华东师范大学学报(教育科学版)

华东师范大学学报(教育科学版) ›› 2023, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (9): 112-121.doi: 10.16382/j.cnki.1000-5560.2023.09.008

• 教育法治 • 上一篇    下一篇

教育惩戒的正当性——政治哲学视域内的考察

洪澄1(), 李政涛2   

  1. 1. 华东师范大学中国现代思想文化研究所暨哲学系，上海 200241
    2. 华东师范大学基础教育改革与发展研究所，上海 200062
  • 接受日期:2023-02-28 出版日期:2023-09-01 发布日期:2023-08-28
  • 基金资助:
    教育部人文社会科学重点研究基地重大项目“面向高质量教育的‘五育融合’实践路径和理论创新研究”（22JJD8800021）

The Legitimacy of School Discipline: A Study from the Perspective of Political Philosophy

Cheng Hong1(), Zhengtao Li2   

  1. 1. Institute of Modern Chinese Thought and Culture / Department of Philosophy, East China Normal University, Shanghai 200241, China
    2. Institute of Schooling Reform and Development, East China Normal University, Shanghai 200062, China
  • Accepted:2023-02-28 Online:2023-09-01 Published:2023-08-28

RichHTML

15

PDF

347

摘要：

关于教育惩戒的已有研究，大多与形式层面的法律法规相关，很少有哲学视域内的深入考察。借鉴现当代政治哲学家关于“理性”“人是目的”“独立自主”和“美好生活”的论争，不仅有助于在理论上澄清教育惩戒正当性的来源，而且对在实践中正当地实施教育惩戒有潜在的现实指导意义。政治自由主义的“普遍接受原则”和康德主义的“独立自主原则”在论证教育惩戒正当性方面存在理论和实践中的困难。虽然，一种基于致善主义的互惠的逻辑可以克服这些困难，但前提是要区分两种关于学生“美好生活”的致善主义观点，并且在理论层面回应政治自由主义和康德主义在“合情理的分歧”以及“家长制”等方面对教育惩戒正当性可能的质疑，同时在实践层面强调正当的教育惩戒需要充分尊重学生自主自觉实现“美好生活”的潜能。

关键词: 教育惩戒, 正当性, 美好生活

Abstract:

Most of the existing studies on school discipline are related to laws and regulations. There are few in-depth investigations of the legitimacy of school discipline from philosophical perspectives. The modern political-philosophical arguments about “reasonable”, “treating someone as an end”, “mutual independence and autonomy” and “good life”, not only contribute to illuminating the source of the legitimacy of school discipline in theory, but also have potential significance for the legitimate practice of school discipline. There are theoretical and practical problems with the principle of “general acceptability” in political liberalism and the principle of “mutual independence and autonomy” in Kantian political philosophy, in terms of justifying the legitimacy of school discipline. These problems can be overcome by a reciprocal logic derived from perfectionism, on the premise of distinguishing two types of perfectionist understanding of “good life”, rebutting the criticism from political liberals and Kantians concerning the “reasonable disagreement” and paternalism, and highlighting the importance of respecting the potential of students to consciously realize their “good lives”.

Key words: school discipline, legitimacy, good life