Virtue Epistemology and the Philosophy of Education

This article initially provides a brief overview of virtue epistemology; it thereafter considers some possible ramifications of this branch of the theory of knowledge for the philosophy of education. The main features of three different manifestations of virtue epistemology are first explained. Importantly, it is then maintained that developments in virtue epistemology may offer the resources to critique aspects of the debate between Hirst and Carr about how the philosophy of education ought to be carried out and by whom. Wilfred Carr's position—that educational practitioners have privileged access to philosophical knowledge about teaching practice—will in particular be questioned. It will be argued that Carr's view rests on a form of epistemology, internalism, which places unreasonably narrow restrictions upon the range of actors and ways, in which philosophical knowledge of and/or for education might be achieved. In declaring that practical wisdom regarding teaching is ‘entirely dependent’ on practitioner reflection, Carr not only radically deviates from Aristotle's notion of practical wisdom, he also, in effect, renders redundant all philosophical research about education that is not initiated by teachers in this manner. It is concluded that Aristotle's general approach to acquiring information and knowledge about the world might yet still offer a foundation for a more comprehensive philosophy of education; one that makes clear that the professional testimony and reflection of teachers, observation of teaching practice, and already existing educational philosophy, theory and policy can all be perceived as potentially valuable sources of philosophical knowledge of and for education.     

儒家道德哲学对德育回归生活的实践意义

儒家道德哲学是一种以道德为入路的哲学,是以国计民生为其思考和行动根本出发点和主要关注焦点的哲学。以民为本是它的根本宗旨,道德本位是它的主要标志,经世致用是它一以贯之的精髓所在。由此而构建了宏伟的本体论、认识论、修养论哲学体系。儒家道德哲学的现实意义及其普世价值,在当前德育回归生活世界的背景下,凸显出重大的启发意义。对于回归生活世界理论,应该在批判中借鉴,研究中利用,而不能盲目照搬。德育回归生活世界要与即内在即超越的儒家道德哲学结合起来,避免德育庸俗化和空泛化两个极端,以消解当前的德育危机。     

欧克肖特的教育哲学初探

文章从人性论、认识论和道德论三个角度初步探讨了欧克肖特的教育哲学，其人性论认为人性假定是作为游戏者的人，并分析了自我理解和会话这两种路径；其认识论主张技术的知识和实践的知识共存；其道德论倡导基于习惯和情感的混合道德生活形式。最后从四个方面评论了欧克肖特的教育哲学。     

道德教育的整体性与道德教育哲学

教育和道德教育的对象是人。人作为道德教育的对象，不仅把伦理学和教育学的关系结合了起来，而且把两门科学与关于人的一般哲学学说及其方法联系了起来。道德哲学对道德教育的整体“框架”作用决定了道德哲学对道德教育的重要意义，同时也决定了必须建立相应的道德教育哲学对道德教育做整体性研究。     

20世纪语言转向的哲学史探源

20世纪哲学发生了语言转向,原本对认识论的关注变为了对语言本体的探索.语言转向之后的哲学研究大多把语言研究作为工作的重点,而新兴学科语言哲学也成为影响贯穿整个人文社会科学的显学.但对语言的哲学思考,自古希腊以降就一直是西方哲学家们关注的话题,语言转向的发生正植根于这种千年来思考的传统.对语言转向的哲学渊源进行一番考察,有助于提供一种理解这一“哲学革命”的历史视角.     

Recovering the Lost Métier of Philosophy of Education? Reflections on Educational Thought,Policy and Practice in the UK and Farther Afield

A Special Issue of the Journal of Philosophy of Education in November 2012 explored key aspects of the relationship between philosophy of education and educational policy in the UK. The contributions were generally critical of policy developments in recent decades, highlighting important shortcomings and arguing for more philosophically coherent approaches to educational policy‐making. This article begins by focusing on what the contributions to the Special Issue—particularly two of them—have to say about the relationship between philosophy of education and educational policymaking. It then goes on to argue that this relationship can best be understood through an exploration of education as a practice in its own right (as distinct from a subordinate practice). Such an exploration seeks to shed light on the proper métier of philosophy of education. In the course of the exploration the kind of thinking predominant in recent international patterns in educational policy is contrasted with a different kind of thinking which has yielded rich gains in Finland. Important distinctions are drawn between the inherent and extrinsic benefits of educational practice and between the internal and external politics of practice. These contribute to the articulation of philosophy of education as a distinctive discipline of thought and action which is necessary to the work of practitioners and policymakers alike.     

浅谈现象与本质

认识论是马克思主义哲学的重要组成部分,是实践经验的深刻总结,但是,其中有些论述还值得我们去挖掘,去探讨。马克思主义哲学家以外的其他西方哲学流派对待认识论,尽管方法不同,结论各异,但都是时代精神的精华和人类思想的结晶,对于深入理解马克思主义哲学都有一定的借鉴意义。罗素的《哲学问题》中关于现象与实在的精彩论述,给了我们更多的启发。     

EXPANDING RATIONALITY: THE RELATION BETWEEN EPISTEMIC VIRTUE AND CRITICAL THINKING

A bstract .  In this essay, Ryan Bevan explores the pedagogical implications of taking virtue epistemology as the philosophical foundation of educational theory rather than following the instrumentalist approach that is currently dominant. According to Bevan, the critical thinking strategies characteristic of instrumentalism generally work to further the vocationalization of educational discourse as well as the cultivation of unreflective moral agents. He contends that critical thinking should be expanded beyond its rationalist criteria to focus on the process of inquiry. Such a virtue epistemology approach, according to Bevan, has the potential to uncover and change fundamental misconceptions that pervade current theoretical assumptions by encouraging learners to engage in a more inclusive inquiry that draws out alternative perspectives. Bevan concludes that citizenship education in particular can benefit greatly from this more expansive theory with concrete pedagogical implications.     

希望哲学:德育的方法论转向与超越——基于古典教育关于教育本质的论述

古典教育的精神大师们,在揭示教育的目的和本质时,为我们确立了以精神反思为基本方法的德育哲学.这一德育的方法论既是一种哲学态度,又是一种精神气质.赋予我们诠释教育本质的一种哲学品质,即关注教育与人的灵魂和命运的关联.作为古典教育精神的延续和发展,希望哲学继续着古典教育精神反思的传统,将对人的本质和精神世界的追问,由当下实然世界指向作为尚未存在的未来——作为人性向善的可能性.希望哲学借助于时间哲学实现着对古典教育及其方法论的超越.要求人将对道德的追求指向作为终极的未来——最高的善或德性的可能性.这是希望哲学作为一种德育方法论的本质和精神.     

朱熹哲学本体论的构建及其“理”蕴

理本论是朱熹哲学思想的核心和最高范畴,也是朱熹整个学术思想的核心和理论基础。这是一个具有客观唯心主义性质和伦理本位色彩的哲学范畴。其本体论哲学的构建是通过对传统文化中儒、道、佛三家思想的全面吸收和改造而完成的。具体讲:吸收佛学本体论的思维模式并将之改造为道德本体论;吸收儒学的道德学说并将之改造为伦理本位的哲学:吸收道家的认识论思想并将之改造为伦理体验的认识论。     

PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION AS PHILOSOPHY: A METAPHILOSOPHICAL INQUIRY

Abstract What is the philosophical status of the philosophy of education? Is it philosophy, no different from the philosophy of science and the philosophy of mind? Much depends on where these latter derive their philosophical bona fides from. There are two ways of viewing the matter. On one account, they are subdivisions of the veritable philosophy branches of metaphysics and epistemology. It being impossible to view philosophy of education as comparably emanating from any of the philosophical originals, this approach effectively deprives it of proper philosophical standing. On the other account, nonoriginal philosophy branches may be viewed as attaining philosophihood, each on its own. Such a purview provides the maneuverability needed to countenance the philosophical nature of philosophy of education as well. Still, George Pollack argues in this essay that if it is to fully accommodate philosophy of education, philosophy will need to be reconceived to include the unearthing of the philosophical foundations of a social practice.     

When Science Studies Religion: Six Philosophy Lessons for Science Classes

It is an unfortunate fact of academic life that there is a sharp divide between science and philosophy, with scientists often being openly dismissive of philosophy, and philosophers being equally contemptuous of the naiveté of scientists when it comes to the philosophical underpinnings of their own discipline. In this paper I explore the possibility of reducing the distance between the two sides by introducing science students to some interesting philosophical aspects of research in evolutionary biology, using biological theories of the origin of religion as an example. I show that philosophy is both a discipline in its own right as well as one that has interesting implications for the understanding and practice of science. While the goal is certainly not to turn science students into philosophers, the idea is that both disciplines cannot but benefit from a mutual dialogue that starts as soon as possible, in the classroom.     

Out of the Ordinary: incorporating limits with Austin and Derrida

This article seeks to open up a re-examination of the relationship between thought and language by reference to two philosophers: John Austin and Jacques Derrida. While in traditional philosophical terms these thinkers stand far apart, recent work in the philosophy of education has highlighted the importance of Austin’s work in a way that has begun to bridge the philosophical divide. This article seeks to continue the renewed interest in Austin in educational research, yet also take it in new direction by exploring Austin’s wider philosophical concern within the William James Lectures with the nature of language. The significance of the philosophical turn to language has entered the agenda of a number of philosophers of education in recent years. The main aim of this article will be to present, as a starting point for further work, an account of language that does justice to the way language actually operates. The article will argue that Austin’s account of the performative opens up new possibilities in this regard and yet—for reasons that will be made clear—also fails in the final instance to carry these through. By illustrating the way Derrida’s philosophy works, contrastingly, to take these possibilities to their full conclusion, I will argue that Derrida succeeds in bringing a radically new conception of language to the fore. The article will end by pointing towards some of the implications of the initial exploration conducted here to be developed elsewhere—particularly for the ways we think about thinking.     

Philosophy and Quantum Mechanics in Science Teaching

Research in physics has its impact on world view; physics influences the image of nature. On the other hand philosophy thinks about nature and the role of man. The insight that philosophy might indicate the frontiers of human possibilities of thought makes it highly desirable to teach these aspects in physics education. One of the most exciting examples is quantum theory which v. Weizsäcker called a fundamental philosophical advance. I give some hints to implementing philosophical aspects into a course on quantum theory. For this purpose I designed a dialogue between three philosophers – from the Antique, the Enlightenment and a quantum philosopher – discussing results of quantum theory on the background of important philosophical terms. Especially the views of Aristotle are reviewed. This idea has been carried out in a supplementary course on quantum theory for interested teacher students and for in-service training of teachers.     

“生命论”的失语——布鲁贝克的高等教育哲学观述评

自从美国教育家布鲁贝克提出政治论和认识论的高等教育哲学基础后,该哲学基础一直成为高等教育理论研究的重要内容和高等教育学学科建构的逻辑起点之一。从方法论、认识论及本体论三方面对布鲁贝克的高等教育哲学基础观进行分析,以此来探讨把＂人＂作为高等教育哲学基础观的来源,以＂生命论＂来应对布鲁贝克的高等教育哲学基础观,对于了解布鲁贝克的高等教育哲学观具有重要意义。     

An “Ideal” Home for Care: Nel Noddings,Thomas Hill Green,and an Ontological Support for a Phenomenology of Care

This paper is grounded in a deep appreciation of Nel Noddings’ “ethics of care” as an important contribution to moral philosophy and moral education. We seek to offer some philosophical reflections that have the potential to strengthen this important alternative to mainstream ethics and to how moral education might be conceived and practiced differently. After identifying some ambivalence in Noddings’ own position toward abstract philosophy, and despite the practical reasons for this that we share, we then find grounds for pressing in this speculative direction, some of which indeed accord with Noddings’ own statements and philosophical concerns. To show how such further philosophical reflection upon her relational morality could help, we focus on elaborating a perspective on ontological issues that we find in the work of Thomas Hill Green, a 19^th century idealist, and seek to show its compatibility with Noddings’ more pragmatic stance. A concluding point addresses, and dispels, a possible worry that the grand narrative structure of Green’s idealism might undercut Noddings’ aim of having an ethic that is melioristic and open.     

Advancing Education's Autonomy through Looking Educationally at Philosophy

This article offers a general framework for considering education's autonomy and its implications for the relationship between education and philosophy. In it, Doron Yosef-Hassidim examines an initiative in Israel that calls for an autonomous secular public education and uses it as a context to clarify what education's autonomy means and to identify its major characteristics. To enhance the idea of education's autonomy, he further argues that education should not be subordinate to philosophy and that the question about being human must be kept open and educational. In particular, education's autonomy requires resisting the temptation of applying a philosophical framework about being human to education, even if the particular philosopher of education agrees with the philosophical framework. Finally, Yosef-Hassidim proposes a strategy for treating the question about being human as one that involves both the work of philosophers of education and practitioners in the classroom.     

Heidegger,Technology and Education

In this paper, I defend the viability and relevance of Heidegger's philosophy of technology and consider its emancipatory potential in the field of education. First, I situate Heidegger's philosophy of technology within the broader emancipatory project of his early work—the fundamental ontology of Being and Time—and emphasise the role of language and (self-)appropriation in human subjectivity. Second, in light of the importance Heidegger placed on education for resisting the reifying and alienating effects of technology, I conclude with some critical reflections on recent attempts to develop a positive Heideggerian programme of education. In particular, I reveal some crucial limitations of the pragmatist or ‘bodily coping’ approach—defended by Hubert Dreyfus and Mark Wrathall and argue that an ‘appropriative’ alternative yields a more compelling philosophy of education, which emphasises the cultivation of moral articulacy.     

Active learning as destituent potential: Agambenian philosophy of education and moderate steps towards the coming politics

Beginning in earnest in the late 1990s, educational researchers devoted increasing attention to the study of “active learning,” leading to a robust literature on the topic in the scholarship of teaching and learning. Meanwhile, during largely the same period, political theorists discovered the radical philosophy of Giorgio Agamben, which soon after began to ripple through more radical forms of philosophy of education. While both the SoTL works on active learning and writings of “Agambenian” philosophers of education have offered new insights into their respective fields, active learning has not yet received a systematic philosophical reflection and the community of Agambenian philosophy of education has not yet been systematized. This article addresses both gaps, first through an outline of existing Agambenian approaches to the philosophy of education and second by theorizing active learning as a form of “destituent potential.” The systematic reflection on the three threads of Agambenian philosophy of education—whatever, potentiality, and study—offers an introduction to less familiar readers, and the second section offers a model for how philosophical concepts can become theoretical tools for SoTL analysis.