RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색

인기 검색어

    다국어 입력

    http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

    변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

    예시)
    • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
    • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
    닫기
    KCI등재

    덕성교육의 이해적 접근 = An Understanding Approach to Character Education

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A60134991

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

      다운로드
    서지정보 열기
    • 내보내기
    • 내책장담기
    • 공유하기
    • 오류접수

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    This paper intends to investigate two theoretical models or perspectives to understand character education. One of them is the ``formative`` approach to character education which is eager to transform the non-moral subject into a moral one, whereas the other tries to interpret and understand the experience of character education as moral experience which I am willing to call an ``understanding`` approach. The standpoint of the one seems mostly to be represented by the theories of moral education based on the virtue ethics or the caring ethics, It is to call a ``formative`` approach because it tries to form the morality itself or to mold moral persons through character education, According to that approach, the educational practice as well as the subject who takes part in that practice are located outside moral criteria. It enables us to grasp the common structure of cognitive, moral and aesthetical educations as ``internalization`` on the one hand; it can be estimated as a problematic position in so far as it regards the character education as a pre- or non-moral practice which lies outside the morality on the other hand. Therefore it deserves to be criticized on account of the failure in understanding the characteristics of the educational practice named character education. The second approach which I intended to maintain and compare with the first makes efforts to understand the constitutive and regulative principles of the educational practice called character education. That is definitely to find in Kant`s moral philosophy. According to Kant, character education can not be regarded as a practice to form moral subjects or morality itself, because it can start only on condition that the moral spontaneity of the subjects is presupposed. When character education accepts that condition as its own limits, it can be identified with a practice which helps the subjects to realize their own morality. To put it shortly, the subjects who take part in character education are already moral ones. They are moral beings, except that they have not yet arrived at such a maturity as to exercise their own autonomy independently. Therefore concrete practices in character education should be such that can help the participants to give mature forms to their own morality. With a word, character education is a moral practice in itself, in the sense that it leads the presupposed moral spontaneity of the participants to its maturity.
    번역하기

    This paper intends to investigate two theoretical models or perspectives to understand character education. One of them is the ``formative`` approach to character education which is eager to transform the non-moral subject into a moral one, whereas th...

    This paper intends to investigate two theoretical models or perspectives to understand character education. One of them is the ``formative`` approach to character education which is eager to transform the non-moral subject into a moral one, whereas the other tries to interpret and understand the experience of character education as moral experience which I am willing to call an ``understanding`` approach. The standpoint of the one seems mostly to be represented by the theories of moral education based on the virtue ethics or the caring ethics, It is to call a ``formative`` approach because it tries to form the morality itself or to mold moral persons through character education, According to that approach, the educational practice as well as the subject who takes part in that practice are located outside moral criteria. It enables us to grasp the common structure of cognitive, moral and aesthetical educations as ``internalization`` on the one hand; it can be estimated as a problematic position in so far as it regards the character education as a pre- or non-moral practice which lies outside the morality on the other hand. Therefore it deserves to be criticized on account of the failure in understanding the characteristics of the educational practice named character education. The second approach which I intended to maintain and compare with the first makes efforts to understand the constitutive and regulative principles of the educational practice called character education. That is definitely to find in Kant`s moral philosophy. According to Kant, character education can not be regarded as a practice to form moral subjects or morality itself, because it can start only on condition that the moral spontaneity of the subjects is presupposed. When character education accepts that condition as its own limits, it can be identified with a practice which helps the subjects to realize their own morality. To put it shortly, the subjects who take part in character education are already moral ones. They are moral beings, except that they have not yet arrived at such a maturity as to exercise their own autonomy independently. Therefore concrete practices in character education should be such that can help the participants to give mature forms to their own morality. With a word, character education is a moral practice in itself, in the sense that it leads the presupposed moral spontaneity of the participants to its maturity.

    더보기

    참고문헌 (Reference)

    1 김상무, "현대 교육철학의 다양한 흐름." 학지사 2009

    2 Platon, "프로타고라스" 범우사 2002

    3 Galtung, J, "평화적 수단에 의한 평화" 들녘 2000

    4 Kant, I., "칸트의 교육이론" 학지사 193-285, 1803

    5 김상섭, "자율적 주체의 형성 문제에 비춰본 심미적 교육의 가능성" 4 (4): 1-22, 2003

    6 Kant, I, "이성의 한계 안에서의 종교" 이화여자대학교출판부 2003

    7 백종현, "윤리형이상학 정초" 아카넷 2005

    8 백종현, "윤리형이상학" 아카넷 2012

    9 김상섭, "아리스토텔레스에 있어서 습관화로서의 도덕교육" 한국교육철학학회 (36) : 7-25, 2006

    10 백종현, "실천이성비판" 아카넷 2002

    1 김상무, "현대 교육철학의 다양한 흐름." 학지사 2009

    2 Platon, "프로타고라스" 범우사 2002

    3 Galtung, J, "평화적 수단에 의한 평화" 들녘 2000

    4 Kant, I., "칸트의 교육이론" 학지사 193-285, 1803

    5 김상섭, "자율적 주체의 형성 문제에 비춰본 심미적 교육의 가능성" 4 (4): 1-22, 2003

    6 Kant, I, "이성의 한계 안에서의 종교" 이화여자대학교출판부 2003

    7 백종현, "윤리형이상학 정초" 아카넷 2005

    8 백종현, "윤리형이상학" 아카넷 2012

    9 김상섭, "아리스토텔레스에 있어서 습관화로서의 도덕교육" 한국교육철학학회 (36) : 7-25, 2006

    10 백종현, "실천이성비판" 아카넷 2002

    11 Kant, I., "실용적 관점에서본 인간학" 울산대학교출판부 1998

    12 Kant, I., "순수이성비판" 아카넷 2010

    13 박병춘, "배려 윤리와 도덕 교육" 울력 2002

    14 Platon, "메논" 조선대출판부 2007

    15 Koyre, A., "덕의 상실" 문예출판사 1997

    16 최병태, "덕과 규범. 도덕교육의 이해" 교육과학사 1996

    17 Kohli, W., "다문화시대 대화와 소통의 교육철학" 학지사 2010

    18 김재홍, "니코마코스 윤리학" 이제이북스 2006

    19 Platon, "국가・정체" 서광사 2005

    20 Kohlberg, L., "The Philosophy of Moral Development" Harper & Row 1981

    21 Taylor, Ch., "Quellen des Selbst. Die Entstehung der neuzeitlichen Identität" F.a.M 1994

    22 Jaeger, W., "Paideia. Die Formung des Griechischen Menschen" Berlin 1959

    23 Sandel, M., "Liberalism and the Limits of Justice" Cambridge University Press 1982

    24 Gilligan, C., "In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development" Harvard University Press 1982

    25 Picht, G., "Hier und Jetzt. Philosophieren nach Auschwitz und Hiroshima" Stuttgart 1980

    26 Kim, S. S., "Die Selbstkonstituierung des moralischen Subjekts und das Faktum der Vernunft" Münster/New York/München/Berlin 2003

    27 May, S., "Critical Multiculturalism. Theory and Practice" Routledge 2010

    28 Foster, L., "Comtemporary Philosophical Perspectives on Pluralism and Multiculturalism" The University of Massachusetts Press 1994

    29 Noddings, N., "Caring: A Feminine Approach to Ethics and Moral Education" University of California Press 1984

    더보기

    동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

    동일학술지 더보기

    더보기

    분석정보

    View

    상세정보조회

    0

    Usage

    원문다운로드

    0

    대출신청

    0

    복사신청

    0

    EDDS신청

    0

    동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

    더보기

    주제

    연도별 연구동향

    연도별 활용동향

    연관논문

    연구자 네트워크맵

    공동연구자 (7)

    유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

    인용정보 인용지수 설명보기

    학술지 이력

    학술지 이력
    연월일 이력구분 이력상세 등재구분
    2026 평가 재인증평가 신청대상 (재인증)
    2020-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (재인증) KCI등재
    2017-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (계속평가) KCI등재
    2013-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2011-03-29 학술지명변경 한글명 : 교육철학 -> 교육철학연구 KCI등재
    2011-03-22 학회명변경 한글명 : 교육철학회 -> 한국교육철학학회
    영문명 : 미등록 -> The Korean Philosophy of Education Society
    KCI등재
    2010-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2008-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2005-05-30 학술지명변경 외국어명 : The Korean Philosophy of Education Society -> The Korean Journal of Philosophy of Education KCI등재
    2005-01-01 등재 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) KCI등재
    2004-01-01 등재 등재후보 1차 PASS (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
    2003-01-01 등재 등재후보 1차 FAIL (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
    2001-07-01 등재 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
    더보기

    학술지 인용정보

    학술지 인용정보
    기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
    2016 0.75 0.75 0.86
    KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
    0.84 0.88 1.27 0.33
    더보기

    이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

    나만을 위한 추천자료

    해외이동버튼