But here comes the effort of thought.' It is easier to see the conditions in their separate; ness, to insist upon one at the expense of the other, to make antagonists of them, than to discover a reality to which each belongs. The easy thing is to seize upon something in the nature of the child, or upon something in the developed consciousness of the adult, and insist upon that as the key to the whole prob-a lem. When this happens a really serious prac tical problem — that of interaction — is trans formed into an unreal, and hence insoluble, theoretic problem. Instead of seeing the edu-a cative steadily and as a whole, we see conﬂict ing terms. We get the case of the child the curriculum; of the individual nature 275. Social culture. Below all other divisions in pedagogic opinion lies this opposition.