批判性思维教育的一个议题：教人论证，还是教人探究？——罗素、杜威和图尔敏

doi:10.16382/j.cnki.1000-5560.2021.06.006

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

二十世纪初期罗素对杜威“逻辑”的批评，在今天体现着学术界对批判性思维（以及创新思维）教育的一种分歧，即，教人论证，还是教人探究？本文从“克里福德原则”引入在早期分析哲学家中流行的一种论证观念，进而考察罗素与杜威关于“探究”观念的著名争议及其“无果而终”的尴尬结局。借助于当代教育思想家图尔敏的广义论证观念，重新审视杜威的“探究理论”，可以澄清罗素对于杜威的批评何以是一种方法论上的（而非只是文本上的）误解。本文在教育哲学上的结论并非“要么论证要么探究”，因为当我们坚持从广义上理解“论证”一词时，“教人论证”与“教人探究”实乃可以彼此沟通与转化的教育目标；但从语用修辞上看，由于“探究”一词强调参与论证之人要从生动的经验中发现问题并在开放的经验中探索问题解决之道，它有助于防止或纠正教师和学生把论证狭隘地理解为语言诡辩或文本游戏。

关键词: 论证, 探究, 批判性思维, 教育理念

Abstract:

Russell’s critique against Dewey’s new logic in the early 20^th century is a symbol of some controversy over the orientation of critical thinking training. This article sets out from a conception of argument popular in earlier analytic philosophy, exemplified by the Principle of Clifford, and thereby examines the historical quarrel over “inquiry” between Russell and Dewey and its embarrassing outcome. After introducing the new conception of argument propounded eminently by Stephen Toulmin and embedding it in Dewey’s theory of inquiry, it is showed in what sense Russell’s criticism against Dewey was based upon some serious misunderstanding of Dewey’s methodology as well as of his key texts. At last, for the viewpoint of philosophy of education, this article suggests that the conception of argument-as-inquiry has the advantage of emphasizing arguers’ engaging in a variety of living experience and warning them against converting academic arguments into some sort of linguistic games.

Key words: argument, inquiry, critical thinking, ideas of education

张留华. 批判性思维教育的一个议题：教人论证，还是教人探究？——罗素、杜威和图尔敏[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2021, 39(6): 71-81.

Liuhua Zhang. An Issue of Teaching Critical Thinking: Argument or Inquiry？Insights from Russell, Dewey and Toulmin[J]. Journal of East China Normal University(Educational Sciences), 2021, 39(6): 71-81.

图/表 3

参考文献 0

	张留华. (2016). 哲学语言及其术语伦理. 中国社会科学, (12), 41- 59.
	张留华. (2020). 信念规范的经济之维: 对“实用性”的一种解读. 社会科学, (9), 112- 123.
	Clifford, W. K. (2011). Lectures and Essays, volume 2, edited by Leslie Stephen and Frederick Pollock. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
	Dewey, J. (1916). Essays in Experimental Logic. New York: Dover Publications.
	Dewey, J. (1938). Logic: The Theory of Inquiry. New York: Henry Holt and Company.
	Dewey, J. (1941). Propositions, Warranted Assertibility, and Truth. The Journal of Philosophy, 38(7), 169—186.
	Dewey, J. (1958). “Experience, Knowledge and Value: A Rejoinder”, in The Philosophy of John Dewey, edited by P. A. Schilpp. New York: Tudor Publishing Company, 515−608.
	Gale, R. (1959). Russell’s Drill Sergeant and Bricklayer and Dewey’s Logic. The Journal of Philosophy, 56(9), 401—406.
	Haack, S. (1997). “‘The Ethics of Belief’ Reconsidered”, in The Philosophy of Roderick M. Chisholm, edited by Lewis Edwin Hahn. Chicago and La Salle: Open Court, 129−144.
	Hurley, P. J. (2015). A Concise Introduction to Logic. Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning.
	Hunter, D. A. (2014). A Practical Guide to Critical Thinking: Deciding What to Do and Believe. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
	James, W. (1956). The Will to Believe and Other Essays in Popular Philosophy. New York: Dover.
	James, W. (1995). Pragmatism. New York: Dover.
	Johnston, J. S. (2009). Deweyan Inquiry: From Educational Theory to Practice. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
	Madigan, T. J. (2009). W. K. Clifford and “The Ethics of Belief”. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
	Monk, R. (1996). Bertrand Russell: The Spirit of Solitude (1872—1921). New York: The Free Press.
	Russell, B. (1910). Philosophical Essays. London: Longmans, Green.
	Russell, B. (1958). “Dewey’s New Logic”, in The Philosophy of John Dewey, edited by P. A. Schilpp. New York: Tudor Publishing Company, 135−156.
	Russell, B. (1995). An Inquiry into Meaning and Truth. London and New York: Routledge.
	Russell, B. (1996). History of Western Philosophy. London and New York: Routledge.
	Russell, B. (1997). “The Spirit of Inquiry”, in The Collected Papers of Bertrand Russell, Vol. 11. London: Routledge, 432−440.
	Toulmin, S., R. Rieke and A. Janik. (1984). An Introduction to Reasoning. New York: Macmillan.
	Toulmin, S. E. (2001). Return to Reason. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
	Toulmin, S. E. (2003). The Uses of Argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

[1]	彭晓玲, 吴忭. “数据驱动的精准教学”何以可能？——基于培养教师数据智慧的视角[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2021, 39(8): 45-56.
[2]	董洪亮. 基于证据的教研转向——基本概念问题的初步讨论[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2021, 39(5): 108-115.
[3]	[德]安德烈亚斯·施莱希尔（Andreas Schleicher）. 教育面向学生的未来，而不是我们的过去[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2020, 38(5): 1-21.
[4]	马利红, 魏锐, 刘坚, 马鸣燕, 刘妍, 甘秋玲, 康翠萍, 徐冠兴. 审辨思维：21世纪核心素养5C模型之二[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2020, 38(2): 45-56.
[5]	邵发仙, 胡卫平, 张睆, 张艳红, 首新. 课堂论证话语的序贯分析:小学生的科学推理[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2019, 37(6): 48-60.
[6]	裴新宁, 刘新阳. 初中课堂科学探究中究竟发生了什么——基于多案例的实证考察[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2018, 36(4): 107-121+165+166.
[7]	张亚星. 自主·合作·探究:学生学习方式的转变[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2018, 36(1): 22-28+160.
[8]	唐斌 . 杜威的探究性教学论：出场语境及其视域偏差[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2014, 32(3): 55-62.
[9]	任长松. 对探究式学习的18种评论-支持探究式学习的12条评论和[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2002, 20(4): 39-47.