. I would now like you to pass these sentences around without any embarrassment and have everyone repeat them, so that by practicing them often, we can make our speech organs more flexible, putting them through their paces, as it were. Dr. Steiner will recite these sentences in a professional manner, and I ask the individual participants to repeat the sentences. These sentences are not formed for understanding or meaning, but for exercising the speech organs.
That he lied to you should not be praised.
In real conversation, it is not pronounced this way, but now you should focus on the syllables and say each letter alternately.
Do not take nuns into tireless mills.
The n recurs repeatedly, but in different combinations, and there the speech organs exercise in the correct manner. This is also evident in the fact that two n's come together; linger longer on the m in “in nimm.” Long i, short i.
Guess several riddles correctly for me.
This puts the organs into proper gymnastic activity. I would recommend that you pay particular attention to literally lying down in the sounds, in the syllables, literally growing into them, really paying attention to such clear growth, so that you are aware that you are speaking every sound. You raise every single sound into consciousness. This is the weakness that one very often has in speaking, that one skips over sounds, whereas speaking is intended to be understood and should rather sound as if one is initially emphasizing syllables in a somewhat exaggerated way that are not emphasized at all. Actors practice not saying “Freunderl” but “Freunderl.” In other words, pronounce every letter consciously! It will even be good for you to do such exercises, even if not as regularly as Demosthenes. You know, when it was no longer possible, he placed small stones on his tongue and strengthened his voice through practice so that it drowned out the noise of the stream, in order to acquire a language in which he could be heard by the Athenians.
Now I would like to ask Miss B. to present the subject of temperaments to us. Since we want to teach in a way that is oriented toward the individual, it is right that we take great care in laying the foundation of temperaments. Of course, when you have a class, you cannot individualize for every child. But a great deal of individualization is achieved by having, on the one hand, let's say, phlegmatic and melancholic children, and on the other hand, sanguine and choleric children, and then letting them participate in a lively mix, sometimes this group, sometimes that group, sometimes turning to the group of this temperament, and then again, in the answers, addressing the others, speaking to some about this, to others about that. In this way, individualization takes place naturally in the class.
B. gives her summary of the temperaments and how to deal with them.
Rudolf Steiner: That is your explanation. Well, what has been said here in conversation has been done very nicely. But perhaps you go too far when you claim that the melancholic temperament tends toward pronounced piety. The only thing missing here is the little word “often.” It may well be the case that the melancholic disposition in children is based on pronounced egoism and that it is by no means a religious inclination. In adults, the word “often” can be omitted; in small children, melancholy is very often a mask for pronounced egoism. Melancholic children are often dependent on the weather, which also manifests itself in melancholic children. The sanguine child is also dependent on the weather, but in terms of mood, more emotionally, while the melancholic child is more physically and unconsciously dependent on it.
If I wanted to discuss this question in depth from a spiritual scientific point of view, I would have to show you how the child's temperament fits into karma, how something really emerges in the child's temperament that can be described as a consequence of experiences in a previous earthly existence. Let us take a concrete example of a person who has to be very interested in himself in one life. Because he is simply lonely, he has to be interested in himself. Because he very often has to occupy himself with himself, he is forced by circumstances to develop his soul within the structure of his physical body, and he brings into his next incarnation a very strongly developed physical body in relation to his relationship with the outside world. He becomes a sanguine person. Thus, if someone is forced into loneliness by his incarnation and would otherwise be retarded, he compensates for this in his next incarnation by being a sanguine person who can be attentive to everything. We must not view karma morally; we must view it causally. The fact that he can become a sanguine person, dependent on observing the outside world, can be very good for life if he is educated in the right way. Temperament is closely related to the general antecedents of the human being, of the human emotional life.
T. asks what is the basis for the shift in temperaments in the course of life from youth to adulthood.
Rudolf Steiner: If you remember a series of lectures I once gave in Kassel, “The Gospel of John in Relation to the Three Other Gospels,” you will find remarks in it about the relationship of a child to its parents. You will find explanations there of how the paternal principle has a very strong influence on the physical body and the ego, and how the maternal principle predominates in the etheric body and astral body. Goethe sensed this when he made the beautiful statement:
From my father I have my stature, - which refers to the physical body
The seriousness of life, — which refers to the ego
From my mother, the cheerful nature — which is connected to the etheric body
And the desire to tell stories — which is connected to the astral body.
These words actually contain a remarkable wisdom. You can see that what is actually in human beings is mixed together in a strange way. Human beings are thoroughly complicated beings. There is a certain relationship between the ego and the physical body, and a relationship between the etheric body and the astral body. In the course of life, one can therefore merge into the other. In the melancholic temperament, for example, the predominance of the ego gives way to the predominance of the physical body. And in the choleric temperament, it even skips heredity and passes from the maternal to the paternal, because it passes from the predominance of the astral to the predominance of the ego.
In the melancholic temperament of the child, the ego predominates; in the adult, the physical body predominates. In the sanguine temperament of the child, the etheric body predominates; in the adult, the astral body predominates. In the phlegmatic temperament of the child, the physical body predominates; in the adult, the etheric body predominates. In the choleric temperament of the child, the astral body predominates; in the adult, the ego predominates.
You will only see such things correctly if you strictly adhere to the principle that things cannot be juxtaposed, especially the higher you go into spiritual realms.
J.: There is a similar transition in the arrangement of persons in the list of characters in “The Guardian of the Threshold” and “The Awakening of Souls.”
Rudolf Steiner: There is a transformation there that may well correspond to the facts. You must take these mysteries as they are, without interpreting them too theoretically. I cannot give any information if the question is asked theoretically, because I have only seen them as they are, purely objectively. The characters are all taken from reality. I recently gave a lecture here on a certain occasion that Felix Balde existed in Trumau, and that old shoemaker who still knew the archetype of Felix Balde is called Scharinger, from Münchendorf. Felix is also still present there in tradition. So all these characters you find in my Mysteries are individual real personalities.
N.: When we speak of national temperament, can we also speak of an individual's belonging to the temperament of his people? — And further: is national temperament expressed in language?
Rudolf Steiner: The first is correct, the second not quite. In a real sense, one can speak of a national temperament. Nations really do have their temperaments, but the individual can easily stand out from the national temperament; it does not predispose the individual. One must take into account that one does not identify the individuality of the individual with the temperament of the entire nation. It would be completely wrong, for example, to identify Russians as individuals today with the temperament of the Russian people. This would be melancholic, whereas individual Russians today are perhaps more sanguine. Everyone has the opportunity to develop their own temperament.
The nature of the national temperament is expressed in the individual languages. One can therefore say that the language of one people is like this, and that of another is like that. One can say that the English language is quite phlegmatic and the Greek language is sanguine in the most eminent sense. Such things can certainly be said to describe real realities. The German language, as is often the case in German, has very strong melancholic and very strong sanguine traits. You can see this when the German language is expressed in its basic form, as in more philosophical speech. I am reminded of the wonderful character of Fichte's philosophical speech and of individual passages in Hegel's “Aesthetics.” There you will find that the basic character of the German language is expressed very clearly.
The Italian national spirit has a special affinity with the air; the French one has a special connection with everything liquid; the English-American, especially the English one, has a connection with the solid, the American one even with the subterranean, namely with the earth's magnetism and electricity. Then the Russian one with light, but with the light reflected back from the earth, from plants. The German spirit has a connection with warmth, which you will soon discover has a dual character: namely, internal and external, blood warmth and atmospheric warmth. You will immediately find a polar character here, even in the allocation to these elementary states. Here, too, we find this polarity, this ambivalence of the German character, which is thus present in everything.
The question is asked: Should children know anything about this classification of temperaments?
Rudolf Steiner: That is something that must be kept behind the scenes. It is very important that the teacher tactfully knows what to keep behind the scenes. Everything we are discussing here is intended to give the teacher authority. If he were to betray himself, he would not succeed.
Pupils should not be seated according to their performance. It is particularly useful not to take into account pupils' wishes to sit next to each other.
Question: Can older students also be seated according to temperament?
Rudolf Steiner: Yes, even up to college age; but after the age of twenty-five, this is no longer necessary. They would no longer follow you anyway.
L. asks: Is there a connection between temperaments and the choice of languages for the different temperaments of children?
Rudolf Steiner: That would be correct in theory, but it is not advisable to take this into account under today's circumstances. It will not be possible to take into account only what is right for the child's disposition, but also that the child must get ahead in the world and that they must be given what they need to get ahead. If it should become apparent in the near future that a large number of German children are not suited to learning English, it would be good not to give in to this weakness. It is precisely those who show such a weakness who will need the English language all the more.
This is followed by a discussion of the tasks set yesterday: that the whole class, instigated by one individual, commits a major act of misbehavior, for example, spitting at the ceiling. Several views are put forward on this.
Rudolf Steiner makes various comments on this: Working towards making such a thing boring, so that the children then stop doing it of their own accord, is quite appropriate. — One must always distinguish whether something is done out of malice or exuberance.
I would like to note something: even the best teacher will not be able to avoid misbehavior. But if the whole class joins in, then it is usually the teacher's fault. If the fault does not lie with the teacher, then some of the students will always be on the teacher's side and will take his or her side. Only if the teacher is at fault will the whole class join in.
However, if damage to property has occurred, then it is right that it must be repaired, and the children themselves must repair it, but through their own actions, not just by paying for it. They can use one or two or three Sundays to repair the damage together.
Then it is true that humor is also a good means of reducing something to absurdity, especially in the case of minor misbehavior. But here the whole thing was based on incitement.
I set this task so that people can see how to intervene in something that is happening as a result of incitement. In this case, the circumstances of the case must be taken into account.
To point out the essentials, I would like to tell you the following true story: In a class where such things had often happened and the teachers did not know what to do, one of the boys, who was about ten to twelve years old, went up to the teacher's desk during a break and said: "Gentlemen, you rascals, aren't you ashamed of doing such things over and over again? Consider that you would all remain completely ignorant if the teachers did not teach you anything." This had the greatest effect.
We can learn the following from this case: When something like this happens, when a large part of the class does something at the instigation of one or a few individuals, then it is to be expected that the influence of a few individuals can make things right again. If there are some who are the instigators, there will be others, two or three, who will tell the class what they think. Most of the time there are leaders. The teacher should therefore select two or three such leaders and arrange a meeting with two or three whom he considers suitable for such a discussion. The teacher should make it clear to them how such behavior makes teaching impossible, and how they should recognize this and exert their influence on the class. They then have as much influence as the instigators and can make this clear to their classmates. In such a situation, one must take into account how the children influence each other.
The main thing here is to evoke feelings that cause people to reconsider the matter. Harsh punishment on the part of the teacher would only cause fear and similar reactions. This does not evoke the feelings that lead to improvement. The teacher must remain as calm as possible and then behave objectively. This does not mean that he should not treat himself as an authority. He can say: “You would learn nothing and remain stupid without the teacher.” The teacher should not be too modest to discuss this with the three students who stand up for him. But he should have the punishment carried out by the classmates, who will make their comrades feel ashamed. This appeals to the emotions, not to judgment. But if you repeatedly have the whole class against you, then you have to look for the fault in yourself. A good part of the misbehavior lies in the fact that the children are bored and have no relationship with the teacher.
It is also very good, if it is not too serious a matter, to do what the students are doing, for example, when the students are humming, the teacher says: “Well, I can hum too,” and treat the matter homeopathically, so to speak. Being homeopathic is extremely good for moral education. Simply diverting interest to something else is also a good method. But I would never appeal to the students' ambition.
In general, we will not have much to complain about in terms of such misbehavior.
If the correction of misbehavior in a class is left to the classmates themselves, then the feeling is affected in order to restore the damaged authority. If another student emphasizes the gratitude that must be shown to the teacher, authority will be restored.
It will be a matter of picking the right people. You have to know the class and find those who might be suitable for such a mission. If I were teaching a class, I could dare to do that. I would try to pick out the ringleader and force him to rant and rave as much as he can about the matter, and I would not let on that he did it himself. I would then quickly end the matter, leaving a residue of uncertainty, and you will see that it is precisely under this residue of uncertainty that much would be achieved. Getting one of the rascals involved in the matter to characterize it correctly and objectively will not lead to hypocrisy. I would consider any real punishment superfluous, even harmful. What matters is to create a sense of the objective damage that has been done and the need to make amends for it. And if time has been lost due to a disruption in class, it is necessary to make up for what has been missed outside of school hours, not in order to punish, but to make up for what has been missed. The gesture of punishment must not be used at all. The status quo must be restored calmly, in the form of a necessity.
Now I would like to pose a question that is more psychological in nature: If there are so-called harmful piety seekers in the class who want to make themselves popular in various ways, who have the character of coming to you with all sorts of things and coming back again and again, how would you like to deal with them?
Of course, you can make things terribly simple. You can say: I just don't care about them. — But then this trait will be diverted in other ways in children who are predisposed to it. These goody-goodies will develop into something that is detrimental to the class if you simply reject them. You have to think about what is best for them in the overall course of teaching and education.