:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:無基礎的道德是否可能?Rorty道德觀與相關論爭之探討及其教育啟示
書刊名:教育學刊
作者:洪如玉 引用關係
作者(外文):Hung, Ru-yu
出版日期:2008
卷期:30
頁次:頁1-27
主題關鍵詞:族群中心主義最低限度道德德育實用主義感性道德EthnocentrismMinimum moralityMoral educationPragmatismSentimental morality
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(4) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:3
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:127
道德教育的目的一向被視為是傳遞社會既定之倫理價值、風俗、道德及培養學生道德認知、道德推理與道德實踐之能力,此種目的預設自律理性(autonomous rationality)與道德真理(moral truth),而理性與真理為超越世俗之先驗預設,換言之,傳統道德觀植基於形上先驗基礎。然而,當代道德理論與啟蒙理想遭到許多嚴厲質疑,例如:美國新實用主義哲學家Richard Rorty抨擊西方思想傳統與道德傳統中的本質主義(essentialism)與基礎主義(foundationalism),Rorty思想在當代學界也引起激烈探討,故本文試圖釐清Rorty的無基礎道德觀之內涵,及其相關爭議,最後說明Rorty觀點與相關論爭對於德育的啟示,本文認為,Rorty的道德觀點可稱為「最低限度道德觀」:以愛與正義作為主軸之具有實踐性與教育性之道德觀點。道德教育的目的一向被視為是傳遞社會既定之倫理價值、風俗、道德及培養學生道德認知、道德推理與道德實踐之能力,此種目的預設自律理性(autonomous rationality)與道德真理(moral truth),而理性與真理為超越世俗之先驗預設,換言之,傳統道德觀植基於形上先驗基礎。然而,當代道德理論與啟蒙理想遭到許多嚴厲質疑,例如:美國新實用主義哲學家Richard Rorty抨擊西方思想傳統與道德傳統中的本質主義(essentialism)與基礎主義(foundationalism),Rorty思想在當代學界也引起激烈探討,故本文試圖釐清Rorty的無基礎道德觀之內涵,及其相關爭議,最後說明Rorty觀點與相關論爭對於德育的啟示,本文認為,Rorty的道德觀點可稱為「最低限度道德觀」:以愛與正義作為主軸之具有實踐性與教育性之道德觀點。
The goal of moral education has been taken as the delivery of established ethical values, conventions and the fostering of the ability of students’ moral cognition, reasoning and practice. This goal is pointed out to assume the autonomous rationality and moral truth a priori. In other words, traditional morality is grounded on the transcendental presupposition. However, this view is facing many challenges. Foundationless morality, proposed by the best-known neo-pragmatist Richard Rorty, is among the piercing challenges which criticize the essentialism and foundationalism underlying the traditional view. In addition, Rorty’s view of morality without foundations provokes many debates. This article aims at discussing the related debates on Rorty’s moral view, which will be illuminating to moral education.The goal of moral education has been taken as the delivery of established ethical values, conventions and the fostering of the ability of students’ moral cognition, reasoning and practice. This goal is pointed out to assume the autonomous rationality and moral truth a priori. In other words, traditional morality is grounded on the transcendental presupposition. However, this view is facing many challenges. Foundationless morality, proposed by the best-known neo-pragmatist Richard Rorty, is among the piercing challenges which criticize the essentialism and foundationalism underlying the traditional view. In addition, Rorty’s view of morality without foundations provokes many debates. This article aims at discussing the related debates on Rorty’s moral view, which will be illuminating to moral education.
期刊論文
1.Rorty, Richard(1996)。What's Wrong with "Rights"。Harper's Magazine,292(1753),15-19。  new window
2.(1986)。On Ethnocentrism: A Reply to Clifford Geertz。Michigan Quarterly Review,25,525。  new window
3.Rorty, Richard、Rorty, R(1992)。A Pragmatist View of Rationality and Cultural Difference。Philosophy East & West,42(4),581-586。  new window
4.Rorty, R.(1983)。Postmodern Bourgeois Liberalism。The Journal of Philosophy,80,583-589。  new window
5.Peerenboom, R.(2000)。Beyond Apologia: Respecting Legitimate Difference of Opinion While Not Toadying to Dictators - A Reply to Richard Rorty。Philosophy East & West,50,92-96。  new window
6.Rorty, R.(1999)。Response to Randall Peerenboom。Philosophy East & West,50,90-91。  new window
7.Peerenboom, R.(2000)。The Limits of Irony: Rorty and the China Challenge。Philosophy East & West,50,56-89。  new window
8.Miller, C. B.(2002)。Rorty and Moral Relativism。European Journal of Philosophy,10(3),354-374。  new window
圖書
1.徐文瑞、Rorty, Richard(1998)。偶然.反諷與團結:一個實用主義者的政治想像。臺北市:麥田圖書。  延伸查詢new window
2.張國清、Rorty, Richard(2003)。後形而上學希望--新實用主義社會、政治和法律哲學。上海:上海譯文出版社。  延伸查詢new window
3.Perry, M. J.(1988)。The idea of human rights: Four inquiries。New York:Oxford University Press。  new window
4.Rorty, Richard(1982)。Consequences of Pragmatism。Minneapolis, MN:University of Minnesota Press。  new window
5.Rorty, Richard(1991)。Objectivity, Relativism, and Truth: Philosophical Papers。Cambridge University Press。  new window
6.Rorty, Richard McKay(1989)。Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity。Cambridge University Press。  new window
7.Rorty, Richard(1979)。Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature。Princeton University Press。  new window
8.Kant, I.(1997)。Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals。Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals。Cambridge。  new window
9.Rorty, R.(1985)。Solidarity or Objectivity?。Post-analytic Philosophy。New York, NY。  new window
10.Rorty, R.(1993)。Human Rights, Rationality, and Sentimentality。On Human Rights: The Oxford Amnesty Lectures 1993。New York, NY。  new window
11.Horkhelmerj, M.、Adorno, T. W.(1972)。The Concept of Enlightenment, in DiaIectic of Enlightenment。The Concept of Enlightenment, in DiaIectic of Enlightenment。New York, NY。  new window
12.Peirce, C. S.(1933)。Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce。Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce。Cambridge, MA。  new window
13.Tesón, F. R.(2001)。International Human Rights and Cultural Relativism。The Philosophy of Human Rights。St. Paul, MN。  new window
14.Rorty, R.(1998)。Philosophy and Social Hope。Philosophy and Social Hope。London, UK。  new window
15.Pojman, L. P.(1990)。Ethics: Discovering Right and Wrong。Ethics: Discovering Right and Wrong。Belmont, CA。  new window
圖書論文
1.Kant, Immanuel(1996)。The Metaphysics of Morals。The Cambridge Edition of the Works of Immanuel Kant: Practical Philosophy。Cambridge:Cambridge University Press。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關博士論文
 
無相關書籍
 
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE