[414] the problem [of] how to find a way of giving, by introducing the contents of such a group, without destroying the possibility of developing this group--and you cannot develop ANYthing whatsoever without being able to say No!--to be subjected to norms which you put AGAINST EVEN the symbols of this group. This is of course a basically Protestant^a attitude in a conformist^b group of society. Now we have in this way all three of them in their necessities, their dangers and their shortcomings. There are different agencies which are responsible for these three and use them predominantly. Obviously the first one, the humanistic^c education^d, is dependent on the house and its traditions--aristocratic--and the private teacher and his genius, and of course the possibility

of the pupil to BE developed to an all-embracing human actualization of his potentialities. The second is predominantly a matter of school and later on of the early apprentice work-communities. The third one is an introduction into the symbols^e and therefore is dependent on the bearers of these symbols, of the leaders of this group, of the institutions--for instance parades of representatives of a party, if it is a real social group; or religious services and processions. All this belongs to the third form of education. They TAKE IN those who are not yet in, and they strengthen the participation^f of those who ARE in. And this is the education which one can call education by existential participation. I had the experience in the twenties that the younger generation of Germany^g was absolutely dedicated to THIS form of education, against both of the others.

I myself belonged to the enlarged humanistic education, not in terms of a teacher in the house