- 期刊
- OpenAccess
兩種批判取向的通識教育進路：批判思考與批判教育學
Two Critique-Oriented Approaches of General Education: Critical Thinking and Critical Pedagogy
摘要
培養學生具備批判思考能力是國內外大學通識教育的目的之一，而批判思考的源流大致起源於兩個取向。自啟蒙運動康德以降，理性傳統影響的教育分析哲學很重視批判思考，此外馬克思傳統的法蘭克福學派及批判教育學也重視批判意識。然而這兩種批判取向卻強調不同的重點，分析傳統下的批判思考，立基於啟蒙的理性精神，強調要排除個人的主觀、偏見，致力尋求客觀，以恢弘心智、健全心靈，知識取向濃厚。而批判取向的教育觀則認為既定的世界充斥著意識形態的不當權力運作，批判的重點在於揭露其扭曲現象，還原社會公道，道德意識強烈。前者大致採取理論、實踐分立，客觀理性指引教育實踐，後者則是理論、實踐辯證，教育實踐促成政治更新。後者認為前者過於強調孤懸於社會的知識與邏輯推理等技能，無法真正解決社會不義問題。本文首先敘明各自的特色與限制，復析論分析陣營回應批判教育學及後現代陣營對其批判思考的評論。筆者認為可以分進合擊、互為主體。結論也對於如何在通識教育中體現這兩類批判的積極教學意義，提供可行建議。
並列摘要
Analytic philosophy of education has been influenced by the tradition of rationality since the Enlightenment put a priority on critical thinking. Frankfurt School, originating from Marxism, and critical pedagogy both emphasize the concept of critique. One of the aims of general education that cultivate students' capacity is critical thinking. However, these two approaches have different priorities of concern. Critical thinking of analytic tradition is based on the rational spirit of enlightenment. It advocates the elimination of individual subjectivity and prejudice, and aims at the pursuit of objectivity and mind- and soul-strengthening, which represents knowledge-orientation. On the other side, the view of critical pedagogy holds that the real world is flooded with improper power operation of ideology and focuses on revealing the distortion and regaining social justice, which represents a strong awareness of morality. The former adopts the theory and suggests educational practice is guided by objective rationality, while the latter believes the relationship between theory and practice is dialectical and educational practice could promote political innovation. The latter also indicates that the former puts too muchstress on knowledge and logic reasoning which are socially isolated to solve the social injustice. In this paper, the characteristics and limitations of these two different approaches would be introduced firstly, and then how the two rival groups response to the comments on its critical thinking made by each other. The author concludes they could advance separately with the same target and are both subjects at the same time. There are some feasible suggestions in the conclusion about how to realize the positive teaching significance of these two critique-oriented approaches in liberal or general education.