The Intellectual Context of the O'Connor-Hirst Debate
歐康諾[D. J. O'Connor]與赫斯特[P. H. Hirst]「論辯」的智識脈絡
- Keyword：
- Intellectual context、D. J. O'Connor、P. H. Hirst / 智識脈絡、歐康諾、赫斯特
Volume 37 - 1996-03-31
The Intellectual Context of the O'Connor-Hirst Debate
歐康諾[D. J. O'Connor]與赫斯特[P. H. Hirst]「論辯」的智識脈絡洪仁進
Indoctrination, Emotivism and Moral Education
灌輸、情緒主義與道德教育李奉儒
Criticisms on Kohlberg's Cognitive Moral Developmental Therory
郭耳堡[L. Kohlberg]的道德認知發展論評析蘇永明
The Essence of Uncertainty in School Administrative Process and Its Implications for Dialogue
學校行政歷程的不確定特質及其對學校行政對話的意涵黃宗顯
A Comparison between Carl Rogers' and B. F. Skinner's Views on 'Man'
羅傑斯[Carl Rogers]與斯金納[B. F. Skinner]「人」觀之比較研究陳啟明
Evaluation on Teacher Education and Teachers' In-Service Training
師資培育與教師進修制度的檢討陳舜芬、丁志仁、洪儷瑜
Odyssey of Rationality, Act of Life and Fate of Subjectivity--Historical Development of Man's Self-Image and the Perspective of Educational Reform
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楊深坑
A Study of Ancient Roman Education
古代羅馬教育林玉体
- Summary
- Chinese Summary
- Reference
- Scholarly references
The main purpose of this paper is to narrate the intellectual context of the O’Connor-Hirst debate. These are three major findings in this paper: Firstly， by giving the brief overview of the analytic philosophy in the United Kingdom since 20th century， it is found that O’Connor’s stance is near to the Logical Positivism， but Hirst’s standpoint is near to the Cambridge-Oxford School. Secondly， by clarifying C.D. Hardie’s Truth and Fallacy in Educational Theory， this paper finds that Hardie’s viewpoints about the status of educational theory can provide a historical clue for the O’Connor-Hirst debate. Thirdly， by rehearsing Peters’s reflection on the tradition of philosophy of education—reductionism， historicism， and aphoristicism， it is concluded that such reflections express a preliminary understanding for the background of the O’Connor-Hirst debate.
本文定為「歐康諾與赫斯特『論辯』的智識脈絡」，旨在透過對英國分析哲學流變與教育哲學發展的勘查，為歐康諾與赫斯特的教育論辯，提供一種初步的探討，作為近一步分析『論辯』的基礎。經由「分析哲學思潮的接承」、「在教育分析哲學的軔起」、及「在傳統教育哲學的省察」三個子提的討論，本文的研究發現計有下列三項：一、在分析哲學思潮的接承中，兩者均受哲學分析方法的啟蒙，祇是歐康諾採循邏輯實證論的哲學論調，赫斯特兼合劍橋學派與牛津學派的哲學理路，因此在教育論辯上，歐康諾較強調邏輯推理與經驗核證，而赫斯特則較注重語言概念的分析與批判，由此形成分殊不同的教育哲學立場。二、在教育分析哲學的軔起中，歐康諾與赫斯特咸認哈迪是促引教育分析哲學興起的樞紐人物，而其論著《教育理論中的真理與繆誤》一書，係以「教育理論」為探討主題，亦同於兩者教育論辯的主題，故能延伸『論辯』的歷史視野，供作探析『論辯』的歷史線索。三、在傳統教育哲學的省察中，藉由皮德思剖析「化約主義」、「歷史主義」、及「格言主義」的三種困局，除能了解歐康諾與赫斯特所面對的教育哲學景況外，對於兩者的教育哲學觀點及其有關『論辯』的主張，亦能提供一種同時代性的初步理解，作為深入分析『論辯』背景脈絡。
