首页> 外文学位 >A KANTIAN CRITIQUE OF TWO THEORIES OF VALUES AND MORALS IN EDUCATION (VALUES-CLARIFICATION, KOHLBERG, EPISTEMOLOGY, ETHICS, DEVELOPMENTALISM).
【24h】

A KANTIAN CRITIQUE OF TWO THEORIES OF VALUES AND MORALS IN EDUCATION (VALUES-CLARIFICATION, KOHLBERG, EPISTEMOLOGY, ETHICS, DEVELOPMENTALISM).

机译:康德对教育中的两种价值和道德理论的批判(价值澄清,柯尔伯格,认识论,伦理学,发展主义)。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

The fundamental task of this dissertation is to offer a critique of two dominant approaches in values/moral education--Values Clarification and Lawrence Kohlberg's moral theory--from the framework of Kant's moral concepts. The specific aim is to demonstrate that, by virtue of their roots in the assumptions and methods of scientific philosophy and psychology, both approaches are necessarily limited to a utilitarian-"consequentialist" ethical position. In the case of Values Clarification the outcome is a values-relativism grounded in a psycho-analytical model of freedom lacking any source of moral responsibility to others as moral beings; in the case of Kohlberg's theory, the outcome is an "ideal" utilitarianism grounded in a logico-mathematical model of freedom lacking any Kantian source of moral responsibility, notwithstanding Kohlberg's alleged debt to Kant and to John Rawls's "Kantianism." Further, albeit proponents of both approaches claim that the priority of "process" over "product" immunizes their theories from indoctrination, it is counter-argued that ethical "products" emerge which are educationally indefensible. Accordingly, this thesis differs from preceding studies (1) by examining the inadequacies and disorder in the foundational premises of both educational cases, and (2) by contrasting these cases with Kant's critical philosophy. The primary focus of contrast is that of a "developmental" epistemology which absorbs ethical freedom in the naturalistic, evolutionary processes of "affective" and/or "cognitive" growth, and Kant's epistemology which distinguishes between psychological and ethical freedom by way of his transcendental method.; Part I adumbrates the dimensions of a scientific epistemology, suggesting the limitations of this method for a theory of morals; Part II explores the assumptions of behavioristic, psychoanalytic and phenomenological "systems" in psychology, assumptions embedded in the thought of John Dewey, Jean Piaget and Carl Rogers, the influential "mentors" of the two educational theories; Part III criticizes Values Clarification and Kohlberg's theory, concluding with a contemporary interpretation of Kant's moral thesis. It is consistently argued that Kant's moral insights, and particularly the ideal of persons always as ends-in-themselves, never merely a means, offers a more adequate and defensible approach for education than the cases in point, both from a conceptual and moral point of view.
机译:本论文的基本任务是从康德的道德观念的框架出发,对价值/道德教育中的两种主要方法进行批判:价值澄清和劳伦斯·科尔伯格的道德理论。具体目的是证明,由于它们起源于科学哲学和心理学的假设和方法,因此这两种方法都必然限于功利主义的“结果论”伦理立场。在价值澄清的情况下,结果是一种价值相对主义,建立在一种自由的心理分析模型上,缺乏对他人作为道德存在者的道德责任的任何来源;以科尔伯格的理论为例,结果是一种“理想的”功利主义,建立在逻辑数学模型的自由基础上,尽管科尔伯格声称欠康德和约翰·罗尔斯的“康德主义”,但这种逻辑模型缺乏任何康德式的道德责任。此外,尽管这两种方法的支持者都声称“过程”优先于“产品”可以使他们的理论免于灌输,但有人反驳说,道德上“产品”的出现在教育上是不可辩驳的。因此,本论文与先前的研究不同(1)通过研究两个教育案例的基础前提中的不足和混乱,(2)将这些案例与康德的批判哲学进行对比。对比的主要焦点是“发展性”认识论,它在“情感”和/或“认知”增长的自然主义,进化过程中吸收了伦理自由,而康德的认识论则通过他的先验性来区分心理和伦理自由。方法。;第一部分概述了科学认识论的规模,提出了这种方法对于道德理论的局限性;第二部分探讨心理学中的行为主义,心理分析和现象学“系统”的假设,以及两种教育理论中颇有影响的“导师”约翰·杜威,让·皮亚杰和卡尔·罗杰斯的思想中所包含的假设;第三部分批评了价值澄清和科尔伯格的理论,最后对康德的道德论题进行了当代解释。一直有人认为,康德的道德见解,尤其是始终作为自我终结者的人的理想,绝不仅是一种手段,它从概念和道德的角度来看,都比案例提供了一种更充分,更辩护的方法。看法。

著录项

  • 作者

    RUBIN, SONYA.;

  • 作者单位

    New York University.;

  • 授予单位 New York University.;
  • 学科 Education Philosophy of.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 1985
  • 页码 403 p.
  • 总页数 403
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 教育;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号