政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/67350
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 113100/144073 (79%)
Visitors : 50562133      Online Users : 915
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/67350


    Title: 現代教育人類圖像變遷之研究
    A study about the change of modern educational human picture
    Authors: 李孟儒
    Lee, Meng Ju
    Contributors: 馮朝霖
    李孟儒
    Lee, Meng Ju
    Keywords: 人類圖像
    教師
    提問式教育
    知識分子
    自由
    human-picture
    teachers
    problem-posing education
    intellectuals
    freedom
    Date: 2013
    Issue Date: 2014-07-07 14:05:42 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 本研究嘗試從現代民主政治與教育兩百多年的發展歷程中,考察三種不同類型的教育命題或觀點,分別是:涂爾幹的「教育是一種社會化的過程」、弗雷勒的「教育即是自由的實踐」,以及傅柯的「關懷自身的倫理作為自由的實踐」。三種政治─教育立場分別著重於不同的人類圖像:教師、學生、知識分子。為考察上述三種不同類型的命題,從「社會環境與人類圖像」這樣的視角,我們將命題置於具代表性的政治社會化時代脈絡中,亦即:「民主社會─道德人」、「解放社會─人性化」與「規訓社會─生存美學」,在各自不同且具代表性的現代教育類型(道德教育、提問式教育、關懷自身的倫理作為自由的實踐)中進行研究。

    基本上,本文所探討的三種教育類型是在與盧梭《愛彌兒》所揭示的教育問題對話過程中依序進行的。首先,愛彌兒這個理想的教育人類圖像對現代教育而言具有某種類似原型的影響力。原因在於,盧梭所虛構創造的愛彌兒是擺脫一切人類不平等,對自由有著深刻體認的道德人。由於日後在民主化的浪潮下,人們所欲培育的道德公民標示出封建君主教育與現代民主教育的根本差異,且是現代民主社會教育的主要特點之一,因此愛彌兒有其奠基性的重要作用。不同於盧梭以愛彌兒作為建構道德社會的起點,弗雷勒依循馬克思主義的思路,強調社會階級的差異,並以資本主義所具有的壓迫剝削性質的理解,提出受壓迫者教育學,凸顯出人類圖像與世界觀的相關性,在教學形式上主張人性化的提問式教育,由此一來也顯現出民主與教育的融合和開展。有別於傳統道德教育思想以及追求人性解放的革命理想,傅柯指出,由於現代國家知識─權力的流動與滲透形成了規訓社會,在這樣的情況下也就益發地凸顯出關懷自身(生存美學)的重要,亦即關注自身的學習成長挑戰了長期以來以國家為教育目的的正規性框架,由此一來便為現代教育研究帶來了深刻的思想衝擊。

    在研究發現中,研究者回顧現代人類圖像變遷及其可能的相關發展,嘗試指出人類圖像的議題置入教育學三種不同政治─教育取向典範時,彼此之間在知識上形成一種既同又異的張力關係,從而呈現出對理解現代教育樣貌的不同詮釋角度,希望能作為教育學知識探討的背景,使我們對教育有更深度的思考,開拓出更多理論思考的面向。在後續研究建議裡,在以康德的教育疑問為背景下,研究者認為我們應對當下人類遭遇的諸多危機有所認識,以從教育的立場上做出適時的貢獻,故研究者整理當代法國哲學家莫翰於西元1999年為聯合國教育、科學及文化組織撰寫的教育改革建議書中的討論,考察教育對人類的重要意義,作為本文的研究結語。
    This research attempts to investigate three different forms of educatinal propostions or pespectives from the process of developing modern democracy and education over the 200-year period. It contains by examining the Emile Durkheim’s notion of “education is a process of socialization”, the notion of “education as the practice of liberty” which had its roots in Paulo Freire, as well as notion of “the ethics of the concern for self as a practice of freedom” which drew directly from Michael Foucault. From the political-education standpoint of view, they concentrated on particular human picture, including teacher, students and intellectuals. To explore the content of three educatinal propostions, I will put these into the context of typical politicization of society: democracy- moral people which means moral education, empancipating society- humanity which stands for posing education, and disciplinary society- aesthetics of existence which is supported by the idea of the ethics of take care of self as the practice of freedom.

    In essense, three educational forms of this research are implemented in sequence which is linked to the dialogue process of revealing educational problems by Rousseau, notably in Emile. First of all, the ideal-educated human picture origining from Emile had potentially influenced on modern education because Emile, who was moral person created by Rousseau, got rid of human inequality and acknowledged significantly importance of freedom. In the enlightment of democracy, people wanted to nurture moral citizenship, which was the main charactersitic of modern-democratic education, that represented the essential differences between feudal-monarchy education and modern-democratic education. Therefore, Emile had laid the foundation for modern-democratic education. Unlike the notion of Emile as a beginning to construct moral society, Freire followed the route of Marxism, and stressed the differences of social classes. In addition, he advocated pedagogy of the oppressed to raise the relationships between human picture and worldview based on understanding of nature of oppression and exploitation in the Capitalist context. As a result, he proposed posing education as a form of enhancing humanity in teaching as well as illustrating the inclusion and development between democracy and education. The flow and infiltration of national knowledge had shaped disciplinary society, which was pointed out by Foucault, was distinct from traditional moral education and evoluational provision of pursuiting humanity-emacipating. In this context, Foucault had raised the importance of concerning for self: aesthetics of existence, in other words, by means of concerning learning growth for self, it could challenge the formal frames of educational aims building on the basis of nation so as to bring the conflict on way of thinking for modern educational researches.

    As the results shown, after reviewing the shift of modern human picture and the possibility of related development, researcher attempts to indicate the tension with the differences and the similarities among the knowledge relationship when human picture are put into three forms of political-educational paradigm of pedagogy. As a result, the findings, which represent different explanation to acknowledge the modern education, are recognized as background of discussing educational knowledge so that we can have profound thinking about education, as well as in the expansion of dimensions of educational theories. In the follow-up research, researcher suggest that we should acknowledge various risks from human encountering at the moment based on the queries from the Kent’s educational problem and make appropriately contribution to education as educational practitioners. In my conclusion, I quote the conclusion that discussed the significances of education on UNESCO’s educational reforms in 1999, which was written by contemporary French philosopher Edgar Morin.
    Reference: 王恭志(2007)。傅柯的生存美學及其對教師課程意識的啟發與蘊義。國立臺北教育大學教育政策與管理研究所博士論文。
    方永泉(2003)。譯序:弗雷勒與《受壓迫者教育學》。載於受壓迫者教育學,頁 39-65。方永泉(譯)。台北:巨流。
    呂正雄(1990)。美國教育的鐘擺。研習資訊,(58)2,20-21。
    李旻儒(2005)。論傅柯的生命權力。國立花蓮師範學院多元文化教育研究所碩士論文。
    林玉体(編著)(2005)。西洋教育史。台北:三民。
    林端(2006)。《社會分工論》導讀。載於社會分工論,頁5-34。渠東(譯)。台 北:左岸。
    高宣揚(2004)。傅柯的生存美學。台北:五南。
    黃武雄(2004)。童年與解放衍本。台北:左岸文化。
    黃昆輝與楊深坑(主編)(2009)。賈馥茗教育學體系研究。台北:五南。
    馮朝霖(1993)。德國教育哲史科目教學與研究之探討。教育與心理研究,(16),145-174。
    馮朝霖與薛化元(1997)。主體性與教育權。載於教育改革的民間觀點,頁69-115。林本炫(編)。台北:業強。
    馮朝霖(2000)。教育哲學專論:主體、情性與創化。台北:元照。
    馮朝霖(2001a)。認同、差異與團結:人權教育與教育人權的辯證。學生輔導雙 月刊,(73), 94-103。
    馮朝霖(2001b)。未確定性與自我完成──從陳大齊論儒家教育人類學。中國近代文化的解構與重建,頁199-216。台北:政大文學院。
    馮朝霖(2004)。駱駝.獅子與孩童:尼采精神三變說與批判教育學及另類教育學的起源。教育研究月刊,(121),5-13。
    馮朝霖(2006)。希望與參化──Freire教育美學推衍與補充之嘗試。載於批判教育學:台灣的探索,頁137-167。李錦旭與王慧蘭(編著)。台北:心理。
    馮潮霖(2011)。國民中小學課程綱要系統圖像之研究(研究報告)(研究主持人)。計畫編號:NAER-100-12-A-1-02-01-1-02。台北:國家教育研究院。
    俞懿嫻(2007)。道德教育與哲學。台北:文景。
    范信賢(主編)(2013)。國民中小學課程綱要之研擬方向與原則。台北:國家教 育研究院。
    陳伯璋(1984)。「潛在課程」研究之評析。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所博士論 文。
    陳瑞崇(2004)。論政治教育:擺盪於人與公民之間。台北:時英。
    楊深坑(1996)。理性的冒險、生命的行動及主體性的失落與拯救:人類圖像的歷史變遷與教育改革之展望。教育研究集刊,(37),19-38。
    葉啟政(2006)。進出「結構-行動」的困境。台北:三民。
    葉啟政(2008)。邁向修養社會學。台北:三民。
    溫明麗(1999)。當代台灣教育哲學典範之轉移。哲學雜誌,(29),48-69。
    歐用生(1991)。從「潛在課程」談國民小學民主教育。轉型社會中的教育,頁47-74。楊瑩(編著)。台北:財團法人民主文教基金會。
    賈馥茗(2003a)。教育哲學。台北:三民。
    賈馥茗(2003b)。教育認識論。台北:五南。
    賈馥茗(2004)。教育倫理學。台北:五南。
    賈馥茗(2006)。教育的本質。北京:世界圖書。
    詹棟梁(1989)。政治教育之實施策略。民主法治與教育,頁203-232。中國教育學會(主編)。台北:台灣書局。
    謝宗宜(2011)。傅柯《性史》中的倫理與自由。國立政治大學哲學研究所博士論文。
    矢內原忠雄(2002)。教育與人。李孋姃(譯)。台南:人光出版社。
    Althusser, Louis. (1999). Machiavelli and us. New York: Verso.
    Arendt, Hannah.(2007)。論革命。陳周旺(譯)。南京:譯林。
    Bagley, W. C.(2004)。教育與新人。袁桂林(譯)。北京:人民教育。
    Barthes, Roland.(2005)。戀人絮語。汪耀進、武佩榮(譯)。台北:桂冠。
    Bauman, Zygmunt.(2007)。液態之愛:論人際紐帶的脆弱。何定照、高瑟濡(譯)。台北:商周。
    Bloom, Allan.(1991).“Rousseau: The Turning Point.”Pp.208-232. in Giants and dwarfs: essays, 1960-1990. New York: Simon and Schuster.
    Bloom, Allan.(2007)。盧梭:那轉折的一幕。巨人與侏儒:布魯姆文集(增訂版),頁231-258。林國榮(譯)。北京:華夏。
    Bollnow, Otto Friedrich.(1999)。教育人類學。李其龍(等譯)。上海:華東師範大學出版社。
    Brossat, Alain.(2013)。傅柯:危險哲學家。羅惠珍(譯)。台北:麥田。
    Cassirer, Ernst.(1963). Rousseau, Kant and Goethe. New York: Harper and Row.
    Cassirer, Ernst.(1989). The question of Jean -Jacques Rousseau. New York: Vail-Ballou Press.
    Cassirer, Ernst.(1992)。盧梭•康德•歌德。劉東(譯)。北京:三聯。
    Cassirer, Ernst.(1997)。人論。甘陽(譯)。台北:桂冠。
    Cassirer, Ernst.(2009)。盧梭問題。王春華(譯)。南京:譯林。
    Comenius, J. A.(2004)。大教學論。傅任敢(譯)。北京:教育科學。
    Deleuze, Gilles.(1995).“Postscript on Control Societies.”Pp.177-182 in Negotiations‧1972-1990. New York: Columbia University Press.
    Dewey, John.(1957). Democracy and education. New York: The Macmillan Company.
    Dewey, John.(2006)。民主與教育。薛絢(譯)。台北:網路與書。
    Durkheim, Emile.(1956). Education and Sociology. translated by Sherwood D. Fox. Illinois: The Free Press.
    Durkheim, Emile.(2001a)。教育與社會學。涂爾幹文集第三卷,頁271-380。沈杰(譯)。上海:上海人民。
    Durkheim, Emile.(2001b)。道德教育。涂爾幹文集第三卷,頁1-270。陳光金(譯)。上海:上海人民。
    Durkheim, Emile.(2003)。教育思想的演進。涂爾幹文集第四卷。李康(譯)。上海:上海人民。
    Durkheim, Emile.(2006)。社會分工論。渠東(譯)。台北:左岸文化。
    Engles, Friedrich.(2004)。反杜林論。馬克思恩格斯選集(第三卷),頁 343-677。中共中央編譯局(譯)。北京:人民。
    Eribon, Didier.(1991). Michel Foucault. Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
    Eribon, Didier.(1997)。權力與反抗:米歇爾‧福柯傳。謝強、馬月(譯)。北京:北京大學。
    Fink, Eugen.(1999)。教育學與人生之道。簡水源(譯)。台北:桂冠。
    Foucault, Michel.(1972).The Archaeology of Knowledge. New York: Pantheon Books.
    Foucault, Michel.(1980a).“The History of Sexuality.” Pp.183-193 in Power∕knowledge. edited by Colin Gordon. New York: Pantheon Books.
    Foucault, Michel.(1980b).“The Confession of the Flesh.” Pp.194-228 in Power∕knowledge. edited by Colin Gordon. New York: Pantheon Books.
    Foucault, Michel.(1980c).“Truth and power.” Pp.109-133 in Power∕knowledge. edited by Colin Gordon. New York: Pantheon Books.
    Foucault, Michel. (1983).“On the Genealogy of Ethics: An Overview of Work in Progress.”Pp.229-252 in Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics. edited by Hubert L. Dreyfus & Paul Rabinow. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Foucault, Michel.(1985). The use of pleasure. New York: Random House.
    Foucault, Michel.(1988a).“An Interview With Michel Foucault.”Pp.9-15 in Technology of the Self. edited by Luther H. Martin, Huck Gutman, and Patrick H. Hutton. Amherst: The University of Massachusetts Press.
    Foucault, Michel.(1988b).“Power and Sex.”Pp.110-124 in Politics, Philosophy, Culture, edited by Lawrence D. Kritzman. New York: Routledge.
    Foucault, Michel.(1991).“How an‘Experience-Book’is Born.”Pp.25-42 in Remarks on Marx. New York: Semiotext(e).
    Foucault, Michel.(1992)。醫療制度史。吳宗寶(譯)。載於當代,(71):82-101。
    Foucault, Michel.(1994). The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences. New York: Vintage Books.
    Foucault, Michel.(1996a).“Rituals of Exclusion.”Pp.68-73 in Foucault Live. edited by Sylvère Lotringer. New York: Semiotext(e).
    Foucault, Michel.(1996b).“Talk Show.”Pp.133-145. in Foucault Live. edited by Sylvère Lotringer. New York: Semiotext(e).
    Foucault, Michel.(1997a)。思想‧批評‧轉型。權力的眼睛,頁49-53。嚴 峰(編譯)。上海:上海人民。
    Foucault, Michel.(1997b)。自畫像。權力的眼睛,頁1-15。嚴峰(編譯)。上海:上海人民。
    Foucault, Michel.(1997c).“What Our Present Is.”Pp.147-168 in The Politics of Truth. edited by Sylvère Lotringer. and Lysa Hochroth. New York: Semiotext(e).
    Foucault, Michel.(1997d)。遊戲的賭注。權力的眼睛,頁181-198。嚴峰(編譯)。上海:上海人民。
    Foucault, Michel.(1999)。必須保衛社會。錢瀚(譯)。上海:上海人民。
    Foucault, Michel.(2000).“Useless to Revolt?”Pp.449-453 in Essential Work of Foucault 1954-1984, Vol.3: Power. New York: The New Press.
    Foucault, Michel.(2002a)。論人性:公正與權力的對立。傅柯集,頁214-256。杜小真(編選)。上海:上海遠東。
    Foucault, Michel.(2002b)。詞與物:人文科學考古學。莫偉民(譯)。上海:上海三聯。
    Foucault, Michel.(2002c)。性經驗史(增訂版)。佘碧平(譯)。上海:上海人民。
    Foucault, Michel.(2003a)。規訓與懲罰(修訂譯2版)。劉北成、楊遠嬰(譯)。北京:三聯。
    Foucault, Michel.(2003b). Society Must Be Defended. edited by Mauro Bertani. and Alessandro Fontana. New York: Picador Press.
    Foucault, Michel.(2003c).“The Ethics of The Concern of The Self as a Practice of Freedom.”Pp.25-42 in The Essential Foucault: Selections from The Essential Works of Foucault 1954-1984. edited by Paul Rabinow. and Nikolas Rose. New York: The New Press.
    Freire, Paulo.(1986). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. translated by Myra Bergman Ramos. New York: The Continuum.
    Freire, Paulo.(1994). Pedagogy of hope: Reliving pedagogy of the oppressed. translated by Robert R. Barr New York: The Continuum.
    Freire, Paulo.(2003)。受壓迫者教育學。方永泉(譯)。台北:巨流。
    Freire, Paulo.(2011)。希望教育學:重現《受壓迫者教育學》。方永泉、洪雯柔、楊洲松(譯)。台北:巨流。
    Fromm, Erich.(1994)。愛的藝術。孟祥森(譯)。台北:志文。
    Furedi, Frank.(2006)。知識分子都到哪裡去了?戴從容、王晶(譯)。台北:聯經。
    Heidegger, Martin.(2004)。世界圖像的時代。林中路(修訂本),頁77-115。孫周興(譯)。上海:上海譯文。
    Illich, Ivan.(1971). Deschooling society. New York: Harper & Row.
    Illich, Ivan.(1994)。非學校化社會。吳康寧(譯)。台北:桂冠。
    Kant, Immanuel.(1960). Education. translated by Annette Churton. Toronto: Ambassador Books.
    Kant, Immanuel.(2002)。論教育。賈馥茗(等譯)。台北:五南。
    Kant, Immanuel.(2005)。論教育學。論教育學(附科系之爭),頁1-52。趙鵬(譯)。上海:上海人民。
    Kelly, Christopher.(2009)。盧梭的榜樣人生。黃群(等譯)。北京:華夏。
    Kuehn, Manfred.(2005)。康德:一個哲學家的傳記。黃添盛(譯)。台北:商周。
    Lamouroux, Christian.(1986)。我上過傅柯的課。當代(創刊號),頁36-38。
    Lilla, Mark.(2003)。當知識份子遇到政治。閻紀宇(譯)。台北:雅言文化。
    Marx, Karl.(1964)。馬克思關於現代社會中的普及教育的發言記錄。馬克思恩格斯全集(第十六卷),頁654-656。中共中央編譯局(譯)。北京:人民。
    Marx, Karl. (1988). Marx Selections. edited by Allen W. Wood. London: Collier Macmillan Publisher.
    Marx, Karl.(1990)。1844年經濟學哲學手稿。伊海宇(譯)。台北:時報文化。
    Marx, Karl.(1995)。關於費爾巴哈的提綱。馬克思恩格斯選集(第一卷),頁54-61。中共中央編譯局(譯)。北京:人民。
    Marx, Karl.(2004)。資本論(第一卷)。中共中央編譯局(譯)。北京:人民。
    Marx, K. and Engles, F.(1995)。共產黨宣言。馬克思恩格斯選集(第一卷),頁248-307。中共中央編譯局(譯)。北京:人民。
    Marx, K. and Engles, F.(2005)。文獻學語境中的德意志意識形態。廣松涉(編注),彭曦(譯)。南京:南京大學。
    Miller, James E.(2003)。福柯的生死愛欲。高毅(譯)。上海:上海人民。
    Morin, Edgar.(2001). Seven complex lessons in education for the future. translated by Nidra Poller. Paris: UNESCO publishing.
    Morin, Edgar.(2004)。複雜性理論與教育問題。陳一壯(譯)。北京:北京大學。
    Pelikan, Jaroslov.(1999)。歷代耶穌形象。楊德友(譯)。上海:三聯。
    Rabinow, Paul. and Rose, Nikolas.(2003).“Thoughts on the concept of Biopower Today.”in Vital Politics: Health, Medicine and Bioeconomics into the Twenty First Century. London School of Economics, 5-7 September.
    Link:http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/sociology/pdf/RabinowandRose-Biopower Today03.pdf
    Rousseau, Jean-Jacques.(1962)。論政治經濟學。王運成(譯)。北京:商務。
    Rousseau, Jean-Jacques.(1979). Emile or On Education. translated by Allan Bloom. New York: Basic Books.
    Rousseau, Jean-Jacques.(2003)。愛彌兒。李平漚(譯)。北京:商務。
    Rousseau, Jean-Jacques.(2005a)。懺悔錄。黎星(譯)。北京:商務。
    Rousseau, Jean-Jacques.(2005b)。社會契約論。何兆武(譯)。北京:商務。
    Rousseau, Jean-Jacques.(2007a)。論人與人之間不平等的起因和基礎。李平漚(譯)。北京:商務。
    Rousseau, Jean-Jacques.(2007b)。盧梭評判讓—雅克:對話錄。袁樹仁(譯)。上海:上海人民。
    Rousseau, Jean-Jacques.(2007c)。論科學與藝術。何兆武(譯)。上海:上海人民。
    Scheffler, Israel.(1994)。教育的語言。林逢祺(譯)。台北:桂冠。
    Strauss, Leo.(2003)。自然權利與歷史。彭剛(譯)。北京:三聯。
    Wulf, Christoph.(2002). Anthropology of education. London: Transaction Publishers.
    Уминскии, К. Л.(1993)。人是教育的對象──教育人類學初探。張佩珍、鄭文樾、張敏鰲(譯)。台北:五南。
    Description: 博士
    國立政治大學
    教育研究所
    96152503
    102
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0096152503
    Data Type: thesis
    Appears in Collections:[Department of Education] Theses

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    250301.pdf903KbAdobe PDF2515View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback