http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
- 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
- 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
RISS 인기검색어
- 검색키워드
- 저자 : 申次均 (검색결과 86 건)
- 무료
- 기관 내 무료
- 유료
-
-
-
-
신차균(ChaKyun Shin) 국민대학교 교육연구소 2012 교육논총 Vol.31 No.-
사람들은 흔히 지행의 괴리를 극복하는 것이 도덕교육의 가장 중요한 과제라고 생각한다. 그러나 지행의 괴리라는 것이 과연 존재하는가, 그것을 극복하는 것이 도덕교육의 참된 과제인가 하는 문제는 엄밀한 철학적 분석이 필요한 문제이다. 그것은 ‘도덕성의 본질’과 ‘도덕적 앎’을 무엇으로 보느냐는 관점과 관련된 문제이기 때문이다. 이 글에서는 지행의 괴리 문제에 관한 통속적 해석이 행위윤리학적 관점에 입각한 것이라는 점과, 그 관점에 입각한 도덕교육은 표면적 행동에 초점을 맞추게 됨으로써 결국 지행의 괴리를 극복한다는 본래의 목적을 달성할 수 없다는 점을 논증했다. 지행의 괴리라는 문제의식은 도덕성의 본질에 대한 피상적인 이해에서 비롯된 잘못된 문제의식이다. 존재윤리학적 관점에서 볼 때 지행의 괴리는 도덕성의 결핍 또는 도덕적 무지현상을 가리키는 것이며, 이 관점에 입각할 때 도덕교육은 단순히 행위규범을 내면화시키는 일이 아니라, 행위규범의 이면에 붙박혀 있는 도덕 이념을 실현함으로써 총체로서의 마음을 함양하는 일이다. 이렇게 보는 것이 도덕교육의 성격을 올바르게 파악하는 길이다. Does there really exist any gap between knowing and doing? This problem is a years-old topic of philosophical debates on moral education. If any gap really exists there, how to bridge the gap is the most serious problem in practicing moral education. The key to resolve this question depends on what is ‘morality’ and what does the ‘moral knowledge’ mean. There are two different interpretations on this matter. ‘A commonsense interpretation’ insists that there exist a gap between knowing and doing and bridging the gap is the most important task of moral education. This interpretation assumes that morality〔morality of action〕 exist in a external society, not in a internal mind, as a system of norms which can be stated as propositions. And also assumes that moral knowledge means knowing those propositions. So it insists that the main task of moral education is internalizing those norms into students’ minds. But ‘a moral mind-centered interpretation’ insists that there is no gap between knowing and doing, because doing is an expression of one's real being(or one's moral mind). This interpretation assumes that morality〔morality of being〕 exists in a internal mind, not in a external society. Though morality reveals itself as a moral action in a concrete situation, before it expresses itself, it is not identifiable as some concrete norms of action and cannot be stated some propositions. So moral knowledge means one’s moral mind as a whole, not knowing some identifiable propositions. According to this interpretation, the most important task of moral education is cultivating a moral mind as the inner source of morality in its true sense. This study attempted to re-examine the two interpretations and their implications on moral education. If we accept the ‘commonsense interpretation’, the focus of moral education will be put on external behavior of students’, not on their internal minds. It may result a failure in cultivating moral mind, and bridging the gap between knowing and doing cannot be achieved. So I insist that moral education should focus on cultivating moral mind as a whole, and that ethical thinking in its true sense is needed in practicing this notion of moral education.
-
-
-
신차균(Shin Cha Kyun) 국민대학교 교육연구소 1994 교육논총 Vol.13 No.-
Education is a purposive human activity. It is decicively important in educational practice to clarify the purpose or intentional aspects of education. But educators do not pay much attention on this problem. And academic discussions on this aspect are far beyond as are supposed to be needed. As a result, there are some confusions in using those intentional terms like "purpose", "aim", "goal", "objective" etc. The purpose of this essay is to examine the status of intention in human conduct and to clarify the difference and relation between the term "educational aim" and "educational objective". It also purports to encourage discussions on aims of education. In order to do this, Michael Oakeshott"s general theory of human conduct was examined and its implications on clarifying the term "educational aim" and "educational objectives" were discussed. And some criticism on the behavioral approach to "educational objectives" were made also.
-
申次均(Shin Cha Gyun) 국민대학교 교육연구소 1987 교육논총 Vol.6 No.-
A theory of education, I think, is a systematic thought about how to educate people, and this thought is supported by particular value orientations towards and images of man and his world. In order to understand an educational theory, it is needed to examine particular world views and value orientations of those who hold the theory, and to examine the social environments and historical circumstances in which that theory is practiced. This study is intended to identify the conspicuous features of the renaissance theory of education and its differences from the Greek notion of liberal education. The term "renaissance" is commonly employed to denote the wonderful awakening of human spirit that heralded the significant departure from medieval world and the dawn of modern times. During that period, great changes have taken place in various aspects of human life. Feudalism, the medieval political order has broken down and ecclesiastically oriented world view has lost its power. Commerce and manufactures have grown up rapidly, cities have become the center of economic activities and a new social class, "the third estate" has emerged. These social changes made their influences felt in the sphere of education almost at once. The humanists who initiated a revolution in education focused attention on the studia humanitatis that included the study of classical literature as the central core of curriculum. But the rise of humanist education was not an entire re-organization of curriculum; it was rather a change in emphasis. The main feature of humanist education is a re-orientation from the divine to the human, and a consequent shift of emphasis from logic as the instrument of theological argumentation to rhetoric as the tool of a human persuasiveness. The passage from traditional to humanist education can in general be defined in terms of a change from a theocentric to an anthropocentric concern in intellectual and moral problems. The humanists believed that man was a creature peculiarly gifted with a capacity for learning. To develop such a native bent, however, methodical training and experience were necessary. The humanists thought that education consisted of three elements; nature, training and practice. Man"s nature provided the potential; training and practice actualized it. The humanistic image of education was one of moulding. It was rather a process of artificial endeavour than of natural growth from within. It was a process to transform the initially given through a process of selective acculturation. In this process, the part played by language was crucial. The essential method of humanist education was imitating the best models which were provided by classical literature, and achieving excellence in style and delivery through repeated exercises. Therefore humanists emphasised classical literature which had the best rhetorical authority. Renaissance humanism in its historical development responded to a certain dissatisfaction with the way in which personal and political values were structured by the transcendent values of christianity. The developing lesson of the renaissance was that man was to create himself within a given social environment through art and artifice; the offsprings of learning and experience, of control and accomplishment. The ideal of life, the ultimate goal of education has changed from a life of contemplation to a life of action. The new orientation was no longer to contemplation and silence, but to expression and action. The notion of man as artificer, exercising his cultural and political arts in time, characterized a movement which resulted in the tremendous expansion of secular culture and learning which it brought about in the area of literature, architecture and moral thought. Humanist education by its nature is not a vocational or professional but a liberal education. It was an education f
-
-
연관 검색어 추천
이 검색어로 많이 본 자료
활용도 높은 자료
