多元文化教育之合理性探討

The Research on Rationality of Multicultural Education

張源泉(YUAN-CHUAN CHANG)

指導教授 ： 溫明麗 ； 譚光鼎

國立臺灣師範大學/教育學院/教育學系/博士(2000年)

摘要

多元文化教育興起的主要訴求是，美國社會的弱勢族群立基於獨立宣言所倡導的平等精神，要求在教育領域中獲得教育機會的均等。為落實各種多元文化教育的主張，勢必以多元文化教育的法規範為依據。因此，本論文所探討的多元文化教育之合理性，即是從法規範的角度作為研究之取向。
當代對於多元文化教育法規範之爭辯，主要是來自於自由主義與社群主義之不同主張。自由主義建基於「個人權利」的觀點，強調個人不分種族、宗教、文化，都擁有相同的機會接受教育，因此自由主義強調教育的中立原則。但是學校教育在實際的運作上，常常具有社會再製的功能，學校課程內容的選擇、組織、傳遞、分配，以及學校中的師生關係形式等，通常都隱含一種主流價值的宰制。
相對地，社群主義認為，個體的權利並非如自由主義所強調的具有不受時空限制的普遍性，而是必須透過「社群」才能獲得體現。在教育上，社群主義認為建基於個體權利的基礎，並不足以保障弱勢族群的教育機會均等，因此國家應給予弱勢族群一種「集體權利」的優惠性待遇。但如此一來，集體權利對於其他社群的成員可能會帶來另外一種歧視；而對於社群內的成員也難以顧及個體選擇之自主性。
哈伯瑪斯反對自由主義的看法，也不贊成社群主義的主張。因為自由主義的理論消除了個體所代表的社群價值取向及利益取向，以此保持對於每一個人的權利的充分尊重。但是哈伯瑪斯認為，社會關係是奠基在一個具體的生活世界中，社會成員必然涵醞著實際角色的扮演，因此社會關係的建立不是價值中立而是利益取向。而社群主義也僅僅是對自由主義作了一些修正，事實上他們仍採取自由主義的權利平等原則。因為，如果我們將平等權利予以深究，並不會無視於文化差異的存在。哈伯瑪斯進一步批評，社群主義並沒有真正體認到法規範的重要性，因為權利理論與法律程序規範是不能分開的，我們只能透過法規範來確立多元文化權利的訴求。
哈伯瑪斯進一步認為，法律的正當性必須透過論辯所形成共識來創設，是透過理想的溝通程序所產生的理性共識。這種程序性之制度保障，使得現代多元文化社會，在一個憲政民主架構上，使不同區域的文化優點的相互欣賞成為可能。
由哈伯瑪斯所揭示程序法典範的基本原則，諸如國民主權與民主程序的參與等，均為現代民主憲政國家的憲法所採納。因此，為落實前述之合理性，在探討原住民教育之合理性時，我們即從原住民教育之合憲性架構，探討原住民教育權之正當性依據。
在確立了原住民族的憲法依據後，為落實原住民權利，則必須要相應的國家權力全面配合才能達成。從哈伯瑪斯的觀點來檢視原住民教育政策的制定過程，即可發現其過程透明化不足、缺乏原住民主體之參與，甚且流為一種威權心態的主導，如此一來，原住民教育政策也就談不上「合理性的共識」了。因此，政府應檢討目前原住民教育決策多侷限於少數技術官僚、民代、學者專家等由上而下的制定過程；而不是只考慮如何有效的達成既定的政策目標。
哈伯瑪斯溝通行動理論之思考向度，強調每一個體均有同等機會表達意見，使每一個個體的需求都可以引進共識的形成過程，因而藉此所形成的規範才能符合實質的社會正義。換言之，政策的開放及由下而上的制定過程才是構成原住民教育政策的正當性基礎。此不僅可以作為原住民在經濟上、政治上、文化上、教育上與台灣社會關係重建的模式；而且還可以透過溝通論辯的過程，增加主體的批判性思考能力，進一步落實民主政治的真義。

關鍵字

多元文化教育 ； 合理性 ； 哈伯瑪斯 ； 原住民教育 ； 溝通行動

並列摘要

Multicultural education stands for the spirit of equality that proposed in the Declaration of Independence,and advocates the equality of educational opportunity to the American social deprived groups.In order to put this into practice,it msut take the norm of law as a base.Thus,this thesis explores the rationality of multicultural education in the perspective of the norm of law.
Controversies about the norm of law in the field of multicultural education,mainly arose from the different viewpoints between Liberalism and Communitarianism.Liberalism proposes Individual rights,and emphasizes a kind of neutral principle of education,it advocates each member in the community has the same opportunity to receive education. But the school education in its practical operation,often possesses social-reproductive functions;the selection,organization,delivering, distribution of school curriculum,and also the formation of the teacher-student’s relation,often imply a kind of domination of dominated values.
Contrary to it,Communitarianism believes the rights of each individual is restricted,and only embodied by community. Furthermore, Communitarianism suggests that the foundation of individual’s rights is not enough to ensure the equal opportunity for the social deprived groups to receive education,thus,it proposes that the nation should provide a kind of positive discrimination which called ‘collective rights’ to the social deprived groups.But then,this might be another kind of discrimination to other members in the community; also, members in the community will feel hard to attend to the autonomy of individual choices.
Jurgen Habermas protest viewpoints of Liberalism and Communitarianism.He thinks that theories of Liberalism eliminate values and interests of community,this is because Liberalism maintains the respect of individual rights.Habermas believes that social relation is based upon a life world,members in society play theirs actual roles, then the construction of social relation is interests-oriented. Communitarianism,in fact,adopts the principle of equal rights which Liberalism proposed.If we explore deeply into this, we can’t ignorant the existence of the cultural differentiation.Habermas critics that Communitarianism is not truly conscious of the importance of the norm of law,and he maintains that rights’ theory and the process of the norm of law can not be separated,so we can only affirm the multicultural rights through the norm of law.
Furthermore, he also thinks that the legitimation of law can only be attained through the consensus discourse,and also the rational consensus which emerged from the ideal process of communication.To assure this system,members in the modern multicultural society ,based on the frame of constitutional democracy ,can admire different cultural merits mutually.
The basic principles of paradigm,such as the sovereignty of the people and the participating in the process of democratisation,is adopted by a modern democratic and constitutional nation.Hence,before exploring the rationality in the field of education for indigenous people,we must base the legitimate rights of indigenous education on the constitutional frame.
After this,if we would like to achieve the rights of indigenous people,then the nation’s power plays an important role.If we take Habermas’ theories to examine the process of policy making for indigenous education,we will notice that the process is not transparent;also,the indigenous people won’t participate in it,and it might incline to authoritarian.In this way,the policy of indigenous education can not be called “rational consesus”.Hence,the government should note that contemporary indigenous education mainly restricted in the process of policy making ,so the government must examine this top-to-down process .
According to Habermas’s Theory of Communicative Action，he emphasizes each individual has an equal opportunity to express their opinions,so the norm can be tallied with the actual social justice.Then,the openness of a policy,and the down-to-top process,are the legitimate foundations for the policy of indigenous education.This will reconstruct a new mode of social relationship between the indigenous and the non- indigenous society,and also,through this process of communication,increases the critical thinking competence of the indigenous subjects,finally,to achieve the true meaning of democratic politics.

並列關鍵字

Multicultural Education ； Rationality ； Jurgen Habermas ； Indigenous Education ； Communicative Action