著者
高橋 春幸
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.88, pp.36-50, 2003-11-10 (Released:2010-01-22)
参考文献数
23

Pestalozzis Stil hat einen wesentlichen Bezug zu seine Gedankenbildung. Pestalozzi war ein Pädagoge, der sein Denken und Wollen durch des Stil ausdrücken wollte und verschiedene Schreibarten in seinen Werken erprobt hat. Der fundermentale Stil Pestalozzis war “Rede”, in der auf Ton und Bild großen Wert gelegt wurde.Diese Abhandlung versucht, Pestalozzis Stil, - “die Rede” und den Sinn in seinem frühen repräsentativen Werk, “Die Abendstunde eines Einsiedlers” zu beleuchten. Dazu wird die Arbeit von Rupprecht genützt, der in seinem Werk Reim und Rhythmus der Abendstunde dargestellt.In dieser Abhandlung werden drei Themen erortert.1. Der typische Stil in “Abendstunde” “Die Abendstunde” ist nicht Aphorismus sondern eine Rede, die an die Menschheit ruft, worm eine geradezu pedagogische und propagatorische Absicht liegt. Hier wird die Rede aus dem Aspekt des Rufs erläutert.2. Der Rhythmus und das Bild des Kreises im Stil der “Abendstunde” Das wichtigste Bild, - das der Kreise - wird hier, anhand der Auffassung Rupprechts, erklärt. Das Bild soll nicht nur in Worte sondern auch in Ton gefassed werden.3. Stil und GlaubePestalozzis Stil, - “die Rede” - spiegelt seinen Glauben wieder. Sein Stil kann nicht nur als Schreibweise sondern als seine Lebensweise angesehen werden, die auf dem christlichen Glaube beruht.
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.
著者
高橋 勝
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.1982, no.45, pp.47-59, 1982-05-15 (Released:2009-09-04)
参考文献数
43

Up to the present, the evaluation of Kerschensteiner's. Arbeitssehule was divided into two opposing views, either fully supporting, that idea (e.g. Spran-ger) or totally rejecting it (Hohendorf); almost no dialague was carried. on between those two positions. In this paper I try to prove that Kerschensteiner's view on Arbeit includes the following rather differing, elements and that in different periods of his life there was a shift from stressing, this rather than the other element (i. e. his view on Arbeit as such changed).First, in his earlier works (Die Schule der Zukunft eine Arbeitsschule, 1908) Arbeit means an importhant method for setting, free the subjeotive “sel-acitivity” (Selbsttätigkeit) of the child, furthering the autonomy of both“living”(Leben) and “learning”(Lernen) (Arbeit as a methodological principle of self-activity).But in the 6, th edition of the Begriff der Arbeitsschule this position is evidently revised shifting toward the postulates of civic morality. Secondly, that is, emphasis is put on the principle of Sachlichkeit, i.e. (1) on the development of the power to work and (2) on its nature as a useful instrument for forming the character trait (Will) of readiness to serve. It is probably here that the “Idea of disciplined work” in the sense of moral education arose.By way of conclusion I maintain that Kerschensteiner's theory of the Arbeitsschule is not to be treated in terms of an alternative as in the past, either accepting it unconditionally or rejecting it in toto, but that it is to be reconsidered and reevaluated anew after grasping accurately. the two different aspects of Arbeit.