Education and its borderlines. An essay about the nature of education

Herner Sæverot, Glenn-Egil Torgersen
{"title":"Education and its borderlines. An essay about the nature of education","authors":"Herner Sæverot, Glenn-Egil Torgersen","doi":"10.29173/PANDPR19865","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This essay initiates a fundamental discussion about education’s nature and character, and raises the questions: Is education reliant on other disciplines as, for example, psychology, sociology and philosophy? Or may education be thought of independently, without being reliant on other disciplines? These questions are discussed in the light of Theodor Litt’s educational reading of Hegel’s understanding of dialectics, as it appears in the book Phenomenology of Spirit, in order to support that education has a relational and dialectic nature. In the second part, we connect the concept of ‘Hegelian dialectic structure’ with scientific theory. More specifically, we introduce a theoretically oriented concept, based on semantic theory construction; namely, ‘relational parameter bundles’. This concept clarifies the difference between education and other ‘scientific,’ often more empirically based disciplines, such as psychology, on which education, or rather, educational researchers, traditionally rely. Through our theoretical approach we aim to uncover fundamental differences within different disciplines’ scientific thinking, and their use of theories and models, which then manifest themselves in the discipline’s scientific assessments and practical actions. An uncritical integration of other disciplines in education may destroy the ‘true’ nature of education, and thus pose a danger to education’s character, problem areas and ways of conducting research. That does not mean that education shall be isolated from other disciplines, it is rather a question of when perspectives from other disciplines should be included in educational matters. Not before the educational questions are raised and worked through will it be appropriate to obtain knowledge from other disciplines, if, that is, it is deemed necessary based on educational judgment.","PeriodicalId":217543,"journal":{"name":"Phenomenology and Practice","volume":"20 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Phenomenology and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29173/PANDPR19865","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This essay initiates a fundamental discussion about education’s nature and character, and raises the questions: Is education reliant on other disciplines as, for example, psychology, sociology and philosophy? Or may education be thought of independently, without being reliant on other disciplines? These questions are discussed in the light of Theodor Litt’s educational reading of Hegel’s understanding of dialectics, as it appears in the book Phenomenology of Spirit, in order to support that education has a relational and dialectic nature. In the second part, we connect the concept of ‘Hegelian dialectic structure’ with scientific theory. More specifically, we introduce a theoretically oriented concept, based on semantic theory construction; namely, ‘relational parameter bundles’. This concept clarifies the difference between education and other ‘scientific,’ often more empirically based disciplines, such as psychology, on which education, or rather, educational researchers, traditionally rely. Through our theoretical approach we aim to uncover fundamental differences within different disciplines’ scientific thinking, and their use of theories and models, which then manifest themselves in the discipline’s scientific assessments and practical actions. An uncritical integration of other disciplines in education may destroy the ‘true’ nature of education, and thus pose a danger to education’s character, problem areas and ways of conducting research. That does not mean that education shall be isolated from other disciplines, it is rather a question of when perspectives from other disciplines should be included in educational matters. Not before the educational questions are raised and worked through will it be appropriate to obtain knowledge from other disciplines, if, that is, it is deemed necessary based on educational judgment.
教育及其边界。一篇关于教育本质的文章
本文对教育的性质和特征进行了根本性的探讨,并提出了以下问题:教育是否依赖于其他学科,如心理学、社会学和哲学?或者教育可以独立思考,而不依赖于其他学科?这些问题是根据西奥多·利特在《精神现象学》一书中对黑格尔辩证法理解的教育解读来讨论的,以支持教育具有关系和辩证法的本质。第二部分,我们将“黑格尔辩证法结构”概念与科学理论联系起来。更具体地说,我们引入了一个基于语义理论构建的理论导向概念;即“关系参数包”。这一概念澄清了教育与其他“科学”学科之间的区别,这些学科通常更以经验为基础,比如心理学,教育,或者更确切地说,教育研究者传统上依赖于心理学。通过我们的理论方法,我们旨在揭示不同学科的科学思维之间的根本差异,以及他们对理论和模型的使用,然后在学科的科学评估和实际行动中体现出来。在教育中不加批判地整合其他学科可能会破坏教育的“真正”本质,从而对教育的性质、问题领域和开展研究的方式构成危险。这并不意味着教育应该与其他学科隔离开来,而是一个何时应该将其他学科的观点纳入教育事务的问题。只有在提出并解决教育问题之前,从其他学科获取知识才是合适的,也就是说,如果根据教育的判断认为有必要的话。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信