荷兰乌特勒支大学现象学教育学派批判

A Critique of the Utrecht School of Phenomenological Pedagogy in Holland

中国的现象学教育学研究深受荷兰乌特勒支学派著名学者兰格威尔德及后来北美的学者范梅南的影响。我们既要看到乌特勒支学派对于现象学教育学运动的重要推动与推广,也要看到这一学派在建构现象学教育学过程中的问题与不足。基于现象学的方法、立场与精神三个层面对荷兰乌特勒支学派进行适度的批判。首先,对乌特勒支现象学教育学的"方法"的批判。真正的现象学教育学必须要坚持教育时间与空间的双重"意向体验",而不是乌特勒支现象学教育学派所主张的片面、单一的"直接描述"。其次,对乌特勒支现象学教育学的"立场"的批判。真正的现象学教育学必须回到"直观"的立场而不是以"机智"为中心的立场。最后,对乌特勒支现象学教育学的"精神"的批判。现象学教育学主要不是关注教育的微观而具体的"生活经验",而是要关心作为纯粹先验现象主体的教育的主观的"生活世界"。

The study of phenomenological pedagogy in China has been strongly influenced by scholar Langevel, one of the most important leaders of the school of Utrecht in Holland, and Marx van Manen of the University of Alberta. The theories proposed by Utrecht School has great significance to the reform of education in China, but at the same time, there are a lot of problems in the process of constructing phenomenological pedagogy. This article challenges the Utrecht school based on the phenomenological approaches, standpoints and propositions. Firstly, we should query the “method” of phenomenological pedagogy of Utrecht School. It is necessary to adhere to the dual “intentionality of consciousness” of the time and space of education, rather than the one-sided and simple “description” or experience. Secondly, we should challenge the “standpoints” of Utrecht School’s phenomenological pedagogy. The phenomenological pedagogy must return to the position of “intuition” instead of “wisdom” or intelligence. The phenomenological pedagogy also takes the phenomenon which is given intuitively as the beginning of the study items. Thirdly, we should question the Utrecht School’s phenomenological “spirit”. Phenomenological pedagogy does not mainly concern the education of the microcosmic and specific “life experience”, but concerns the phenomenon of education as a purely transcendental subjective “life world”.