通过斯洛特迪克的《人类动物园规则》反思人文主义与教育

IF 0.9 4区 教育学 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Jeong-Gil Woo
{"title":"通过斯洛特迪克的《人类动物园规则》反思人文主义与教育","authors":"Jeong-Gil Woo","doi":"10.1007/s11217-024-09932-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This study examines the challenges of humanism and education in the 21st century as addressed by the German philosopher Peter Sloterdijk in his Elmau Speech (1999). In this lecture, titled <i>Rules for the Human Zoo</i>, Sloterdijk argues that the traditional notion of humanism, specifically “humanism as a literary society,” has reached its conclusion, necessitating the development of a new humanism appropriate for the contemporary era. However, the new concept of humanism emerging from what Sloterdijk terms the “anthropotechnic turn” appears to align with the discourses surrounding human enhancement that have emerged in the 21st century, thereby influencing the realm of education. The first half of this article reports on the significant concerns and criticisms expressed by the media at that time regarding this new humanism, which seems to be associated with eugenicist ideas. Taking a step further, this study critically examines the nature of the challenges around education implied by Sloterdijk, specifically the conflict between “friend of humans and friend of Übermensch”, and explores the potential roles and responsibilities of education in the latter part of the paper.</p>","PeriodicalId":47069,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Philosophy and Education","volume":"60 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rethinking Humanism and Education Through Sloterdijk’s Rules for the Human Zoo\",\"authors\":\"Jeong-Gil Woo\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11217-024-09932-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>This study examines the challenges of humanism and education in the 21st century as addressed by the German philosopher Peter Sloterdijk in his Elmau Speech (1999). In this lecture, titled <i>Rules for the Human Zoo</i>, Sloterdijk argues that the traditional notion of humanism, specifically “humanism as a literary society,” has reached its conclusion, necessitating the development of a new humanism appropriate for the contemporary era. However, the new concept of humanism emerging from what Sloterdijk terms the “anthropotechnic turn” appears to align with the discourses surrounding human enhancement that have emerged in the 21st century, thereby influencing the realm of education. The first half of this article reports on the significant concerns and criticisms expressed by the media at that time regarding this new humanism, which seems to be associated with eugenicist ideas. Taking a step further, this study critically examines the nature of the challenges around education implied by Sloterdijk, specifically the conflict between “friend of humans and friend of Übermensch”, and explores the potential roles and responsibilities of education in the latter part of the paper.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47069,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studies in Philosophy and Education\",\"volume\":\"60 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studies in Philosophy and Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-024-09932-9\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Philosophy and Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-024-09932-9","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究探讨了德国哲学家彼得-斯洛特迪克(Peter Sloterdijk)在其埃尔茂演讲(1999 年)中提到的 21 世纪人文主义和教育所面临的挑战。在这篇题为《人类动物园的规则》的演讲中,斯洛特戴克认为,传统的人文主义概念,特别是 "作为文学社会的人文主义",已经走到了尽头,必须发展适合当代的新人文主义。然而,斯洛特迪克所说的 "人类技术转向 "所产生的新人文主义概念似乎与 21 世纪出现的有关人类提升的论述相吻合,从而影响了教育领域。本文前半部分报道了当时媒体对这种似乎与优生学思想有关的新人文主义所表达的重大关切和批评。本研究进一步批判性地探讨了斯洛特迪克所暗示的教育挑战的性质,特别是 "人类之友与优生之友 "之间的冲突,并在文章后半部分探讨了教育的潜在作用和责任。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Rethinking Humanism and Education Through Sloterdijk’s Rules for the Human Zoo

This study examines the challenges of humanism and education in the 21st century as addressed by the German philosopher Peter Sloterdijk in his Elmau Speech (1999). In this lecture, titled Rules for the Human Zoo, Sloterdijk argues that the traditional notion of humanism, specifically “humanism as a literary society,” has reached its conclusion, necessitating the development of a new humanism appropriate for the contemporary era. However, the new concept of humanism emerging from what Sloterdijk terms the “anthropotechnic turn” appears to align with the discourses surrounding human enhancement that have emerged in the 21st century, thereby influencing the realm of education. The first half of this article reports on the significant concerns and criticisms expressed by the media at that time regarding this new humanism, which seems to be associated with eugenicist ideas. Taking a step further, this study critically examines the nature of the challenges around education implied by Sloterdijk, specifically the conflict between “friend of humans and friend of Übermensch”, and explores the potential roles and responsibilities of education in the latter part of the paper.

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
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
10.00%
发文量
38
期刊介绍: Studies in Philosophy and Education is an international peer-reviewed journal that focuses on the philosophical, theoretical, normative and conceptual problems and issues in educational research, policy and practice. As such, Studies in Philosophy and Education is not the expression of any one philosophical or theoretical school or cultural tradition. Rather, the journal promotes exchange and collaboration among philosophers, philosophers of education, educational and social science researchers, and educational policy makers throughout the world. Contributions that address this wide audience, while clearly presenting a philosophical argument and reflecting standards of academic excellence, are encouraged. Topics may range widely from important methodological issues in educational research as shaped by the philosophy of science to substantive educational policy problems as shaped by moral and social and political philosophy and educational theory. In addition, single issues of the journal are occasionally devoted to the critical discussion of a special topic of educational and philosophical importance. There is also a frequent Reviews and Rejoinders’ section, featuring book review essays with replies from the authors.
×
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