为禁忌赋予语言:现代教育推理中的民族与宗教

Q2 Arts and Humanities
Daniel Tröhler
{"title":"为禁忌赋予语言:现代教育推理中的民族与宗教","authors":"Daniel Tröhler","doi":"10.36368/njedh.v10i2.478","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Like all taboos, nation and religion are so powerful precisely because they are often not brought to language. Educators around the world see themselves as secular, not religious, and rational, not national, and they develop their elegant, moral, and bland arguments precisely on this premise. This is, of course, capable of gaining majority support because it keeps the sociological machinery of educational thinking stably alive, but epistemologically it is unsatisfactory. Educational reasoning is sometimes as elegant as the freestyle of a virtuoso ice skater, sometimes as captivating as a rhetorically gifted village preacher, sometimes as clumsy as a plow horse that thinks it is a dressage horse. Some are the stars in the arena of academic education, others the moralizers, and others the bland extras. This rather simple sociology of educational reasoning emphasizes the different roles that Academics occupy in what Fleck called a “thought collective,” but it obscures that “thought collectives” share common “thought styles” in which, often carefully administered by national professional associations, truth is produced. In education, these “thought collectives” have historically been shaped by two fundamental elements. They are veritable taboo subjects, which are presupposed but hardly ever reflected upon, namely religion and nation.","PeriodicalId":36653,"journal":{"name":"Nordic Journal of Educational History","volume":"44 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Giving Language to Taboos: Nation and Religion in Modern Educational Reasoning\",\"authors\":\"Daniel Tröhler\",\"doi\":\"10.36368/njedh.v10i2.478\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Like all taboos, nation and religion are so powerful precisely because they are often not brought to language. Educators around the world see themselves as secular, not religious, and rational, not national, and they develop their elegant, moral, and bland arguments precisely on this premise. This is, of course, capable of gaining majority support because it keeps the sociological machinery of educational thinking stably alive, but epistemologically it is unsatisfactory. Educational reasoning is sometimes as elegant as the freestyle of a virtuoso ice skater, sometimes as captivating as a rhetorically gifted village preacher, sometimes as clumsy as a plow horse that thinks it is a dressage horse. Some are the stars in the arena of academic education, others the moralizers, and others the bland extras. This rather simple sociology of educational reasoning emphasizes the different roles that Academics occupy in what Fleck called a “thought collective,” but it obscures that “thought collectives” share common “thought styles” in which, often carefully administered by national professional associations, truth is produced. In education, these “thought collectives” have historically been shaped by two fundamental elements. They are veritable taboo subjects, which are presupposed but hardly ever reflected upon, namely religion and nation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36653,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nordic Journal of Educational History\",\"volume\":\"44 6\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nordic Journal of Educational History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.36368/njedh.v10i2.478\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nordic Journal of Educational History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36368/njedh.v10i2.478","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

像所有的禁忌一样,民族和宗教之所以如此强大,正是因为它们往往没有被带入语言。世界各地的教育工作者都认为自己是世俗的,而不是宗教的,是理性的,而不是民族的,他们正是在这个前提下提出了他们优雅的、道德的、平淡的论点。当然,这能够获得大多数人的支持,因为它使教育思维的社会学机制稳定地保持活力,但从认识论上讲,它是不令人满意的。教育推理有时像滑冰大师的自由泳一样优雅,有时像口才出众的乡村牧师一样迷人,有时像一匹自以为是盛装舞步的犁马一样笨拙。有些人是学术教育领域的明星,有些人是道德说教者,还有一些人是平淡无奇的临时演员。这种相当简单的教育推理社会学强调了学者们在弗莱克所谓的“思想集体”中所扮演的不同角色,但它模糊了“思想集体”拥有共同的“思想风格”,在这种“思想风格”中,真理往往由国家专业协会精心管理,从而产生。在教育中,这些“思想集体”在历史上是由两个基本因素形成的。宗教和民族是真正的禁忌话题,是预设的,但很少反思。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Giving Language to Taboos: Nation and Religion in Modern Educational Reasoning
Like all taboos, nation and religion are so powerful precisely because they are often not brought to language. Educators around the world see themselves as secular, not religious, and rational, not national, and they develop their elegant, moral, and bland arguments precisely on this premise. This is, of course, capable of gaining majority support because it keeps the sociological machinery of educational thinking stably alive, but epistemologically it is unsatisfactory. Educational reasoning is sometimes as elegant as the freestyle of a virtuoso ice skater, sometimes as captivating as a rhetorically gifted village preacher, sometimes as clumsy as a plow horse that thinks it is a dressage horse. Some are the stars in the arena of academic education, others the moralizers, and others the bland extras. This rather simple sociology of educational reasoning emphasizes the different roles that Academics occupy in what Fleck called a “thought collective,” but it obscures that “thought collectives” share common “thought styles” in which, often carefully administered by national professional associations, truth is produced. In education, these “thought collectives” have historically been shaped by two fundamental elements. They are veritable taboo subjects, which are presupposed but hardly ever reflected upon, namely religion and nation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Nordic Journal of Educational History
Nordic Journal of Educational History Arts and Humanities-History
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
22
审稿时长
50 weeks
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信