【作者】 王建平；

【导师】 冯向东；

【作者基本信息】 华中科技大学 ， 高等教育学， 2008， 博士

【摘要】 科学教育与人文教育融合的话语,是20世纪下半叶以来世界教育的共同主题。其背景来自于“两种文化”的分裂、科技理性的突进、人文教育的衰微等。于是,从加强人文教育的重要性、突出科技教育的人文意义、促进人文科学的振兴入手,以达到“两种文化”或两种教育的融合,从而实现身心全面发展的教育目的。我国上个世纪90年代以来针对人文教育的边缘化、人文精神的失落等教育现象,提出了加强大学生文化素质教育,促进科学教育与人文教育之间的融合,培养在智力与情感、知性与德性、学术与修养等方面和谐发展的人才,为社会主义现代化建设服务,而不是成为“有知识没思想,有文化没教养,有目标没信仰”的令人失望的一代。事实上,早在1936年,开始担任浙江大学校长的竺可桢就关注科学教育与人文教育融合的问题。他认为大学不是“谋食”而是“谋道”,即追求真理、光大学术、推进科学的场所,因此大学应该实行通才教育。梅贻琦先生也很担忧随着科学技术的发展而可能出现的科学与人文分离问题,从而强调了人文教育的重要性。科学教育与人文教育融合的必要性、重要性自不待言,它们统一于人的发展本身的要求。但“两种文化”的冲突及人文知识、人文教育的边缘化问题,却不能不激发我们进行本源意义上的思考。“两种文化”冲突的话语来自于西方,但它并不是一个从来就有的文化命题。在人类社会早期,没有明确的科学人文之分,它们统一于人类文化的哲学大厦里。近代科学的产生,使具有不同倾向和学术特征的科学文化与人文文化的二元格局开始出现,从而为人类文化由整体走向分裂埋下了伏笔与可能。但直到19世纪中叶,科学文化与人文文化并没有什么根本上的分歧,正如这时的自然科学具有强烈的人文本色和精神底蕴,与人文学科一起共同服务于主体的道德修养、人格完善的需要,所以此时的科学教育与人文教育是一致的、融合的。19世纪中叶以后,随着实证科学的兴起与科技理性的抬头,科学的专门化程度的加深,科学与人文之间的裂缝开始出现,从而使大学也成为“文科与理科之间持续紧张的场所”。20世纪初期以来,实证科学取得了主导地位,并将科学精神归结为实证的精神,将科学推崇为真正知识的唯一来源,将科学方法看作是唯一可靠的方法时,从而形成了两种文化的真正冲突与对立。反映在教育上,则是科技教育的当阳称尊,人文教育的衰颓低落,人文精神的落魄无归。“20世纪上半叶,在大学中引发科学与人文对立的根源,恰恰是试图雄心勃勃地统一整个知识领域的科学”。在实证科学基础上诞生的“唯科学主义”思潮,主张把自然科学的一套研究范式和逻辑准则无原则地加以推扩,便形成对人文社会科学的一种规训与僭越。尽管有部分人文学者的悲情呼喊以及对科学技术的全面抨击,但自然科学的强势对人文社会科学构成了明显的压力,人文科学为了改变自己的学科地位,甚至也盲目地向自然科学看齐,满足所谓“科学化”的要求,从而产生“科学挤压人文”的现象。“科学挤压人文”是建立在高度发达的科学基础之上的,是科学文化的强旺对人文文化形成的一种控制与影响。西方有长期的、不断积累的科学发展历史,理性主义、实证主义有它丰厚的文化土壤;同时,科学信仰、科学精神等科学文化的“形而上”也得到了很好地继承和保持。所以,上个世纪以来在西方文化背景下,基于自然科学取得了巨大成功,一度发生了“科学挤压人文”,引起了人文教育的危机。尽管“科学与人文的冲突”是世界性的共同话语,人文教育的惨淡是世界性的基本话题,但并非意味着在中西文化背景下具有相同的意义和本质内涵,而不存在“场域”的区别,这需要进行语境分析。可以知道,我国没有产生近代意义上的科学,科学是“西学东渐”的产物。在西方“坚船利炮”的沉重打击下,本着“救亡图存”的目的和需要,我们引进了西方的科学技术。但是在“中体西用”的指导思想下,科学被视为形下之术,只有器物层面上的价值,科学也只有工具性意义,科学思想、科学理性不可能得到发展。新文化运动带来了“科学”、“民主”的大解放,有识之士如胡适、严复等也从科学方法、科学精神层面来提倡发展科学,但文化传统的力量与救国图强的心理还是使国人习惯于从技术、物质、功用方面来理解科学,经世致用的思想传统使科学文化始终难以健全发展。解放后为了适应经济建设发展的需要,科学教育的技术性更加突出,应用性更强。80年代以后从技术性、实用性来理解科学和进行科学教育的实质依然。因此,与西方科学主义文化的强盛相比,科学文化在我国一直未能发达起来。我们所理解的科学,似乎仍停留在“器物”层面、技术层面,我们所张扬的,是能带来巨大经济效益的、作为显性“生产力”的科学技术。而科学理性、科学实证、科学精神等在我国发展得还很不够,没有所谓独断的科学话语霸权。所以,在中国文化语境下,“科学挤压人文”命题缺乏可靠的前提基础,或者说其前提性基础至少是发育不全的。而且,在我国科学与人文的冲突,并没有形成像西方那样“两种话语权力和思维模式”的冲突,也没有产生科学主义与人文的尖锐对立。如果说“科学挤压人文”在我国并非一个确切的命题,那么,如何追寻人文教育遮蔽和人文精神失落的根本原因?可知,我国传统文化的主要特征之一是人文主义传统,我国传统文化是一种人文文化,传统教育体现出高度的人文教育特点。经过近代学术转型以后,古典人文教育变成现代人文学科教育,人文教育的范型发生了改变。现代人文教育需要从传统文化中挖掘资源,转化成具体的人文教育实践。但自新文化运动以来,传统文化被批判、否定的事实,使我国的传统精神资源在某种程度上被切断了。人文传统的断裂,无异于抽掉了人文教育的精神命脉,抽空了人文教育的生命质素,人文教育不可避免地走向空疏化、政治化、实用化。不可否认,近现代以来,人文教育的边缘与人文教育的政治化、意识形态化是相伴而行的,政治化的人文教育(或曰政治化的人文精神)是片面的、异化的,在一定时期却也起着独特的精神控制作用,但在社会价值转型和市场经济体制建立后,就逐渐失去它的话语权力和精神引领功能。这就是为什么上个世纪80年代以来,我们痛彻感到人文精神失落的重要原因。人文教育的遮蔽及人文精神的失落是我们倍感沉重的教育问题,在超越科学与人文简单的二元思维模式上,从教育与社会政治、经济、文化所构成的整体语境中,分析了它发生的原因与实质,这是本论文的核心部分。但是,如何促进科学教育与人文教育的融合,培养科技理性与人文素养并重的人才,也是不可忽视的重要方面。我认为,加强大学教育的人文性及人文意义,从制度层面上高度重视人文教育的开展,以及在一定程度上实施通识教育,应成为我们努力的方向。更多还原

【Abstract】 Since the second half the 20th century, the combination of humanities education with science education has been the common topic of the world education. The background of the topic includes the separation of“two cultures”, people’s emphasis on scientific ration, and the decline of the humanities education. Thus the educational purposes of a comprehensive physical and psychological development will be realized with the fusion of the two kinds of culture or education by strengthening the importance of humanities education, highlighting the significance of the humanities in science and technology education, and promoting the revitalization of the humanities.In face of such education phenomena as the marginalization of the humanities and the loss of the humanistic spirit, sugguestions are made to strengthen the cultural and education quality of university students and to promote the fusion between the science education and humanities education so that talents are cultivated hamoniously with intelligence as well as emotion, knowledge as well as morality, leaning as well as quality. In this way, they are able to contribute to the socialist modernization instead of becoming a disappointing generation who are knowlegable but without ideal, educated but without cultivation, ambitious but without convition. In fact, early in 1936, Zhu Kezhen, president of ZheJiang University, has concerned about the fusion of science education and humanitied education. He believed that the university is the place for seeking the way for living rather than food. In other words, the general education should be implemented in university, namely, the pursuit of truth, the development of learning and the promotion of science. MeiYiqi worried about the separation of the science and humanities with the development of science and technology, so he emphasized the importance of the humanities education.Obviously, the fusion of science education and humanities education is of great necessity and importance, and it is also a requirement for human development. The conflicts of these two single-culture, the marginalization of the knowledge of humanity as well as the humanities education spur us to find the origin of the problem. The discourse of the conflicts of two single-culture originated from the western countrie, but it did not come into being from the very beginnig. Early in human society, there was no clear distinction between sciecne and the humanities, and they were united in the philosophy of human culture. But the emergence of modern science began giving rise to the polarization of scientific culture and humanistic culture, the two being world apart in tendencies and academic characteristics, thus giving the foreshadowing and possibility of human culture’s spliting. However, there was no fundamental differences between science education and humanities education until the mid-19th century. At that time, the natural science had with itself a strong humanistic qualities and spirits and, together with the humanities, they served moral training and personality perfecting. Thus the science education and humanities education are consistant and intergrated. After the mid-19th century, with the emergence of empirical science and rational technology as well as the deeping specialization of science, the cracks between science and humanities began to emerge and universities became“a place full of tension between arts and science”. Since the very beginning of the 20th century, empirical science have made a dominent position. Thus it concluded scientific spirits as emprirical spirits, science the origin of knowledge and the scientific method the only reliable one. So the conflict and confrontation between the two cultures became acuted. This was demonstrated by the dominated science education, the decline of human education and the loss of human spirit.In the first half of the 20th century, the origin of the conflicts between science and humanities existing in universities is the science which ambitiously tried to unify the whole domain of knowledge. Originated from scientific empiricism, the scientism advocated unprincipled expansion of a set of research norms and logical standards of science and thus it began to resemble regulating and trampling on human science to some extent. Although there were some humanists’pathetic callings and thorough attacks on science, the dominent science bore obvious pressure on humanities. In order to change its situation, humanities aimlessly served natural science to meet the needs of science, which formed the phenoma of“science suppresses humanities’.That“science suppresses humanities”was built on highly developed science and was the influence and control of science on humanities. The West has a long history of incessantly-accumulated development of scientific culture, from which originated rationalism and impricism. Meanwhile, the“metaphysical”science belief and science spirit were well inherited and retained. Therefore, since the last century under the background of western culture, great success of scientific culture was achieved based on natural science, at a time leading to“science suppresses humanities”and engendered a crisis of humanities education.Although the conflicts between science and humanities is a common term worldwide, and the gloom of humanities education becomes the basic topic internationally, it dosen’t mean that they have the same meaning and cultural connotation under the background of Chinese and Western cultures without location differences, which need contextual analysis. Therefore, it can be elicited that no science in the modern sense, a kind of a fruit resulted from learning from the west, had ever been developed in old China. Because of the severe attack from the West, the old China introduced science and technology from the West to serve as the purpose and meet the need for survival. So the scientific spirit and the rational science never developed. New culture movement brought with it the great liberation of“science”and“democracy”. And some men of insight, such as Hu Shi, Yan Fu, promoted the development of science in the aspects of scientific method and scientific spitits. However, the strength of our cultural tradition and the mentality of salvaging and powering the country made us accustomed to comprehend science only in the aspects of technology, material and function. The traditional ideology of social management for material benefits made the scientific culture hard to develop regularly. After the liberation, in order to meet the needs of economic construction, science and education became more prominent and the application of it became more urgent,. After 1980s, the understanding of science and the implementation of scientific education from the angle of technical and pratical aspects still existed. As a result, science didn’t develop well in old China, compared to the prosperous western scientific culture. The science in our mind seemed to be still in material and technological level and the technology we advocate is one that can yield significant economic benefits as an overt“productivity”. While such concepts as scientific rationality, scientific empiricism and scientific spirits were not well developed, thus they have no so-called autocratic hegemony of scientific discourse. Therefore, in the Chinese cultural context,“science suppresses humanities”lacked precondition, or at least, the predition was not abundant. Besides, the conflicts of science and humanities in China were different from those of the West, which featured the conflicts between two word power and thinking model as well as the fierce contradition of science and humanities.Then, how to probe into the basic reasons of the neglect of humanities education and the loss of spirits if“science suppresses humanities”is not a definite proposition in China? It is known that one of the main characters of our tradtional culture is humanism tradition which is a kind of humanism cultures, and the traditional education reflects the significant style of humanities education. After the modern academic transformation, the classic humanities education has turned into the contemporary displine education and the paradigm of humanities has changed. The contemporary humanities education needs the exploitation of resources from tradional culture and put them into the concrete practise of humanities education. It is true that the criticism and negation of traditional culture cut off our traditional spirits resources since the New Culture Movement. The separation of human traditions undoubtedly leads to the loss of spirit lifeline and essence of humanities education, and causes the tendency of insignificance, politicalization and pragmatism. There is no doubt that the marginalization of humanities education accompanies its politicalization and the ideological change since modern times, and politicalized humanities education( so called politicalized humanlistic spirits), although unilateral and dissimilated, plays an unique part in spirit control in a certain period. However, such humanities education has gradually lost its function of word power and spiritual guidance after the transformation of social value and the founding of market of economy—that is the reason why we have the deeply painful feeling of the loss of humanistic spirits since the 1980s.The neglect of humanities education and the loss of humanistic spirits is the educational problem toword which we feel severe pressure, and the analysis of its reason and essence is the centre topic of this treatise, which is concerned with the comprehensive context consitituted with the aspects of education, politics, economy and culture in the simple binary thinking pattern beyond science and humanity. However, what can’t be ignored is how to promote the integration of science and humanities education and how to cultivate talents with an equal stress to both scientific ration and humanistic accomplishment. As to me, the strengthening of humanistic nature and significance, the emphasizing on the development of humanities education from the viewpoint of system and the implementing general education to some degree are what we should strive for.更多还原