The pedagogy of Durkheim is here interpreted under the concept of socialization. This, however, has been frequently criticized as an interpretation limiting education to a function of conservative maintenance of the status quo. This paper examines the validity of such criticism.
It is clear that Durkheim subjectively included in his idea of socialization the formation of a critical subject and therefore attributed to education also a function of social reform. But this critical subject is not correctly located in his sociology. It is unavoidable, therefore, that the individual is understood as subject to society. In spite of this shortcoming his view that, on the average, the individual reason does not transcend group reason is true and as long as that is admitted, his definition that education as a rule is socialization must also be admitted.

抄録全体を表示

It is a characteristic of art in Japan that there are two styles of painting, Japanese and Western. In nurturing their sense of beauty, Japanese have been influenced both by their indigenous artistic culture and by the expression and way of pursuing beauty on the part of foreign arts. This is particularly true in public art education in Japan, which imported a great many ideas of western painting to enrich the Japanese way of thinking and expression.
The purpose of this paper is to clarify how the ideas of western painting influenced the viewpoint and expression of N. Inamori (1892-1978), who was an ordinary school teacher, that is; a typical Japanese.
N. Inamori, who was brought up in the Japanese culture, nurtured his sense of beauty within its confines. Then, in school, he received ringa (conventional training in copying pictures in the textbook), jiyuga (style of painting free from textbook restraints) education and studied Western viewpoint and expression. However, he could not understand scientific and analytical perception and expression. Later, retiring from teaching, he did Japanese painting and calligraphy as his hobby.
By pursuing the process of nurturing his sense of beauty and analyzing his paintings, the following three points were clarified. (1) The technique of line drawings by ringa influenced the form of his expression for a long time. While, jiyuga education made him perceive and portray the essense of nature and life directly. It put stress on children's individual freedom, inner expression and their subjective activity. (2) Education in Western painting taught him the importance of observing objects attentively and rationally ; scientifically, analytically and mathematically. Technically, it taught himthe lams of perspective and shading, so on. But, he could not understand the Western thought behind the techniques, especially the thought that aimed at the perfected ego and the development of science. (3) He could not perceive and paint nature objectively and concretely as a third party. Because, he does not perceive the world in opposition to ego, but he finds his self in the world. The emotion, viewpoint, and expression that he had experienced in his early days was his basic and fundamental way of perception, expression and sense of beauty.

抄録全体を表示

When one examines the content of the “Declaration on Christian Education” issued by the Second Vatican Council and the Circular Letter “the Catholic School” published two years ago, one sees that the Catholic Church aims at a modernization of Catholic education. The change becomes particularly evident if these two documents are compared to the Encyclical on Christian Education by Pius XI (1929). Using the occasion of Tarnowski's recently published book “An Existential Christian Pedagogy” in which the author describes the characteristics of this change as a shift from an essentialistic tendency toward an existential trend, it is attempted here to examine this change as far as possible objectively, scientifically and pedagogically.
For that purpose the content has been studied as follows :
(1) The Vatican Council and its background thought;
(2) a comparison of Pius XI “Encyclical on Christian Education” and the “Declaration on Education” of Vatican II;
(3) source of existential thought in Catholic education;
(4) existential Catholic pedagogy;
(5) the problems faced by existential Catholic pedagogy.

抄録全体を表示

Prof. Ueda says, “The dynamic A cannot be identified with an abstract generality, Ao, in the final analysis.” I admit it makes some sense to distinguish an object (A) from an abstract notion of it (Ao).
But is he right when he asserts on the basis of this distinction that any actual cognition of an object is entirely uncertain and fluctuant? Is it right to deprive actual cognitions of certainty?
I argue against his assertion for the following reasons.
i) We should not treat “Certain” and “Uncertain” as an absolute dichotomy. Being certain to some degree necessarily implies being uncertain to some degree at the same time. The real question is to what degree a notion is certain. Many-valued thinking is necessary.
ii) It is quite a nonsense to say that our actual cognitions can be uncertain altogether. To regard them uncertain, there must be some unquestionable viewpoint according to which we can measure the degree of uncertainty of the cognitions. Without such a viewpoint, we cannot regard them uncertain at all.
iii) It is necessary to measure the degree of certainty of actual cognitions. What matters for this measurement is to analyze the content of individual cognitions. But in his book, Prof. Ueda ignores the content of cognitions in particular cases, so he fails to recognize how indispensable are the criteria to distinguish “Certain” from “Uncertain”.

抄録全体を表示