著者
奥野 佐矢子
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.2006, no.93, pp.85-101, 2006-05-10 (Released:2010-05-07)
参考文献数
38

It is a specific conceptualization of the twentieth century, the century of the linguistic turn, that language is in general 'performative'. Building from Austinian notion of performativity and Althusseruan notion of interpellation, this essay explores the production/construction of the subjects based upon the main work of Judith Butler.Butler begins with her contention that as linguistic beings, our existence is unavoidably dependent on language. For her, the subject is constructed through the process of subjection; it can be explained as the simultaneous process of becoming the subject and being compelled to participate in reproducing dominant discourse. Butler's understanding that the status of the subject is thus constituted and her insistence that the compelled reiteration of conventions is the essence of performativity help us clarify how the subject is unwittingly complicit in sustaining hegemonic social structures.To deconstruct this discursive and social formation involving the subject, it is necessary to focus on the very process of the construction of the subject. As Butler explains the subject is subjected to a norm while being the agent of its use. Accordingly if the formation of the subject is the repeated inculcation of the norm, it will be possible to repeat that norm in unexpected ways. The norms of performative identity resemble the sign, and they are vulnerable to the recitation of the same and semantic excesses. The subject performatively and linguistically constituted is not ultimately defined by the interpellative call; neither is the subject fully determined or radically free from the deployed discourse. Steering a careful middle course between voluntarism and determinism, Butler distances herself from the strategic deployment of the category of the “essential” identity in political practices. What she offers instead is rejection and resignification in her alternative political mode.Crucially, the deconstruction of the subject is by no means equivalent to its destruction as Butler argues. In seeking out the instabilities of language and of the constitutive terms of identity we are guided to a new sense of ethics, with the limit and inevitable opacity of the subject that always fails to define itself.
著者
白銀 夏樹 村田 美穂 久保田 健一郎 奥野 佐矢子 小野 文生
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.2006, no.93, pp.145-150, 2006-05-10 (Released:2010-01-22)
参考文献数
9

現代の人間形成論においては、「美」「倫理」という言葉によって、人間形成をめぐる現代的状況を解明しようとする議論や人間形成論の可能性を提起しようとする議論が少なからず見受けられる。だが「美」と「倫理」の概念の接点をさぐりながら人間形成論の現代的射程を探る共同研究の試みは、いまだ豊かに展開されているとはいいがたい。教育哲学会第四八回大会 (香川大学) において「美」と「倫理」の概念に関心を寄せる若手研究者が集まり、「美的・倫理的人間形成論の現在性をめぐって」と題したラウンドテーブルを開催した。ドイツ語圏の美的人間形成論 (白銀・久保田) 、英語圏の道徳や倫理を扱う人間形成論 (奥野・村田) 、ドイツ教育思想史における「美」「倫理」概念 (小野) といった各々の関心から、現代の「美」「倫理」概念の人間形成論的射程を議論した。以下はラウンドテーブル当日の提案者四名 (村田、久保田、奥野、白銀) と指定討論者 (小野) による報告である。本論の最終的な文責は企画者 (白銀) が負うが、それぞれの項目は担当者が執筆したものである。
著者
青柳 宏幸
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.2006, no.93, pp.49-66, 2006-05-10 (Released:2010-05-07)
参考文献数
29

The purpose of this paper is to clarify the distinctive features of Karl Marx's educational thought. Many studies on Marx fail to distinguish Marxism from Marx. However, Marx's thought is different from Marxism and has distinctively historical meanings. This paper pays attention to Marx's criticism of Max Stirner in “Die deutsche Ideologie”. Because Stirner developed the criticism of pedagogy in “Der Einzige und sein Eigentum”, Marx's educational thought can be reconstructed by means of Marx's criticism of Stirner.Stirner assumed that the rule of the spirit by the concept of “Man” was a distinctive feature of modernity and that education was its means. He criticized the suppression of the individual by “Man”. Before Stirner's book was published Marx had envigioned “Communism as the real appropriation of the human essence by and for man”. Stirner' s criticism turned out to match this Vision of communism and awakened Marx from philosophical consciousness. Marx thus stopped regarding the human essence as the assumption of the discussion and came to understand it as “the ensemble of social relations” based on the materialistic view of history. He called the refusal of this human essence theory the settlement of account with philosophical conscience. Because Stirner's pedagogy was based upon the assumption of the human essence, it can be considered that the settlement of account with philosophical conscience implied the settlement of account with pedagogical conscience. Marx changed the way of viewing pedagogy of terms of the human essence theory by explaining how such an idea as “Man” was abstracted from material relations.
著者
生澤 繁樹
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.2006, no.93, pp.67-84, 2006-05-10 (Released:2010-05-07)
参考文献数
48

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.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.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.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.
著者
宮本 健市郎
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.2005, no.92, pp.117-124, 2005-11-10 (Released:2009-09-04)

二〇〇二年の学習指導要領によって導入されたばかりの総合的な学習の時間 (総合学習) が危機に瀕している。総合学習を学力低下と直結させる思考の短絡さをあらためて論ずる必要はないだろう。だが、そのような短絡的な発想にもとついて教育政策が進められている現実を見ると、一世紀以上をかけて作り上げられてきた総合学習の理論が一般には理解されていないことを痛感させられる。この点で研究者の努力の不足は認めざるをえない。このような時に、キルパトリックの教育思想にかんする日本で初めての本格的な研究書が公刊されたことの意義は大きい。言うまでもなく、キルパトリックは、アメリカ進歩主義教育の中でデューイに次いで重要な思想家であり、教育実践上の指導的立場にあった。彼の開発したプロジェクト.メソッドは総合学習の典型であり、大正期から昭和初期に構案法として、我が国でも実施されたことは周知のことである。にもかかわらず、彼に対する評価はわが国では必ずしも高くない。彼の思想はデューイ理論の通俗化とみなされ、プロジェクト・メソッドの実践は反知性主義として批判されることが多い。彼の思想の本格的な研究がほとんどなされないままに、低い評価が与えられ続けてきたのが実情ではなかっただろうか。佐藤隆之氏は、先行研究を丹念に参照しながら、キルパトリックのプロジェクト・メソッド論に焦点を絞って、キルパトリックの思想とプロジェクト・メソッドの論理を解明する。そして、「理想への投企」として、プロジェクト・メソッドの意義を見出すのである。著者はプロジェクト・メソッドを現代の総合学習に直結させて論じてはいないが、プロジェクト・メソッドは現代の総合学習の一つのモデルであるから、著者がプロジェクト・メソッドの可能性を明示したことは、著者の意図を超えて、総合学習を否定しようとする日本の現状にたいする批判にもなっている。その意味では、本書は現状への問題提起の書であり、総合学習に関心をもつ人々には待望の書である。