论文部分内容阅读
“主知主义”德育观作为道德哲学和道德教育理论的一脉,有其内在的合理性。认知和理性是德性和德育的源泉;德性的获得需要理性的支撑;道德认知与思维构成了道德教育的起始环节。“主知主义”德育观又有其自身难以僭越的限度。它不能担保认知与实践的相涉相融;认知并非道德的唯一要素,知性教育亦非德育的全部;知识不能自动地成为道德指导,智慧亦不能填补道德的缺陷。“主知主义”道德观不能如其所是地确保道德教育的价值与实效。对其合理性予以德育学辩护,对其限度予以德育学反思,是为了建构一种理想的德育研究致思趋向,以超越单一的“主知主义”从而以整合的视域对多元道德取向予以统驭或涵摄。
“Advocacy ” moral education as a moral philosophy and moral education theory has its own internal rationality. Cognition and reason are the source of virtue and moral education. The acquisition of virtue requires rational support. Moral cognition and thinking constitute the initial link of moral education. “Advocacy ” morality has its own limits that can not be crossed. It can not guarantee the interrelationship between cognition and practice. Cognition is not the only element of morality. Intellectual education is not the whole of moral education. Knowledge can not automatically become moral guidance, and wisdom can not fill the moral defects. “Principalism ” morality can not ensure the value and effectiveness of moral education as it is. To justify its moral defense of moral education, the moral education to its limits, in order to build an ideal moral education thinking trend to go beyond a single “main doctrine” so as to integrate the perspective of pluralism Orientation to control or culvert.