愛的序階﹑溝通理性與人格發展 更多文章

Ordo Amoris， Communicative Rationality and Development of Person

本文旨在說明謝勒（M. Scheler）「愛的序階」與哈伯瑪斯（J. Habermans），「溝通理性」與人格發展的關係。本文指出西方自啟蒙運動以降，即將人格發展視為重要的教育目的之一。但是，由於人類過度理性化與現代科技齊頭並進的結果，工具理性抬頭，導致人類內在本性受到壓抑，”生活世界”與”人為制度”分道揚鑣，前者更淪為後者的奴隸。因此，「反人性」於焉產生，此種情形在二十世紀的今日最為顯著。職是之故，本文作者認為，為了消弭現代社會嚴重反性的情形，有必要恢復謝勒真誠而正確的「愛的序階」以及重建哈伯瑪斯的「溝通理性」。因為惟有透過有價值及規範的溝通，才能涵攝美感的經驗，個人也才能找出適當的詮釋，塑造出自主而健全的人格。因此，如和調和個理性與情感，以發展健全的人格，是值得每個關心現代社會生活品質的教育工作者，所應深入加以探討與關懷的。這也正是本文的重點所在。

Man is according to Imm. Kant superior in rank and dignity to any other living creature on the earth through the unity of self-consciousness， through namely the formation of his unique person. Towards the fulfillment of authentic humanity and the elevation of man’s status in the cosmos， the development of person constitutes thus one of the most important educational objectives. A child forms himself to a person， as J. Habermas holds， only to the extent that he learns how to locate himself in his social lifeworld. Today only such a concept of self identity which assures that single person of both freedom and individualization in a complex role system， can explain the acceptable orientation for educational process. M.Scheler even defines education（Bildung）as free development， as self-development of all the spiritual powers of person（Selfstentfaltung aller Geisteskräfte der Person）. The Formation of person， as one of the most important educational objectives， is actualized， according to Imm. Kant， in the unity of self-consciousness by dint of the function of man’s intellect（Verstand）. It is no wonder that Kant emphasizes one-sidely the function of intellect in the formation of person， when considering he was an heir of the Enlightenment. In his response to the question “What is the Enlightenment？”， Kant regards Enlightenment as “man’s emergence from his self incurred immaturity. Immaturity is the inability to use one’s understanding without the guidance of another person.””Understanding without the guidance of another person，” as Th. Adorno and M. Horkheimer interpret， “is understanding guided by reason. Reason to the Enlightenment， as Adorno and M. Horkheimer（ibid.）argues further， “ constitutes the court of judgment of calculation， which adjusts the world for the ends of self-preservation and recognizes no function other than the preparation of the object from mere sensory material in order to make it the material of subjugation. “ Even the human individual is converted into the repeatable， replaceable process， into a mere example for the conceptual models of the system. Man’s individuality is rife so long as he identified himself with the unquestioned generality. Personality instead of person signified a general， abstract principle that is embodied in the actually living persons.