【作者】 喻学林；

【导师】 杜时忠；

【作者基本信息】 华中师范大学 ， 教育学原理， 2007， 博士

【摘要】 二十世纪末的中国，随着市场经济的到来和社会的转型，社会经济、政治、文化的嬗变引起许多道德问题。当人们反思这些道德问题时，常常习惯性地把它与学校道德教育的责任对应起来。自近代正规教育产生以来，为了追求人的发展和社会进步，人们无不对学校的道德教育寄予了厚望。人们不断地夸大道德教育的作用，从国家到社会一直在强调学校的道德教育责任，而当教育没有达到人们的期望时，社会又对它盲目地横加指责。学校的道德教育越来越步履艰难，越来越陷入困境。从人类文明历史发展的全景考察，道德及道德教育虽然为人类社会发展所必需，但它们并不因此而越来越具有决定性的作用。尤其是当今学校德育对人和社会的发展的作用已经发生了很大的变化。在社会转型期，学校道德教育的功能问题成为众多研究者的主要议题之一。当我们对道德教育寄予很高期望或探讨道德教育应该怎样发挥好它的功能时，有一个前提性的命题值得研究者反思：学校的道德教育的作用是不是无限可能的?对这一问题所抱有的观念不仅影响到人们的道德理想和道德教育理想，而且影响到人们的教育行动，也影响到道德教育的效果。厘清学校德育自身的作用限度，有利于人们合理地定位学校德育的价值，也有利于学校德育明确而充分地履行好自身的责任。对教育改革的关心和对道德教育困境的忧虑，使我们有必要把思维的触角伸向对德育自身局限性的探讨。教育思想史上夸大学校道德教育功能的思想源远流长。人们要么认为道德教育的作用很多，要么认为道德教育的某一方面作用很大，直至对人和社会的进步具有决定性作用。综观这一思想的本质，虽然它对人类社会的发展充满道德理想主义的良好愿望，对道德教育充满无限的信心，但是由于特定的历史背景和人的认识上的局限性，它忽视了对德育实践活动的条件性和德育本质特性的思考，也缺少对人自身的思想和行动的局限性的思考。以至于一方面由于对道德教育的偏颇认识和盲目乐观，另一方面由于以社会本位主义出发而形成过高的期望，二者最终导致道德教育逐渐地偏离了它培养人——具体的人——的道德品质这一本体性价值。德育功能的变化是随着社会时代的变化而变化的。在传统社会，由于道德在国家建制中举足轻重，道德教育在社会教化和维护社会稳定方面有着重要甚至决定性作用。但是随着现代社会开放而多元化的发展，道德教育活动的发生条件产生了很大的变化。学校德育在社会运行中的地位相对下降，对社会道德的促进作用相对减弱，而制度的规范与教化成为社会正常运行的首要保证。由于现代文明受到功利主义和科技主义的肆虐，它们不仅侵蚀着人的道德精神，而且导致人的实践活动走向异化。道德教育在学校中的伦理地位受到极大的动摇，以致其作用明显地受到削弱。从影响现代人道德发展的全部因素看，社会生活对人的德性的复杂影响使学校已不能在其中起主要或决定作用，而且反过来还可能使学校的努力显得势单力薄。学校的道德教育实践活动是由教育活动的主体借助于德育手段来进行的。构成这一活动过程的要素包括教育者、受教育者、德育内容和德育方法。作为活动手段的德育内容和方法和作为影响源的教育者本身都有局限性。因为个体的道德发展具有自我建构性、生成性、发展性特点，从德育内容看，规约过的道德知识和道德价值使教育对人的道德情感的培养、道德经验的积累、道德态度的养成和道德行为能力的锻炼都与真实、复杂而丰富的社会道德生活需要存在较大距离。德育方法作为达到德育目标的媒介，既因其自身的局限性，也因其所要求的外界条件的局限性而导致借助于它们来实现德育功能，其作用是有限度的。以人们计划好、规定好的道德内容与道德目标来应对道德变化中的人，其影响过程和结果是不确定的；受教育者从学校的程式化、理想化、半自主化的生活中所获也难以达到适应自主道德生活的要求。教育者是对受教育者产生影响的一个重要影响源。然而，鉴于教师自身实际的道德教育素质在一定的时期是一定的，鉴于教师与学生双主体之间的道德理解与交往水平是有限的，对教师的道德权威和道德表率作用既不能过于理想化，也不能施加过度的、不合理的要求。多元价值的社会生活下教师与学生是在共同的道德学习中共同发展。人对人自身的实践改造活动迥异于人对自然客观世界的实践改造活动。其关键就在于道德教育实践活动是人对自己意识与灵魂的塑造，人的意义世界的变化是难以准确把握的。这就决定了这一实践活动的实现机制的特殊性，即使是德育自身的各功能要素产生了作用，其最后功效的显现在教育的时空范围内还具有不确定性、有限性。具体表现为德育活动对人的影响多表现为间接的、隐性的影响，其影响产生效果还具有延时性特点，有些正面的教育意图与作用往往被那些难以避免的、隐性的负面影响所削弱。学校德育活动对个体的道德品质发展和社会的道德风气所起的影响不可能全部在学校教育的时间内完成和体现。道德教育的这种特性表明人的良好德性的形成、社会的道德进步需要全社会的共同努力，也需要人一生的努力。人的社会存在决定社会意识。人的道德观念是在人们的社会实践活动中产生的。而且，什么样的社会实践活动就产生什么样的道德经验和道德观念，具体不同的道德实践又需要具体不同的道德原则和道德价值。社会对人的道德品质的影响合力远远大于学校的影响力。道德品质是在社会生活实践中不断建构、不断生成、不断发展的。学校道德教育只是起引导性、基础性作用。道德教育需要社会的理解与宽容，需要理性地支持。我们毫不否认学校的德育能力，但我们也必须看清学校德育的限度。更多还原

【Abstract】 In the end of the 20th century, the evolution of people’s viewpoints of values has been caused lots of moral issues with the transformation of economy and society. With the reflection of these moral issues, many persons interrogate the responsibility of school moral education customarily. Since the institutional education having begun in modern times, school moral education has always been expected highly. People often exaggerate the role of moral education to omnipotence, and states often emphasize the responsibilities of school. School moral education constantly receives criticism for its being out of expectation. Because of the great change of society and forces from society, school moral education has fallen into a predicament. Through the whole civilization of human being, moral education is no longer decisive to the moral formation and moral development of individuals and society, though it is necessary. The role of modern school moral education has changed greatly.Now the function of moral education has become one of the main topic in educational research. Before our discussion one preconditional subject should be reflected. Are the functions of school moral education unlimited? The idea about it affects not only the aspiration to moral and moral education, but also people’s action of education and the effect of moral education. Understanding the limit of school moral education itself could help people raise reasonable expectation, help school perform its tasks clearly and fully. With the concern about the predicament of moral education, it is necessary for us to study the limitation of it.The exaggeration to moral education has been a long history. People believed firmly that school moral education had either many functions or great power, and believed it could decide the progress of human being. Deepening into the essence of the theory, although it blooms in good wills with moral idealism and unlimited confidence to moral education. It exposed its flaws which neglected the limiting conditions of educational activities, the limitations of school, and the limitations of man’s thought and action. Because of the biased understanding and excessive optimism to school moral education, and the social standard of concept of moral education, they both led moral education gradually deviated its subjective value in cultivating individual’s moral character.The functions of moral education change with the social progress. In traditional society people trusted that moral played a key role in state’s organism, so moral education also played a great, even decisive role in social cultivation and social stability. But with the appearance of complicated and rich life styles in modern times, the formative conditions of moral and moral education have changed a lot. Their status and role have also been falling. Simultaneously institution has become the primary guarantee for social virtue and for man’s virtue. Utilitarianism and scientism are wreaking havoc with our modern civilization, they have corroded people’s moral spirit, and the alienation of educational practice. Finally the ethical spirit of moral education in school is being weakened. Taking a panorama view in all causes to modern man’s moral development, compare- tively school would no longer decide one’s virtue in the varieties of social effects. Eventually schools’ endeavor is less and less powerful.Modern educational activities in school are fulfilled by the subjects with the help of medium of moral education, which includes teachers, students, content of moral education and its methods. They themselves all exist flaws. The moral knowledge and moral values in the content are regulated and limited, which causes it far below individual’s demand in life, it is in a low and basic level in cultivating one’s moral emotion, accumulating one’s experiences, forming moral attitude and tempering moral behaviours,. Applying regulated, planned moral knowledge and goal of moral values to guiding a changing and developing person, the process and effectiveness are uncertain. What students gain from the practice of formulation, idealization and incomplete subjectivity could not adopt them to the real life. Teachers are another source of effect. In view of the fact that teachers’ quality of moral education are not perfect in reality, the interaction and understanding between teachers and students could just reach a certain degree because of the limited level of students development, we could neither raise too ideal requirement to teachers as moral authority and moral model, nor excessive and irrational demand. In a pluralism social life teachers and students develop their moral quality within a learning community.The practice of human to a subjective world is greatly different from that of human to an objective world. Because the former practice is to construct human ’s significance world. It’s a creation to his own consciousness and soul, whose changes could be invisible and uncontrolled. That causes the special mechanism of moral education practice. After the working of all elements in moral education, the effectiveness is still unknown and limited. In details, educational activities affect individuals in an indirect, concealing and postponing way. In the process some frontage functions are weakened by some negative functions. These features indicate that a good virtue would attribute to the endeavor from the whole community, also from a life-long learning.One’s social being decide his social consciousness. Man’s moral concept forms in the social practice. Different social practices demand different moral principles and moral values, form different moral experience. Moral quality is constructing, forming and developing constantly in social life practice. By this opinion, man’s moral quality develops not from educating but from his own practice. People must expect school moral education rationally, and approve it leniently and understandingly. School’s role is just guiding and basic. We never deny the capability of school moral education, but we must forever understand its limit thoroughly.更多还原