- 教育哲学研究 (ISSN:03873153)
- vol.2006, no.93, pp.67-84, 2006
This paper examines Charles Taylor's idea of self-becoming in his cultural-pluralistic philosophy with a focus on his “anti-naturalistic” notion of the self. Although Taylor and his essay “The Politics of Recognition” have been introduced as the philosophy of multiculturalism or communitarianism in contemporary educational studies, it is not well understood that his cultural-pluralistic ideas are inspired, influenced and invoked by his sympathy with modern Romanticism and antipathy against modern naturalism concerning the concept of self-understanding. I characterize his philosophy of self-becoming as “anti-naturalism” and attempt to clarify his contributions to education including multicultural education.<BR>First, this paper conducts an analysis of Taylor's original notion of the “selfinterpreting” self with reference to his stance against modern natural sciences of man. Through this examination, we recognize that Taylor proposes the dialogical and hermeneutic notion of the self or self-becoming against the disengaged, neutral, or atomistic view of the self in natural sciences.<BR>Second, I present his “anti-naturalistic” philosophy of self-becoming as one based upon his positive evaluation of the ideas of individuality and authenticity in modern Romanticism. This is a view that an individual self is constituted by language and hence embedded in community, culture and history. I argue that the Romantic idea of the self is central to his “anti-naturalist” interpretation of the self as he views Romanticism as a reactionary movement against the analytic science of man in Enlightenment.<BR>Finally, as Taylor claims that the world of education is the main locus of multiculturalism, I examine his contribution to education including multicultural education. The conclusion runs as follows : Taylor's “anti-naturalistic” philosophy suggests the possibilities of multicultural education for us to rethink modern education from the standpoint of his Romantic appreciation of the originality of the individual and culture, while at the same time his philosophy has difficulties precisely because of that position.