- 著者
-
田中 裕喜
- 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.1999, no.80, pp.35-47, 1999-11-10 (Released:2009-09-04)
- 参考文献数
- 16
It has been apparently assumed that children would enter into, through school education, “the verbal activity at the secondary level (the verbal activity in which dialogists don't premise sharing the same context of life history.)” But we can't presume such a language development as self-evident. The purposes of this paper are (1) to clarify the general condition of “the verbal activity at the secondary level, ” (2) to indicate the problems involved in “the verbal activity at the secondary level, ” and (3) to suggest a new vision on classroom communication with “the verbal activity at the secondary level.” Children can enter into “the verbal activity at the secondary level” because they construct a perspective of the third person to objectify the context of narrative. The present author points out that the perspective of the third person is “Seken.” “Seken” is the transcendental other to which everybody conforms, or the frame of reference as “general subjectivity of cognition.” Adults must embody the persona of this transcendental other for children. After recognizing adults as embodying the persona of “Seken” as the place for deciding whether their verbal behaviors are proper or not, children will remove the personality adhering to the place and will construct, on their part, “Seken” as transcendental other.However, by its conformity to “Seken”, “the verbal activity at the secondary level” involves primary problems. By constructing “Seken” to which everybody conforms, we can avoid the worst kind of contact with unknown others and can communicate with them. At the same time, we cover up the intersubjective discordance of cognition and belief which are attributed to “Seken”, and fail to notice the singularity of others. In short, the construction of, and conformity to, “Seken” is a double-edged sword.Accordingly, the author suggests a new vision on classroom communication based upon a view of fallible truth which is derived from pragmatism. In this classroom communication, teachers and children will objectify cognition and belief which each party regards as being attributed to “Seken” and will demonstrate that it is useful for everybody to hold them. Thus teachers and children will attain to “an inter-intersubjective agreement” and construct “the Seken which is pluralistic and contains many contexts.”