At first glance Peterson’s advice on discipline seems very different from what we know about Montessori discipline. But is it? Join me as I dive into each expert’s writing on the goal of discipline, the use of punishments, and tactics for effective discipline.
Pin me!
This post contains affiliate links. For more info, see here.
Do you do this too?
Each time I come across a new idea, technique, method, or philosophy that has to do in the slightest with early childhood education, I wonder, “Is this what Maria Montessori was saying? Or is it different? Do I instantly disagree, or does this add to or change my understanding?”
‘Obsessed’ might be the word to describe my level of interest in human development and the strategies related to its nurturing.
Which is why I read Rule 5 of Jordan Peterson’s 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos with great attention.
It’s called, “Don’t Let Your Children Do Anything That Makes You Dislike Them,” (unexpected title) and it’s all about the discipline of children.
I overanalyzed it as I read, looking for clues. Does Jordan Peterson agree with Maria Montessori on discipline? Do his ideas add to or change my understanding of human development?
Here is what I found.
Peterson Discipline vs. Montessori Discipline
Jordan Peterson’s Views on Discipline
“Discipline is a careful combination of mercy and long-term judgement.”
-Jordan Peterson
That unexpected chapter title gives away what Peterson says is the goal of discipline: social well-being. “Poorly socialized children have terrible lives.” They need to be liked. Sounds shallow, but he has a point. We’re social creatures, and we can’t be happy if we’re not part of a community. People who are disliked are often rejected by the community. So it’s harder for them to be happy.
And there is more to it than just being liked. “A well socialized child will be introduced to the world by people who are pleased to do so…this will do more for his eventual individuality than any cowardly parental attempt to avoid day to day conflict and discipline.”
Socialization. That’s the goal, before wonder and independence, because it leads to them. And good behavior, learned through discipline, is the key.
Peterson has a few principles to help:
- “Limit the rules.”
- “Use the minimum necessary force.”
There are more, but these two help us understand how Peterson believes parents should discipline their children.
Establish rules, and enforce them.
Can’t argue with that.
Peterson proposes interesting tactics for rule enforcement.
- Intervene immediately. (He believes children need to learn before the age of 4.)
- Teach good behavior with simple steps.
- Use rewards and punishments, using negative emotions mercifully. (Montessori people: Don’t freak out. Keep reading.)
- Battle if necessary.
According to Peterson, “the fundamental moral question is not how to shelter children completely from misadventure and failure, so they never experience any fear or pain, but how to maximize their learning so that useful knowledge may be gained with minimum cost.”
Please pin me!
How Maria Might Agree or Disagree
Generally, I’d say Maria Montessori agrees with Jordan Peterson. Discipline is essential, and it needs to happen early. There are some areas of disagreement; closer inspection will show us where.
Let’s start at the top.
The Goal of Discipline
Peterson believes socialization is more important than independence, but that it helps foster individuality. Montessori believes independence is pretty darn important, so that the child can fulfill his role as part of the community. Seems to me they both agree that the end goal of child-rearing is a whole human being who thrives in a community.
On to the next.
Peterson’s Principles of Discipline
Peterson says, “Limit the rules.” Montessori says, “A child needs freedom within limits.” Here the ideas are compatible. Montessori uses the word ‘limit’ instead of ‘rule’ to help the adults understand how to set these limits/rules. They are not arbitrary, but help the child use her freedom well. The combination of thoughtfully set limits and freedom gives us rules, but not too many.
Peterson says, “Use the minimum necessary force.” Montessori says, “Sweetness, severity, medicine, do not help if the child is mentally hungry.” Here the ideas differ. Montessori believes freely chosen, purposeful activity, within limits, in a good environment, is the cure to character problems in young children. Thus, she definitely disagrees with Peterson’s use of arbitrary punishment, e.g. pinching. Montessori discipline does, however, make use of logical consequences, implemented firmly and consistently by the adult. A logical consequence to poor behavior, e.g. being removed from the playground, could be what Peterson means when he says minimum necessary force, if it is enough to discipline the child. He clearly doesn’t believe a logical consequence is always enough.
On to the tactics.
Tactics: Peterson vs. Montessori
Intervene immediately
Peterson believes in swift intervention, and he stresses the need for children to learn good behavior as much as possible before the age of 4. Here, Montessori would heartily agree. She believes that the years from birth to age 6, “when nature is still busy in the perfecting of many newly formed powers,” are the best for addressing “defects.” If not, these defects will have “an influence…on the developing awareness of right and wrong.”
Immediate intervention applies on a daily basis as well. In my training on Montessori discipline, I learned to intervene immediately and firmly whenever a child was using a material inappropriately, or hurting himself, another child, or the environment. We gave lessons in good behavior and modeled it ourselves. I learned how to give children a kind yet authoritative look that meant, “you should do as I say.”
Teach good behavior with simple steps
Peterson writes about teaching a child to set the table, by first showing him how to hold and carry a plate. (#somontessori) The style may differ slightly, but the idea is the very same. As I mentioned above, there are Montessori lessons on all types of good behavior, from apologizing to blowing one’s nose to closing the door quietly. Likewise, every single Montessori lesson is given by modeling the right way, and breaking it down into simple steps. Montessori teachers don’t cut corners. We show every step, and then let the children give it a try.
Use rewards and punishments, using negative emotions mercifully
Now before you exit outa here because this is so not Montessori, let’s look at a few of Peterson’s examples of effective rewards and punishments.
When your daughter finally opens up to you when you ask about her day, Peterson says, “Pay attention. That’s the reward.” So he’s not necessarily talking about stickers and candy. Similarly, “time out can be an extremely effective form of punishment, particularly if the misbehaving child is welcome as soon as he controls his temper.” So he’s not always talking about pinches and spanks (though he thinks they might be necessary in certain situations.)
In practice, then, Montessori discipline and Peterson discipline might look very similar, but there is a difference. The Montessori method stresses the importance of treating children with respect (e.g. paying attention) regardless of their behavior. It is not a reward. Likewise, a time out is used as a consequence, as I mentioned above.
When it comes to using negative emotions, Peterson isn’t being harsh. On the contrary, he is looking for a more merciful route. “The judgmental and uncaring broader social world will mete out conflict and punishment far greater than that which would have been delivered by an awake parent. You can discipline your child, or you can turn that responsibility over to the harsh, uncaring, judgemental world.” He knows the world is a difficult place, and that suffering is part of every human’s experience. Montessori recognizes this, too. In Montessori classrooms, teachers are kind, but they do not shelter children from the unpleasant realities of life. If someone breaks a material, that’s the end of that material, at least for a good while. There will be no immediate replacement, no matter how much everyone misses it.
I think the biggest difference then is that Peterson advises parents to sometimes inflict negative emotions. The Montessori method permits them as a reality and as a consequence, but doesn’t advise directly causing them.
Battle if necessary
Peterson writes about the time he went to battle with his two-year-old son to make him eat at dinnertime instead of drop food all over the floor. “I prepared for war.” He’s being funny, but he means it. “A patient adult can defeat a two-year-old, hard as that is to believe.” Peterson was firm and kind, and he won. The boy ate his dinner, they took a nap together, and “he liked me a lot better when he woke up than he had before he was disciplined.” So all is well. But Montessori might disagree…
In my training on Montessori discipline, I learned to never engage in a battle of wills. In such a battle, someone has to lose. If I lost, the child would lose respect and trust for me, and would be less likely to obey me later. If the child lost, her own developing will would weaken. Since the will is a gift from God, is what makes us human, and is a necessary component of self-discipline, it’s worth protecting. Instead of battling, I learned to make the objective clear, in a firm, kind and confident voice, before the chance for a fight became possible. Then the child sees it is a good idea to obey, and chooses to do so or face the consequences. This tactic worked well for me, but I am sure there will be times when a battle seem inevitable. So be it, as a last resort.
Quick note from Peterson: “An angry child should sit by himself until he calms down. Then he should be allowed to return to normal life. That means the child wins – instead of his anger.”
What do you think?
There is one more difference between Peterson and Montessori.
Maria Montessori is very scientific and idealistic, for example, “If, at conception and during gestation, at birth and the period following birth, the child has been scientifically treated, he should at three be a model individual.” Nature is on our side, we just need to cooperate.
Peterson, however, sees things a little differently, “But human beings are evil, as well as good, and the darkness that dwells forever in our souls is also there in no small part in our younger selves.”
These views shape their methods of discipline, and the tactics they propose. And now I want to know, what do you think? Which view/method makes more sense to you? Do you think they are all that different? Is it possible to use both? Let’s chat in the comments!
Jean Marie
Montessori’s method has the benefit of the “prepared environment.” It is THE THING that allows us to respond to children as we do. She says that it is through daily opportunities for concentration and engagement with meaningful activities that the child is able to develop their character, intellect, self-discipline, and control of the will.
My guess is that Peterson does not really know much about the “prepared environment. Therefore, he could not really imagine the difference it is able to make in a child’s behavior and development.
True. The Montessori prepared environment in particular is genius (in my opinion) in the way it helps the development of concentration and character. Peterson does remark on the effect certain types of activities have on development. I wonder what he would think of a Montessori environment and whether it would change his views.
I was shocked by the way Peterson treated his son, by forcing food down his throat, and showing his power that way. As you said a child’s will is important. It made me think of my strong will child, that is not a particular pleaser. It made me feel a bit guilty by maybe missing a chance on making him obedient and a pleasant companion. This book really triggered me and in my opinion is miles away from Montessori for the main issue , respect, and what’s more important obedience or freedom to express himself? I’m still trying to digest it, thank you for the insights
Hi Barbara, Thanks for sharing your thoughts! In response to your question, “what’s more important obedience or freedom to express himself,” would it help to look at it from the angle of the freedom and discipline coin? In the Montessori philosophy, freedom and discipline must always come together, so really, one is not more important than the other. They are equally valuable, two sides of the same coin. And while Montessori is referring to self-discipline, she recognizes that obedience is a part of self-discipline. If you’d like, you can read more about obedience and discipline here. As with everything good in life, it seems there is a fine balance to walk. We don’t want our children to become people pleasers, but we do want them to be pleasant, at least to some extent. It’s difficult if not impossible to get that balance exactly right. Anyways, this is really interesting stuff. Thanks for getting the conversation going!
Wow! Well done! I am a huge fan of Jordan Peterson and also a follower of Maria Montessori – NEVER thought I would see both their names in the same article.
Thanks for reading it! I thought it would be fun to take a look at how those two think about the same topic. ~ Jean Marie
Hello,
I’m not sure Canada’s laws on child abuse but in America most of what he described, in most states today, would be considered child abuse. Of the most spanking-friendly psychologists I know, none would condone what he described in dealing with their children. Perhaps he has some good points. However, his ill advise eclipses any of it and ‘kills the witness’ of any good points he may have otherwise had. Not to mention, his character in recent news displays a dichotomy between his words and his actions. Please consider re-writing your post as I am sure you may not have heard of him in full detail but perhaps picked up a book by him. https://nypost.com/2020/02/08/jordan-peterson-recovering-from-tranquilizer-addiction-in-russia/
There are at least 3 better suited psychologists I would recommend for anyone looking into how to discipline effectively. First, is Doctor Ray Guardendi. He is a clinical psychologist and father of 10. Second, Drs. John Towsend and Henry Cloud. Read any of their series on Boundaries. They have more in common with Montessori than Peterson including being Christian, whereas Peterson is not, which is relevant since his moral hierarchy is self-based not other-based (which is relevant since Maria Montessori was a practicing Catholic herself, which undoubtedly influenced her philosophy).
Please do look into this and give it a second thought. As a child of abuse and a child advocate, this is not a light matter.
God bless.
Emily, Thank you for your thoughtful comment. I will give your considerations careful thought. I’d like to emphasize that I am not proposing Peterson’s advice as the model. Instead I am comparing his advice with Montessori’s advice for those interested in Peterson’s ideas. By looking carefully at both, we can see subtle differences that will hopefully help us make choices that line up with our understanding of the human nature. ~ Jean Marie
Jordan Peterson is the person who single handedly brought me back into my christian faith and is the sole reason I began implementing judeo-christian values back into my household. It has immensley impacted me and my family in ways I cannot describe and is truly nothing short of divine intervention. When I first heard of Jordan peterson and watched a lecture he did on raising children, I broke down in tears and raised my hands to the sky thanking God for the answers I had been looking for. I have since listened to all of his biblical lectures (There are hours and hours). So I am curious as to why you think he is not a christian, and why you are so confident that christian values did not play a significat role in the conclusions he has come to?
Not to mention.. We are all humans and we are not infallible. So, please think carefully before you go and discredit the life-work of any individual just because they have fallen on difficult times. If you truly knew of him, you would know that the media portrays him in a very negative light just as the media does to ANYONE with strong conservative values. The article you shared is sorely out of context. Jordan Peterson has been a beacon of light to many on this earth regardless of any mistep or negative publicity.
Thanks for joining the conversation, Francesca! It’s awesome to hear of the positive impact Jordan Peterson has had on your life. ~ Jean Marie
I think it’s a shame that a commenter quoted one article about Jordan Peterson in order to prove there is a dichotomy between his actions and words. If you take the time to do some lengthy research and dig into the issue deeper, you will find out why he became addicted to pain killers. He has never tried to hide that fact. The one thing I admire about Dr. Peterson is that he is always honest about his shortcomings (and I personally don’t find his addiction a shortcoming because it can happen to anyone who isn’t aware of the dangers of even taking only the prescribed amount of certain pain killers) and discusses them with almost unparalleled vulnerability and openness. That takes immense courage. He recently told the whole story on YouTube and I saw no such dichotomy. I think you did a fine job of comparing and contrasting Jordan Peterson’s insights with the Montessori philosophy and I enjoyed reading it very much. When you described Peterson’s way of making a child eat dinner vs how a Montessori teacher would do it I saw only slight differences. The only difference I could detect is that he eventually made his son eat his dinner by staying patient and persistent in a kind but firm way, whereas you would have given a consequence for the child not having eaten his dinner. Am I correct? Both methods state the objective clearly, both methods use kind but firm manners and words, but only one method achieves the objective, whereas the other method gives a consequence for the child not having obeyed.
Hi Gabi, thanks for being part of the discussion! You’re right that most often the Montessori method uses consequences to help children learn to make good choices, but there still is room within the method for achieving the objective with kind and firm persistence. If, for example, a child was refusing to eat for several meals in a row, a consequence might no longer be appropriate.
At the heart of discipline is a trusting relationship between two whole individuals. The child must grow toward wholeness by learning to make decisions (guided by consequences) but this is only part of the equation. A child who trusts and respects his parent or teacher will obey more readily. Dr. Peterson’s example illustrates how this relationship was strengthened by his firm insistence.
I have not read Peterson’s book, but have seen some of his talks. You describe his gentle persistence and firmness in feeding his son, but a person who commented, said that he forced food down his son’s throat. Which is it?
I am a huge fan of Maria Montessori and her method which is based very much on her Catholic beliefs of the dignitary and uniqueness of every child of God. The development of each child is specifically to allow them to become the gift to the world that they were meant to be.
Based on what you wrote, I might agree that there are some similar goals that Jordan Peterson and Maria Montessori share, they seem to be coming from radically different places, especially if, as the one commenter above stated, Peterson is not a Christian.
Thanks for joining the conversation, Anne! In response to your question, which is it, I invite you to read the chapter in question. (“Don’t Let Your Children Do Anything That Makes You Dislike Them”, from 12 Rules for Life by Jordan Peterson) so you can discern for yourself.
Yes, the belief in the dignity of every child is fundamental to the Montessori method, and is partly why this method is so successful and attractive. And, while Jordan Peterson and Maria Montessori are coming from different places, I find it beautiful that with thoughtful observation of children they arrive at a similar place regarding how to treat them.
Jordan Peterson in particular has studied and thought so carefully, and written so clearly, about many things that I know little about. When I read his books, while standing firmly in the framework of my Catholic beliefs, I find my understanding of the world and of myself becomes much deeper and more nuanced. Just as there is room for scientist who teach us about the nature of snow, for example, and in this way deepen our knowledge of and gratitude for the world God created, so there is room for thinkers such as Jordan Peterson, who teach us about human nature, personality, etc. ~ Jean Marie
One thing I noted was that you wrote that Montessori believes that meaningful work helps get rid of character flaws. Peterson does say this but for adults, not children. I agree that if he knew that there was meaningful work for children, he would probably realise it’s ability to help with character defects. In his book he talks about doing things to help the world become a better place – even simple things such as cleaning your room, and how that helps us to improve our lives and character. I think it’s a similar concept, but applied to adults instead of children in his book.
True, his book is definitely aimed at adults, and I wouldn’t be surprised if he believed in something similar for children. Thanks for commenting! ~ Jean Marie