- 著者
-
高橋 舞
- 出版者
- 教育哲学会
- 雑誌
- 教育哲学研究 (ISSN:03873153)
- 巻号頁・発行日
- vol.2003, no.87, pp.46-66, 2003-05-10 (Released:2010-05-07)
- 参考文献数
- 51
This paper clarifies the mechanism of “meeting”, and defines the role of education for preparing human beings for rich possibilities in “meeting”.O. F. Bollnow regards “meeting” as an accidental gift which defies any methodological treatment in education. At the same time, he attaches educational significance to “self-revelation” as provided by “meeting”. On the basis of contemporary issues of “independence from colonialism”, the author will take up another feature of “meeting”, that is, the educational significance of the “existence of others”. Moreover, the author will examine “meeting” from the point of view of human responsibility, by asking a question : “Why do human beings often fail to meet in day-to-day situations?” The failure to meet derives from the nature of “understanding”. While each language can give expression only to what transcend human sensibilities, human beings would understand “the other's” language within their own limited recognition. As a consequence, the “otherness” of “the other” does not emerge, thus hampering the “meeting”. Therefore, the author would like to suggest, first, that people become conscious of the limitations of languages, and exert their “control of understanding”.Second, by analyzing the cases of “meeting”, the author will examine the validity of the “control of understanding” as a useful tool for “meeting”. The analysis shows that the “meeting” ensues from “self-revelation” which Bollnow has found educationally significant. In order to highlight this process of “self-transformation”, the author will name it “self-metamorphosis”.Third, to provoke “self-metamorphosis”, one must understand “the other”. By meeting “the other” in the realm outside of one's understanding, one's understanding will be overthrown and be reversed. “Understanding” is necessary to “meet” the other, and those acts without understanding may turn into “violence”. At this point, the “control of understanding” and the “requirement of understanding” may strike some as inconsistent. In fact, both “understanding” and “less understanding” are violence, and the author will indicate that a life in the midst of such a dilemma will cultivate humanity which will promote rich possibilities in “meeting”.Finally, the author will criticize Bollnow's idea that the “meeting occurs only among the existences”. “The other” is the existence which goes beyond one's understanding, and which entails one's “self-metamorphosis”. Thus, Bollnow's idea of “the other” cannot be mere existences (without essential attributes). “The other” may either have its attributes or it may be merely existential. The author will insist that the open attitude to any possibility of “the other” holds an important role to play in education.