论思想政治教育与“规训”的根本区别
作者:
作者单位:

作者简介:

通讯作者:

中图分类号:

G641

基金项目:

中国人民大学2015年度拔尖创新人才培育资助计划


On the Differences between Ideological and Political Education and Discipline
Author:
Affiliation:

Fund Project:

  • 摘要
  • |
  • 图/表
  • |
  • 访问统计
  • |
  • 参考文献
  • |
  • 相似文献
  • |
  • 引证文献
  • |
  • 文章评论
    摘要:

    福柯的规训权力理论揭示了教育管理制度的心灵操控功能,展现了思想政治教育同规训的相关性。但由于未能认清规训权力的性质,使得人们误把思想政治教育认作规训。规训本质上是压迫性的权力,它起源于资本主义社会的生产环节,并将随着对资本主义的扬弃而被超越。思想政治教育不是规训,它作为针对思想观念的政治实践活动,只有在马克思资本批判的视野中才能超越规训,找到自己的支点。

    Abstract:

    Foucault's theory about discipline indicates that rules and regulations in education management may lead to soul manipulation, which shows the correlation between ideological and political education and discipline. However, people regard ideological and political education as discipline because of the misunderstanding of the nature of discipline. The essence of discipline is oppressive power. It is originated from the production link of capitalism and may be surmounted with the sublation of capitalism. Ideological and political education is not discipline and as the political practice of ideology, it can only transcend discipline and find its foundation from the perspective of Marx's critique of capitalism.

    参考文献
    相似文献
    引证文献
引用本文

常宴会.论思想政治教育与“规训”的根本区别[J].河海大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2016,18(2):37-40.(CHANG Yanhui. On the Differences between Ideological and Political Education and Discipline[J]. Journal of Hohai University (Philosophy and Socail Sciences),2016,18(2):37-40.(in Chinese))

复制
分享
文章指标
  • 点击次数:
  • 下载次数:
  • HTML阅读次数:
  • 引用次数:
历史
  • 收稿日期:
  • 最后修改日期:
  • 录用日期:
  • 在线发布日期: 2016-04-13
  • 出版日期: