PhilosophyandReligions分析
英文哲学入门知识点总结
英文哲学入门知识点总结1. What is philosophy?Philosophy is derived from the Greek words "philo," meaning love, and "sophia," meaning wisdom. Therefore, it can be understood as the love of wisdom. As a discipline, philosophy seeks to answer fundamental questions about existence, knowledge, values, reason, mind, and language. It encompasses a wide range of topics and approaches, including ethics, metaphysics, epistemology, logic, and aesthetics.2. Branches of philosophy- Metaphysics: This branch of philosophy deals with the nature of reality and existence. It explores questions about the nature of being, the structure of the universe, and the concept of causality. Metaphysical questions include the nature of time, space, and the self.- Epistemology: Epistemology is the study of knowledge. It examines the nature of knowledge, the sources of knowledge, and the criteria for knowledge. It explores questions about belief, truth, justification, and skepticism.- Ethics: Ethics is concerned with questions about right and wrong, good and bad, and moral obligation. It considers the nature of ethical principles, the foundations of morality, and the concept of justice. It also explores the relationship between ethics and human behavior.- Logic: Logic is the study of reasoning and argumentation. It deals with questions about the structure of valid arguments, the principles of inference, and the nature of truth. It also examines the foundations of mathematics and the philosophy of language.- Aesthetics: Aesthetics is the study of beauty, art, and taste. It explores questions about the nature of beauty, the perception of art, and the role of aesthetic experience in human life. It also considers the relationship between art and society.3. Methods of philosophy- Analysis: Philosophical analysis involves the careful examination and clarification of concepts, arguments, and problems. It aims to uncover hidden assumptions, identify inconsistencies, and explore the implications of ideas. Analysis is often used in logical and linguistic philosophy.- Argumentation: Philosophical argumentation involves the construction and evaluation of arguments. It aims to establish the validity and soundness of reasoning, challenge assumptions, and support claims with evidence. Argumentation is often used in ethics and epistemology.- Thought experiments: Philosophical thought experiments involve the imaginative exploration of hypothetical scenarios. They aim to test intuitions, challenge assumptions,and explore the consequences of ideas. Thought experiments are often used in metaphysics and ethics.4. Historical development of philosophy- Ancient philosophy: The ancient Greeks, such as Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, made significant contributions to the development of philosophy. They explored questions about the nature of reality, the basis of ethics, and the foundations of knowledge. Their work laid the foundation for subsequent philosophical inquiry.- Medieval philosophy: In the Middle Ages, philosophers such as Augustine and Aquinas integrated classical philosophy with Christian theology. They sought to reconcile faith and reason, explore questions about the nature of God, and develop ethical principles based on religious teachings.- Modern philosophy: The Renaissance and the Enlightenment marked a period of renewed interest in philosophy. Philosophers such as Descartes, Spinoza, and Kant focused on questions about the nature of the mind, the limits of human knowledge, and the moral implications of reason.- Contemporary philosophy: In the 20th and 21st centuries, philosophy has continued to evolve and diversify. Philosophers such as Wittgenstein, Heidegger, and Rawls have made significant contributions to the study of language, existentialism, and social justice.5. Key philosophical concepts- Dualism: Dualism is the philosophical view that reality consists of two distinct substances, such as mind and body, or good and evil. It explores questions about the relationship between these substances, their interaction, and their ultimate nature.- Determinism: Determinism is the philosophical view that every event, including human actions, is determined by prior causes. It raises questions about free will, moral responsibility, and the nature of causation.- Utilitarianism: Utilitarianism is an ethical theory that holds that the best action is the one that maximizes overall happiness or utility. It raises questions about the nature of happiness, the measurement of utility, and the implications for moral decision-making.- Existentialism: Existentialism is a philosophical movement that emphasizes the individual's freedom, responsibility, and authentic existence. It explores questions about the nature of anxiety, the search for meaning, and the experience of absurdity in human life.6. Importance of philosophy- Critical thinking: Philosophy encourages critical thinking, rational argumentation, and analytical reasoning. It teaches individuals to question assumptions, evaluate evidence, and make informed judgments.- Ethical reflection: Philosophy promotes ethical reflection, moral deliberation, and the exploration of ethical principles. It encourages individuals to consider the consequences of their actions, reflect on their values, and engage in ethical decision-making.- Cultural enrichment: Philosophy provides cultural enrichment, intellectual stimulation, and a deeper understanding of human experience. It offers insights into different worldviews, historical periods, and philosophical traditions.- Personal development: Philosophy contributes to personal development, self-awareness, and the cultivation of wisdom. It fosters a sense of wonder, curiosity, and appreciation for the complexities of life.In conclusion, philosophy is a rich and diverse discipline that encompasses a wide range of topics and approaches. It explores fundamental questions about existence, knowledge, values, reason, mind, and language. By studying philosophy, individuals can develop their critical thinking skills, engage in ethical reflection, enrich their cultural understanding, and promote their personal development. Whether you are interested in metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, logic, or aesthetics, philosophy offers a wealth of knowledge and wisdom to explore.。
Philosophy and Educational Research 教育的哲学取向
Philosophy and Educational Research D Bridges,University of Cambridge,Cambridge,UKã2010Elsevier Ltd.All rights reserved.GlossaryAction research–Research carried out bypractitioners in the sites of their practice and designedto improve that practice through a repeated cycle of reflection,research and change in the practice.Empirical–as in‘empirical enquiry’–Based on observation and experience(and contrasted withmore abstract thought characteristic of philosophy, mathematics,and more speculative aspects of science).Epistemology–or theory of knowledge–A branch of philosophy concerned with the natureand justification of belief,truth claims,etc.Ethics–A branch of philosophy concerned with thenature and justification of beliefs about the right and the good,sometimes referred to as moral philosophy.But ethics is also used to refer to codes of(moral)practice governing,for example,professional lives or,asdiscussed in this article,the conduct of research. Normative–Related to norms,in this case thevalues and principles which underpin educationalpolicy and practice.Phenomenography–Enquiry aimed at eliciting and describing the ways in which people experience theworld–an attempt to access,for example,the learner’sor the teacher’s subjective experience of education. Postmodern–Refers to a body of thought andliterature which challenges a whole range of assumptions associated with,in particular,the aspirations of modern science and technology.It is a notion which rather eludes definition(and most ofthose who espouse its various forms would seek toelude definition),but the paragraph in the text seeksto explain what it means in this context.Practitioner research–Research(usually smallscale)carried out by practitioners,most commonly inthis context teachers(see also action research above).The Contributions of Philosophy to Educational ResearchThis encyclopedia will itself bear witness to the fact that the field of educational research is enormously diverse. Education is not a single form of disciplined enquiry:rather,it is a field of enquiry which draws on a wide range of the intellectual resources of the academy as well as the accumulation of practical wisdom drawn from the experience of educational practitioners.(There are of course interesting philosophical questions about the rela-tionship between these two sources which are commented on briefly below).Its intellectual resources and its methods of enquiry are drawn from disciplines as diverse as history and neuroscience,literary theory and philosophy,behav-iorist psychology and ethnography,law and economics, and museology and the creative arts.This(in part philosophical)picture of the nature of educational research itself points to three kinds of contribu-tion which philosophy can and does make to this endeavor. First,philosophy is itself among the scholarly,systematic, and sustained disciplines which can–and many would argue must–be drawn upon to contribute to educational enquiry.This is philosophy as educational research.Second, the claims and limitations of all of the other forms of enquiry which offer contributions to educational research need to be examined and understood,and this is philosoph-ical work of an epistemological character,that is,rooted in theory of knowledge.This is referred to as philosophy of educational research.Third,any research which requires engagement with human participants and the redistribution of their knowledge and of knowledge about them raises issues of an ethical and political character which have their roots in a long-standing tradition of philosophical ethics and social and political philosophy.The remainder of this article on the contribution of philosophy to educa-tional research is organized under these three headings. Philosophy as Educational Research Philosophers may feel a little uncomfortable about their work being described as research,because this term is more commonly applied in contexts in which people are seeking evidence or data of one kind or another.Philoso-phers tend to be more comfortable with the language of scholarship or enquiry.This is not to say that philosophers have to stay removed from the grounded world of practice or empirical enquiry,though they are sometimes criticized for failure to engage directly with these worlds(Phillips, 2005).It is rather that what they do with such material–as philosophers–is to reflect upon it,analyze it,and interpret it drawing on the rich tradition of philosophical writing which is at the heart of the subject.However,they have on29the whole accepted their role as educational researchers as the price of a seat at the table of the national and interna-tional educational-research community.Their presence in the educational-research community is an essential one,because philosophical questions are central to the theory and practice of education itself.You cannot go far in the consideration of educational policy and practice without engaging with fundamental questions about the aims of education and about the values and principles which ought to govern this policy and practice. These are themselves rooted in conceptions of human being and flourishing,about the individual and society,and about the lives we want to lead–all of which are at the core of the philosophical tradition.You cannot go far in consideration of the curriculum without engaging in these issues but also with questions about the nature and structure of knowledge itself,about what it is to know or understand something, about the relationship between knowledge and skilled per-formance,about the authority which can be claimed for different kinds of belief–and about the implications of all of these considerations for what we teach and how we teach it. You cannot go far in pursuit of the social-justice agenda in education without encountering contested interpretations of social justice and conflicts with other social principles and values.How far should the state intervene in the name of justice and at what price to individual freedom and responsibility?How compatible is a pursuit of equality with the pursuit of excellence?How far ought one to respect the rights of minority communities to maintain traditional practices which appear to disadvantage women?(A fuller account of the contribution of philosophy of education to educational enquiry is discussed in the BERA website and elsewhere in the encyclopedia.)It is not that philosophy will necessarily provide sim-ple answers to such questions:it is perhaps more likely to reveal further layers of complexity.The point is that the questions that are illustrated and many like them are questions which have been and continue to be refined, analyzed,discussed,and substantially investigated in a long tradition of philosophical writing,and if any educa-tional practitioner or enquirer ignores this work,they are destined to rehearse simplistic responses which have long been discredited.A research community which claims to represent the highest standards of intellectual endeavor and whose authority lies precisely in its commitment to critical,systematic,and sustained enquiry cannot restrict these requirements to the empirical aspect of enquiry in a field which,as illustrated above,depends significantly upon philosophical considerations.Philosophy of Educational Research Philosophical considerations underpin all or most of the central debates about educational research methods and methodology,for they are all at base about how we can best know about or understand educational policy and practice in their many shapes and forms.In this section this point is illustrated with reference to four of these debates,though this is by no means a comprehensive treatment of the field.Research and Educational PracticeA large proportion of academic research in education seeks to inform educational practice–in schools,colleges, and universities in professional training environments like hospitals and also in nonformal settings in the workplace, the home,and the community.However,we have to ask whether all these need research as the academy under-stands it at all or should we have confidence in the kind of situated practical judgment(a notion derived from Aristotle)and the tacit knowledge(as Polanyi,1966might call it)developed by teachers and other practitioners?If some further investigation needs to be done,might this best be in the form of practitioner research or action research developed in the classroom and in intimate relationship with the sites in which change is expected to take place and under the control of those responsible for any such change? Such questions are essentially philosophical ones which require answers rooted in an understanding of the nature of practice and the ways in which it can be informed and transformed;of the extent to which general educational prescriptions can be applied to particular situations;of the relationship between theory and practice.In this last case it is not just a question of whether and how theory can inform practice but also of whether that dichotomy does not already distort a proper understanding of the nature of practical judgment.All of this is well-worn philosophical territory,which nevertheless continues to excite contem-porary debate(see,e.g.,Carr(1986),Elliott(2001)and the last part of Hammersley(1993)).Research and Educational PolicySimilarly,we may asks questions about the sort of knowl-edge which ought to inform wider educational policy(as distinct from questions about the often bizarre considera-tions which do,as a matter of fact appear to inform the decisions of policymakers).If,as philosophers would cer-tainly argue,policy is always driven by normative con-siderations,where does this leave us in terms of the contribution which educational research can make?(Just possibly with the conclusion that we had better build in some philosophical consideration of this normative framework.)But,clearly,policy needs to be grounded in evidence of some kind about the actual or likely effects and the consequences of doing this rather than that.This in turn prompts the question‘‘so to what sort of research should we look to provide such evidence?’’30Philosophy of Education–Contemporary IssuesThis is a question which has provoked enormous debate in both educational policy and educational-research com-munities.At one end of the spectrum,it has been answered in very restrictive terms.The What W orks Clearing House in the United States has set as the gold standard for what it calls evidenced-based practice research which conforms to the standards of the double-blind controlled experiment which has achieved preeminence in medical research.In the UK,the Evidence for Policy and Practice Information (EPPI)Centre established to conduct systematic reviews of educational research operates with criteria which are not quite so restrictive,but which nevertheless exclude large swathes of the research which is carried on across the educational community.(For a fuller discussion of these issues see Bridges et al.(2009)and Hammersley(2007)).At the same time,as steps are being taken to restrict the range of research which is supposed to inform policy, the wider educational-research community itself has expansively embraced a wider and wider range of intel-lectual resources drawn from almost every corner of the academy–not only from the social sciences(which have themselves extended and hybridized their repertoire) but from the humanities(biography and autobiography, discourse analysis)and,as Elliott Eisner encouraged in his presidential address to the American Educational Research Association,the creative arts(Eisner,1993).It is not proposed to enter these debates in this context. The point to be made is that such debates about what kind of knowledge can and should inform educational policy-making are essentially philosophical ones.The claim that only research which adopts successfully the experimental design of the double-blind controlled experiment and, equally,the claim that educational research can benefit from the contribution of the creative arts are both philo-sophical claims which require not empirical evidence but careful philosophical argumentation and critique if they are to be sustained.The irony for the What W orks movement is that no double-blind experiment will ever demonstrate that the experiment should be the preferred form of educational enquiry.The Qualitative/Quantitative DebateA third and related area of essentially philosophical debate about educational research is closely related to this last one insofar as it is another example of argument about what kind of research can best illuminate educational policy, practice,and experience.The debate which is often couched in terms of the opposition between qualitative and quantitative research paradigms is referred to here, though most sophisticated contributors to this debate immediately point out that this is both a crude and mis-leading dichotomy.It is crude because both terms pick out what are in fact some very diverse forms of enquiry:both large population studies in sociology and small controlled experiments in classrooms,for example,might come under the quantitative label,just as a long-term ethnographic study of playground rituals,a piece of autobiographical writing by a teacher,and a piece of applied critical theory might all be called qualitative.They are misleading because quantitative data might very well have a place in the sort of thick description of,for example,a school or its neighbor-hood provided in what are normally thought of as qualita-tive case studies.Equally,some researchers will subject what might otherwise be regarded as qualitative data,for example a careful transcription of a lesson or an interview, to quantitative analysis while others could apply a different, interpretative analysis to the same data.Such disassembling of the dichotomy has not,however, ended controversy which is seen by some to have ramifi-cations which extend far beyond the educational-research community and into the very fabric of what is presented by some as a modern(ist)world bent on reducing the social world to a technology whose functioning can be rationally managed,controlled,and(the key to all of this) measured(Smith,2007)and by others as a postmodern world,fractured,a-rational,defeating(happily perhaps) centralized,technocratic management,a world in which notions of truth and certainty are replaced by a mixture of social relativism,nihilism,fancifulness,irony–or none of these because it refuses to be captured in any of these ways(Stronach and MacLure,1997;Peters,2004).If not all researchers(nor even all philosophers)iden-tify fully with either of these theoretical camps,this wider argument nevertheless adds an intellectual and political frisson to more modest debates–all of which are similarly philosophically rooted.To take what must surely be a central concept in any educational research agenda:‘‘What learning is taking place in this setting?’’Drawing on the contemporary range of educational research we might find at least the following illustrative range of responses.1.An old style behaviorist psychologist interprets learningas a relatively stable change in behavior.(S)he needs to do some systematic observation of the pupils’behavior and probably conduct a test devised to quantify the learning which has taken place.2.A neuroscientist(and neuroscience is an increasinglyinfluential source of educational research)will need some more sophisticated observational techniques,in-volving technology which will enable him or her to observe(and again probably measure)changes in the structure or activity of the brain.3.A phenomenologist will probably want to conduct anextended interview with a selection of the pupils,ex-ploring their experience of the lessons in questions and their own self-reporting on what they felt they may or may not have been learning,what they benefited from and why.Philosophy and Educational Research31There may be several different reasons why someone might prefer in general to adopt one of these approaches over another.In part the preference will depend on what one means by learning,though an answer to this question will almost certainly depend on how we think of human beings:Are they reducible to their behavior?Do we want to get rid of what Gilbert Ryle referred to as the ghost in the machine(Ryle,1973)?What is the relationship between activity of the brain and activity of the mind? How important is it to think of and to relate to human beings as experiencing beings and to understand the world through their eyes?Beyond these fundamental philosophical questions,there are some more practical ones:How useful is it to whom to know about,for exam-ple,electrical signals in the brain as compared with a child’s own perception of his or her own learning?What can a teacher do with such knowledge?Objectivity and Subjectivity in Educational ResearchThe contrasting styles of enquiry illustrated above also raise issues which are sometimes expressed in terms of objectivity and subjectivity(although again this dichot-omy is probably too crude–at very least,we need to add the notion of intersubjectivity,of the social character of the construction of knowledge,to the spectrum).This distinction operates at two levels at least.First,we might apply it to the objects of our enquiry,so that the behav-iorist and the neuroscientist might claim to be observing the objective world of human behavior and of brain activ-ity,respectively.By contrast,the phenomenologist might be said to be investigating the subjective world of human experience.The distinction gets blurred when,for exam-ple,we attempt to describe human behavior,which is almost impossible without reference to the individual and social significance which human beings attach to different forms of behavior(Is the child who holds two fingers up to his teacher indicating a numerical quantity or something rather ruder?)and to human intentionality, both of which are embedded in the kind of perceptions which the phenomenologist seeks to describe and inter-pret.However,the objectivity/subjectivity distinction continues to frame a lot of educational debate and again we are dealing with matters which are essentially philo-sophical in character.The language of objectivity and subjectivity also serves to distinguish the aspirations of different educational researchers and the way in which they deal with the presentation of their research to a readership.At one end of the spectrum,researchers seek to go as far as they can to eliminate through their methodology and their style of presentation the effect,the visibility,and indeed,the very presence of the researcher.This is indeed one of the aspirations of the double-blind controlled experiment which has been referred to already.Such research goes to great lengths to reduce any impact which the presence of the researcher might have on the research site or partici-pants;it seeks objectivity in the reporting and interpreting of the data;the hand of human authorship is concealed by stylistic devices which replace the first person(I did this and then I observed that...’’)by the third person(The researcher used a standardized test...),or employs the passive voice(the students were observed)rather than the active voice(I observed the students...).Elsewhere on the spectrum are advocates of the view that this search after objectivity is ultimately doomed to failure:subjectivity will always enter into educational research,perhaps through the definition of the research agenda or the research questions;through the selection of research methods and methodology;subtly through what is not asked or noted as well as what is,in the collection of data;in the observation;in the analysis;and in the report-ing.W e deceive ourselves,it is claimed,if we imagine that we can escape such subjectivity.It is‘‘a garment which cannot be removed’’(Peshkin,1988:7).This skepticism with respect to the possibility of objec-tivity is closely linked to a second opinion that,rather than trying to eliminate subjectivity it is better way to enable a reader of research to take account of such sub-jectivity by providing sufficient information about the researcher–his or her background,interests,ideological attachments,etc.(his or her biographical positioning as it is sometimes called)–and thus enable the reader to take this into account in evaluating the import of the research (see,e.g.,Atkinson,2000).This still,in a sense,represents a search after a kind of objectivity,a version of what things are really like,lying behind what is acknowledged to be one human rendering of this reality.A third and more radical position suggests that even this kind of access to reality is illusory.All we have are people’s subjective experience of the social world, people’s perceptions,and people’s narratives.These can enlarge our imaginative understanding of possible ways of seeing the world,and some may appeal to us more than others for a variety of reasons,but none can command special authority.The concern here is not to offer a conclusion to a debate which continues to run through the education research community,but to point out the nature of the argument. These and other related questions about the nature of our knowledge of the social world,about the possibility of and limitations on such knowledge,about the sense in which we can(or cannot)talk about truth and falsity with respect to the claims issuing from educational research–all of these are the very stuff of philosophical writing over two millen-nia.The debates which rang through Socrates’chambers and the halls of medieval disputations between nominalists and realists are as alive today as they ever were.The passing32Philosophy of Education–Contemporary Issuescenturies may sophisticate the terms in which they are constructed,but they do not seem to resolve them in a way that conclusively sets them aside.In this context are illustrated only some of the issues in the methodology of educational research(and in this section the focus is on epistemological questions)which invite and have received substantial philosophical atten-tion.There are many more.Indeed lying behind any disciplined form of enquiry whose resources are drawn into educational research,there is a body of literature which relates to the philosophy of this discipline and which addresses issues to do with,for example,the kind of confidence which might be attached to findings gener-ated by that particular form of enquiry,the extent to which one might generalize from such findings,or the extent to which one might confidently apply these find-ings in a single particular setting.Without making some attempt to engage with these philosophical questions in any research setting,one cannot confidently know how to interpret the research which one reads.The Ethics and Politics of Educational ResearchEducational researchers have become increasingly aware over recent decades of the ethical and,more widely, social and political significance of their interaction with research participants(some of who are of course chil-dren),research users,and research sponsors(who include powerful government and corporate organizations).This has been reflected in the establishment within profes-sional research organizations like the American Educa-tional Research Association and the British Education Research Association of ethical codes to which their mem-bership is expected to subscribe.Individual higher edu-cation and research institutions have similarly adopted ethical codes governing the conduct of research with human participants and ethics committees tasked with overseeing conformity with these codes.Of course,this process has required considerable debate about what are the duties and rights of researchers,of participants in the research,and of sponsors of the research. Among the central issues,perhaps are the following:The issue of informed consent.To what extent does educa-tional research require the informed consent of those who are going to participate in it?Is covert research excluded?Is the answer the same if one is doing re-search with vulnerable people or in the setting of pow-erful government or corporate organizations?Who needs to give consent?If I want to do research in a classroom,is it sufficient to have the agreement of the head teacher or do I also need the agreement of the teacher?The children?The children’s parents? The issue of confidentiality.To what extent can and should the researcher guarantee confidentiality to an institu-tion or individual involved in the research?How does one balance considerations of confidentiality with the public right to know and indeed with participants’rights to acknowledgment of their contribution?The issue of control over data and its interpretation.To what extent should researchers allow participants to,for ex-ample,amend a transcript of a recorded interview or to control the way in which their contribution is inter-preted in a research report?Should researchers pay for contributions to their research?Is research a form of theft of other people’s knowledge?The issues indicated thus far generally assume a sit-uation in which participants’rights need to be protected from an unscrupulous researcher.There are other issues framed by situations in which the researcher’s own hon-est enquiry is threatened by the power of controlling organizations–especially,perhaps,where these organiza-tions are paying for the research:The issue of the level of control and censorship which those paying for research can exercise over what is researched,how it is researched,and how and where it is reported–and hence...The issue of the responsibility of higher education insti-tutions with respect to the kinds of contract which they enter into and the support they give to their researchers.There are two things to note,in particular,about these issues.First,it is easy to see how what at first might be thought of as more narrowly ethical issues carry important social and political significance.Research is about the creation and redistribution of knowledge,which is itself an act with political consequences insofar as it involves a redistribution of power.Such a redistribution has even weightier conse-quences when,as in the field of education,you are dealing with a social practice which itself carries such a high level of public and political investment and which is itself a matter of intense political controversy.So,beyond the narrower construction of an ethics of educational research,we have to engage with the political principles which should govern such research in a democratic setting.Considerations of social justice and the requirement for informed public opinion jostle with each other and also with considerations about,for example,the right to privacy or confidentiality or at least some kind of credit for the knowledge that partici-pants are sharing(see Griffiths,1998;Smith,1999).Second,although all or most of these issues are ad-dressed in the sort of ethical codes referred to,this does not mean that they are now settled.Many remain contro-versial.Others,which might appear to be agreed at the level of general principle,turn out to be much more complex when one has to operationalize them in the field–and this Philosophy and Educational Research33experience has led to a flurry of debate around the situated-ness of ethical judgment and the relationship between gen-eral principles,embodied perhaps in ethical codes and the resolution of issues in the field.Both of these sets of considerations drive educational researchers into the philosophical territory,which is al-ways close to the surface in ethical argument.How are we properly to understand these ethical claims?By reference to what principles can we resolve conflicts between these ethical principles?What is the relationship between gen-eral principle and situated judgment?All of this is well-worn ground in philosophy and an essential resource for educational researchers seeking to engage seriously and systematically with the sort of issues described. ConclusionThese last two sections describe some examples of the sort of issues which arise out of the endeavor of educational research.It has been argued that these are inescapably philosophical in character and that they are indeed the sorts of questions which philosophers have engaged with and continue to engage with in their academic work. Educational researchers,like any other citizens can,of course,lead their lives without any attention to the litera-ture which engages in a serious,sustained,and systematic way with these issues,but at enormous cost.After all,are not researchers’particular claims to authority and their claims on public attention based precisely on the expec-tation that their enquiry is more serious,sustained,and systematic than that which ordinary citizens or even jour-nalists can normally afford?If philosophical questions are, then,central to the research enterprise,then these too must receive the same rigorous attention as is given to the gathering and analysis of empirical data.However,this argument does not only place an onus of responsibility on educational researchers,but it also points to the importance of philosophers of education engaging in a practical way with the work and life of the wider educational research community–as not only researchers in their own right(as indicated in the first section above)but also as co-workers engaged in a con-tinual conversation about the meaning,justification,and right conduct of the research.See also:Philosophy of Education:Overview. BibliographyAtkinson,E.(2000).Behind the enquiring mind:Exploring the transition from external to internal inquiry.Reflective Practice1(2),149–164. Bridges,D.,Smeyers,P.,and Smith,R.D.(2009).Evidence based Educational Policy.What Evidence?What Basis?Whose Policy?Oxford:Blackwell.Carr,W.(1986).Theories of theory and practice.Journal of Philosophy of Education20(2),177–186.Eisner,E.(1993).Forms of understanding and the future of educational cational Researcher22(7),5–11.Elliott,J.(2001).Doing action research–Doing practical philosophy.Prospero6(3/4),82–100.Griffiths,M.(1998).Educational Research for Social Justice:Getting off the Fence.Buckingham:Open University Press.Hammersley,M.(1993).Educational Research(Volume One):Current Issues.London:Paul Chapman.Hammersley,M.(2007).Education Research and Evidenced Based Practice.London:Sage.Peshkin,A.(1988).In search of subjectivity–One’s cational Researcher17(7),17–21.Peters,M.(2004).Derrida,Deconstruction and Education:Ethics of Pedagogy and Research.Oxford:Blackwell.Phillips,D.C.(2005).The contested nature of empirical educational research(and why philosophy of education offers little help).Journal of Philosophy of Education39(4),577–597.Polanyi,M.(1966).The Tacit Dimension.New York:Doubleday. Ryle,G.(1973).The Concept of Mind.London:Penguin Books. Smith,L.T.(1999).Decolonising Methodologies:Research and Indigenous Peoples.London:Zed Books.Smith,R.D.(2007).As if by machinery:The leveling of educational research.In Bridges,D.and Smith,R.D.(eds.)Philosophy,Methodology and Educational Research,pp31–42.Oxford:Blackwell.Stronach,I.and MacLure,M.(1997).Educational Research Undone:The Postmodern Embrace.Buckingham:OpenUniversity Press.Further ReadingBibby,M.(1997).Using a code of research cational Philosophy and Theory15(1),49–64.Bridges,D.(2003).‘Fiction Written under Oath?’Essays in Philosophy and Educational Research.Dordrecht:Kluwer.Bridges,D.and Smith,R.D.(2007).Philosophy and Methodology of Educational Research.Oxford:Blackwell.Burbules,N.(1998).Principle and process in the ethics of educational research,reply to Robin Small.Australian Journal of Education42(1),116–123.Hammersley,M.(2002).Educational Research,Policy Making and Practice.London:Sage.Homan,R.(1991).The Ethics of Social Research.Harlow:Longman. Howe,K.R.(2003).Closing Methodological Divides:Towards Democratic Educational Research.Dordrecht:Kluwer. McNamee,M.and Bridges,D.(eds.)(2002).The Ethics of Educational Research.London:Blackwell.Paul,J.(2004).Introduction to the Philosophies of Research and Criticism in Education.New York:Prentice-Hall.Pring,R.(2004).Philosophy of Educational Research.London: Continuum.Sikes,P.,Nixon,J.,and Carr,W.(eds.)(2003).The Moral Foundations of Educational Research:Knowledge Enquiry and Values.Maidenhead/Philadelphia,PA:Open University Press/McGraw-Hill. Small,R.(2001).Codes are not enough:What philosophy can contribute to the ethics of educational research.Journal ofPhilosophy of Education35(3),345–360.Relevant Websites–American Educational Research Association, Ethical Standards.–American Educational Research Association, Journal of the American Educational Research Association,Educational Researcher.34Philosophy of Education–Contemporary Issues。
分析当代西方分析教师教育哲学思想
分析当代西方分析教师教育哲学思想分析哲学作为重要的哲学流派，对当代社会人文科学产生了深远影响，这其中包括对教育学的影响。
虽然国内学界对分析教育哲学颇有研究，但对分析教师教育哲学少有涉猎。
事实上，分析哲学不仅成就了分析教育哲学，而且也深刻地影响了教师教育研究。
分析教师教育哲学就是它影响的结果。
本文以约翰•威尔逊(John Wilson) 和伊斯雷尔•谢弗勒(IsraelScheffler) 的分析教师教育哲学思想为例，试图回答什么是分析教师教育哲学以及如何评价分析教师教育哲学?一、威尔逊对“教师教育”的日常语言分析约翰•威尔逊是英国牛津大学的一位著名教育哲学家。
他的分析教师教育哲学思想以分析哲学的日常语言学派为指导思想。
日常语言学派不同于逻辑实证主义，它不认为日常语言是残缺且模糊不清的，而认为日常语言有其自身的游戏规则和丰富的用法。
威尔逊持这种日常语言清晰论。
他认为日常语言蕴含着一种内在的清晰性。
“事实上，我们已经拥有了非常精密的日常语言……我们需要的清晰性已经镶嵌在我们的语言之中，如果我们认真对待日常语言的措辞和特点，那么它将呈现出重要的旨趣。
……教育的境况或者说一般的人类研究，不在于我们已经清楚日常语言的特征而转向新的基础，而在于我们并不清楚至少是有意识的明晰我们已拥有的概念和特征”。
可见，威尔逊采取的这种语言分析法既不是简单的辞典编撰的查询，也不是词源学的考证，同样不是技术语言或学术词汇的考察，而是一种独特的日常语言分析法。
他认为，这种日常语言包含着所有人都能掌握的共识和内容。
只要认真地分析，就能让日常语言内在的清晰性显现出来。
关于威尔逊的分析教师教育哲学思想，玛格丽特•布克曼(Margret Buchmann) 和罗伯特•弗洛登(Robert E. Floden) 在《论做教师教育哲学》一文中有过详细的论述。
威尔逊的分析教师教育哲学思想主要体现在他的《教育理论与教师筹备》中。
他在分析“教师教育应该做什么”这个重要问题时，选择了“教师教育”(teacher education) 这一核心概念。
外国哲学名词解释(7)
西方近代哲学：(英modern western philoso-phy)西方近代哲学思想、理论的统称。
其特点是：以哲学表现出来的意识形态的斗争始终在西方资产阶级革命过程中进行着；资产阶级哲学家为资产阶级革命提供了哲学的理论根据；认识论成为哲学研究的主要内容。
在近代初期，文艺复兴运动以人与自然为研究的对象，以人文主义反对神道，以自然科学的方法继续了中世纪唯名论的科学研究传统。
其代表是但丁、彼特拉克、哥白尼(Nicolaus Copernicus,1473—1543)、伽利略。
英国F.培根的哲学揭露经院哲学的不切实际，提出以经验论与归纳法作为对自然进行研究的理论与方法。
法国笛卡儿则提出怀疑论，主张以“自我”作为知识的可靠基础，以清楚明白作为真理的标准，以上帝作为达到对自然界的实在性认识的保证，并在物理学上坚持唯物主义。
F.培根和笛卡儿开始了近代哲学中的经验论与唯理论的对立。
经验论随着英国革命的发展而改变了它的形式，英国霍布斯成为机械唯物主义的代表。
洛克集中研究了认识过程问题，并从经验论的认识原理出发，提出资产阶级的经济、政治、道德、宗教、教育等方面的理论。
贝克莱与休谟的哲学从18世纪的英国现实出发，提供了资产阶级掌权以后有利于巩固政权的哲学理论，它不是把经验看成客观事物的反映，而是看成主观的感知或知觉，从而调和了科学与宗教的矛盾，陷入唯心主义的经验论。
唯理论的发展随着各国情况的不同而有所不同，荷兰斯宾诺莎在荷兰的政治自由状况下，把唯理论发展为一种唯物主义体系，强调神或实体即自然界，而自然界是自行发展的(自因),并认为真正的自由在于遵照自然界的规律性与必然性。
德国莱布尼茨的单子论是一种客观唯心主义体系，认为单子的等级是一种精神的等级，而上帝是最高级的单子，它对世界作了“前定和谐”的安排。
经验论和唯理论作为西方近代哲学前期的两大派别，都是一种片面的哲学。
其原因主要在于当时的哲学家在认识论上的着重于经验或着重于理性，不理解人的认识从感性到理性的过程，而各自作了一些片断的研究。
英语各种主义集合及名词解释
a meaning that is preserved in and discourse but has been more
tholicis in the churches in , , , , and spirituality.
m
Da
Darwinism is a theory of biological evolution developed by Charles
rwinism Darwin and others, stating that all species of organisms arise and develop
Ab rahamis m？
the monotheistic religions, considered collectively.
Ag
1.The view that absolute or ultimate is unattainable, especially
nosticis regarding not based on or perceivable .
sm
conservatives seek to preserve things as they are, emphasizing stability
and continuity, while others, called , oppose modernism and seek a return
to "the way things were.”
• that inhabited by God.
Co
Conservatism as a and promotes retaining traditional social
nservati institutions in the context of the culture and civilization. Some
哲学科学全书纲要的英文名
哲学科学全书纲要的英文名## Outlines of the Encyclopedia of Philosophical Sciences.The Outlines of the Encyclopedia of Philosophical Sciences (Grundlinien der Encyklopädie der philosophischen Wissenschaften) is a work by Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, first published in 1817. It is a systematic exposition of Hegel's philosophical system, and it is considered one of the most important works in the history of philosophy.The Outlines is divided into three parts:1. Logic.2. Philosophy of Nature.3. Philosophy of Spirit.Logic is the first part of the Outlines, and it dealswith the most basic concepts of philosophy, such as being, nothingness, and becoming. Hegel argues that these concepts are not static, but rather they are in a constant state of flux and change. He also argues that the laws of logic are not arbitrary, but rather they are based on the nature of reality itself.Philosophy of Nature is the second part of the Outlines, and it deals with the natural world. Hegel argues that nature is not a separate realm from spirit, but rather itis a manifestation of spirit. He also argues that the lawsof nature are not fixed and immutable, but rather they are constantly evolving.Philosophy of Spirit is the third and final part of the Outlines, and it deals with the human spirit. Hegel argues that the human spirit is the highest form of reality, and that it is the goal of all history. He also argues that the human spirit is not a static entity, but rather it is in a constant state of development.The Outlines is a complex and challenging work, but itis also a rewarding one. It is a work that has had a profound influence on the history of philosophy, and it continues to be studied and debated today.## Hegel's Philosophical System.Hegel's philosophical system is based on the idea that reality is a constantly evolving process of becoming. He argues that all things are in a state of flux and change, and that there is no such thing as a static or unchanging reality.Hegel also argues that the laws of logic are not arbitrary, but rather they are based on the nature of reality itself. He believes that the laws of logic are the laws of thought, and that they are therefore the laws of reality.Hegel's philosophical system is often referred to as idealism, because it emphasizes the importance of the mind and spirit. Hegel argues that the mind is the source of all reality, and that the world is a product of the mind.Hegel's idealism is not solipsism, however. He does not believe that the world is simply a product of our own imagination. Rather, he believes that the world is a real and independent entity, but that it is also a product of the mind.Hegel's philosophical system is a complex and challenging one, but it is also a powerful and persuasive one. It is a system that has had a profound influence on the history of philosophy, and it continues to be studied and debated today.## The Outlines in the History of Philosophy.The Outlines was first published in 1817, and it was immediately recognized as a major work of philosophy. It was quickly translated into several languages, and it was soon being studied and debated by philosophers all over the world.The Outlines had a profound influence on thedevelopment of philosophy in the 19th century. It was one of the main sources of inspiration for the idealist movement, and it also helped to shape the development of Marxism.In the 20th century, the Outlines continued to be studied and debated by philosophers. It was a major source of inspiration for the existentialist movement, and it also helped to shape the development of analytic philosophy.The Outlines is still a major work of philosophy today. It is a work that is studied and debated by philosophersall over the world. It is a work that has had a profound influence on the history of philosophy, and it continues to be a source of inspiration for philosophers today.。
48种哲学主义
48种哲学主义《48种哲学主义》哲学是一门思考人生和世界的学科，它涉及到许多不同的学派和理论。
在这个丰富多样的领域中，有许多不同的哲学主义出现。
下面将介绍48种哲学主义，每种主义都表达了不同的思想和观点。
1.唯物主义：认为物质是唯一真实存在的东西，精神和意识是物质的产物。
2.唯心主义：认为意识和精神是唯一真实存在的东西，物质只是意识的表象。
3.实用主义：强调实际行动和实践的重要性，关注解决问题和达成目标。
4.理性主义：强调理性和逻辑的重要性，认为通过思考和推理可以获得真理。
5.经验主义：认为经验是获得知识和理解世界的唯一途径。
6.唯心唯物主义：认为物质和意识都是真实存在的东西，但二者相互依赖。
7.逻辑实证主义：强调逻辑和经验的重要性，认为只有经过验证的陈述才是有意义的。
8.辩证法唯物主义：强调事物的矛盾和变化，认为事物的发展是通过矛盾的冲突而实现的。
9.结构主义：关注结构和体系的重要性，认为事物的意义和价值来自于其在整体结构中的位置。
10.人文主义：强调人类的尊严和价值，关注人类的幸福和进步。
11.个人主义：强调个体的权利和自由，认为个体的利益优先于集体的利益。
12.社会主义：强调社会公平和经济平等，主张社会的共同所有制和计划经济。
13.自由主义：强调个人自由和个人权利，主张市场经济和个人的自由选择。
14.实证主义：强调通过观察和实验来验证理论，主张科学的方法和精确的测量。
15.现象学：关注意识和经验的本质，认为事物的意义来自于主体的体验。
16.勃洛克主义：强调个体的意识和经验的重要性，认为个体的体验是真实的。
17.文化相对主义：认为文化和价值观念是相对的，没有绝对的标准。
18.伦理学：研究道德和行为的原则，探讨人们应该如何行动和生活。
19.人类学：研究人类的文化和社会行为，理解人类的多样性和共同性。
20.环境伦理学：强调环境和自然的价值，主张保护环境和可持续发展。
21.生命哲学：探讨生命的意义和价值，思考生命和死亡的问题。
英语各种主义集合及名词解释
Expressionismwas amodernistmovement, initially inpoetryandpainting, originating in Germany at the beginning of the 20th century.
Epicureanism
Esotericism
Esotericism(oresoterism) signifies the holding ofesotericopinionsor beliefs,[1]that is, ideas preserved or understood by a small group of those specially initiated, or of rare or unusual interest.
Communism
1The ideology of political parties that use the termCommunistin their names, usuallyMarxistandLeninist.
2The socio-economic system based on such parties' ideologies.
Creationism
Creationismis the belief that theUniverseandLifeoriginate "from specific acts ofdivine creation."
Catholicism
Catholicismis used as a broad term for describing specific traditions in theChristianchurches intheology,doctrine,liturgy,ethics, and spirituality.
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
Based on the work of Dao De Jing, Taoism promotes the belief that a person should live a simple life, not to strive for wealth, fame or power, which will only give one worries and trouble.
The school favours the political principle of “achieving good government through non-action”(无 为而治)
Mohism
Based on the teaching of Mozi, the school cherishes universal love which states that if all the people in the world loved one another, there will be no hatred, calamities, and hostilities.
Chinese Language and Culture
Unit 2 Philosophy and Religions
Contents
➢ Chinese Philosophy ➢ Chinese Religions
Chinese Philosophy
➢ The Development of Ancient Chinese Philosophy ➢ The Basic Features of Ancient Chinese Philosophy ➢ Characteristics of Chinese Ethics and Morality
The most influential schools were Confucianism (儒家), Taoism (道家), Mohism (墨家) and Legalism (法家)
Байду номын сангаасonfucianism
The school takes the teachings of Confucius as its core of thought and regards the words and deeds of Confucius as its highest code (准则) of behavior.
Stress on Spiritual Existence
Ancient Chinese philosophers studies different kinds of philosophical problems based on reality and experience, but all of them paid attention to the study of existence. all pursue in order to achieve the highest spiritual state.
It advocates the benevolence and justice, allegiance and forbearance (仁、义、忠、恕), the doctrine of the golden mean (中庸) and values the ethical relations of men.
Taoism
Founded by Lao Zi and Zhuang Zi, the school advocates the doctrine that the Dao is the course, the principle, the substance, and the standard of all things, to which all of them must conform.
dynasties (明清实学)
The philosophy in Pre-Qin times (先秦子学)
The philosophy in Pre-Qin times was marked by the emergence of various ancient philosophical views.
Legalism
Legalism, begun by Hanfeizi, espouses (主张) laying down laws to unify the thought of people, promoting agriculture to achieve affluence (富裕), waging (进行) wars to gain strength and power, and establishing a system of bureaucracy (官僚制度).
(魏晋玄学) The buddhist philosophy during the Sui and
Tang dynasties (隋唐佛学) Neo-confucianism in Song and Ming dynasties
(宋明理学) Application philosophy in the Ming and Qing
The Development of Chinese Philosophy
The philosophy in Pre-Qin times (先秦子学) The orthodox philosophy during the Han
Dynasty (两汉经学) Metaphysics during the Wei and Jin dynasties
The Basic Features of Chinese Ancient Philosophy
Stress on spiritual existence Stress on practice Stress on morality Stress on harmony Stress on intuition