Moral-politics Separated And Moral-politics Combined

Chinese education and western education (represented by Western Europe and United States of America) have a very important difference in the practical paradigm of moral education:In Chinese paradigm of moral education, moral is closely combined with politics, while in western countries moral is separated from politics distinctly. Of course this may be only a hypothesis of this paper. How shall we understand the origin, theoretic foundation, and practical significance of the two moral education paradigms moral-politics separated paradigm and moral-politics combined paradigm, and the discrepancies of development ideas inherent to Chinese and western educations, cultures, and societies of different moral education paradigms?This paper puts forward two hypotheses:1. Moral education paradigm is a result of social, historical, cultural and educational logics development; 2. Moral education is the reflection of social relations in education.To trace the logic behind moral education paradigm, from four aspects this paper analyzes respectively the philosophic, cultural, historical, and social logics behind the two types of moral education paradigms moral-politics separated paradigm and moral-politics combined paradigm, and returns to educational logic finally.The philosophic logic behind mainly has two aspects:The first is the difference of philosophic thinking paradigm, namely the empirical paradigm of Confucianism represented by Confucius in China and the rationalistic paradigm represented by Socrates that caused the combination or separation of moral and politics finally; the second is that in China the ethical politics that binds closely moral and politics is always prevailing, while from Machiavelli in western world, the political science irrelative of moral was formed and moral and politics has been separated.In cultural logic, the moral education paradigm of Chinese moral-politics combination type has oriented itself to society, collectivism, and social unification culture, while the moral education paradigm of western moral-politics separation type has the religious culture, individualism and social and cultural tradition of liberalism to back itself.In the logic of historical development, Chinese history is a unified one, which indicates consciousness of unification that will be destined to be reflected in modern society, while a disrupted history dominates the western world and so long-term disruption has infiltrated the disruption consciousness into every pore of the western culture. If Chinese culture protects the unification of itself, then the western culture emphasizes on the protection of the different cultural characteristics of different countries.The social logic that supports the Chinese moral education paradigm of moral-politics combination type mainly contains two aspects:the first is the social philosophy of harmonious development of China; the second is the core Chinese value system that places justice at the first position. The former emphasizes the harmonizing and developing capability of politics in society, that politics is doomed to enter different layers of society extensively; the latter focuses on the value of justice, and so politics shall meet moral, which promotes the tight combination of politics and moral. The social logic upholds the separated moral-politics paradigm of western moral education also has two main aspects:the first is the unique dynamically balancing social development philosophy of the western world; the second is the western value system of liberalism. The social development philosophy of dynamic balancing emphasizes the balancing of various forces in a society, the dominance of liberalism value, and as one of social forces politics is not the undoubted center of society. These two aspects cause moral and politics to separate in western society.In educational logic, Chinese moral education paradigm of moral-education combination type has the following key components:1. The moral learning value of behaviorism causes Chinese moral education to put a focus on the entirety of moral education, which will unconsciously expands to all levels of a society, including moral and politics; 2. The relationship between moral and politics in Chinese social philosophy is manifested in a structure constituted of ’small’ individual goodness and ’big’ social goodness; the education in such an environment cannot deny the existence of politics in moral education; 3. Chinese moral education that calls for prevailing value and core value targets at social harmony, to which an important contributor is politics:this is the key reason why politics exists in Chinese moral education paradigm.The educational logic of western moral education paradigm of moral-politics separation type has the following key components:1. The moral education learning view of constructivism drives moral education to emphasize self-construction of individuals and repulse external infusion, politics as an option of free choice whose position and existence being excluded from moral education; 2. Moral education of liberalism focuses on political neutrality in education and prohibits the access of party politics to school education; 3. The social ideology of liberalism determines politics as a necessary existence of ’bad’ in society, which type of existence determines the banishment of politics from school education.In analyzing educational logic, this paper sets forth that the basic theory of Chinese moral education is mainly constituted of the following:1. The core hypothesis of Chinese moral education is that an individual who studies goodness will be a good person, and who practices moral will approach moral; 2. The growth approach of individuals in the view of Chinese moral education is that they grow from selfishness to follower of moral in community and society; 3. The core idea of Chinese moral-politics combination paradigm is that moral is the foundation of politics, while politics is responsible for moral demonstration; 4. The basic characteristic of Chinese moral education’s value system is that the moral education calls for harmony and unification in entirety and the dominance of a directing value.Research of moral education paradigm shall not shunt the influences of different moral education paradigm upon the practice of moral. This paper holds that different moral education paradigms have distinct influences upon individuals, society, nation, and moral education research. However, additionally what notable is that the moral education itself is complex, and the influence of such difference cannot be understood in a completely static and separate thinking way.For the influence of moral education paradigms upon individuals, the combined moral-politics paradigm of moral education has influences upon individuals as:individual moral is closely linked to politics; individuals are accustomed to systematic understanding in social cognition; the generalization of moral pressure in politics; and the risks moral education contains for pan-politics individual development. The separated moral-politics paradigm of moral education has influences upon individuals as:thinking paradigm of liberalism for moral; separated politics and moral in individual cognition; weakening commonness of social individuals; politics is held as a realistic game of power.The combined moral-politics paradigm of moral education has influences upon social development as:social unification is higher; politics has moral consciousness; the society requests high moral conformity of politics. Its disadvantages are:in such a society the politics has a heavy consciousness of moral; the social moral is apt to be idealized; politics may abduct or exalt moral, as politics and moral being an integral one, politics is inclined to serve itself. The separate moral and politics paradigm of moral education has influences upon the society as:politics is beheld as a game of power; the society is atomized; and politics losses its authority over moral. Its advantages are:the realistic inclination of politics causes the loss of moral ideal, and the social commonness may be dissolved.Of the influences brought by moral education research, the separated moral-politics paradigm of moral education pays more attention to individual freedom, which allows it to reach deeper into the moral development and progress of individuals, while the combined moral-politics paradigm of moral education attaches higher importance to the integral development of the whole society, deeming political education as an important part of moral education and endowing moral a mission of politics. The later moral education paradigm that binds or tightens moral and politics together, as it attaches more importance to the integral social development, will build better health and stronger coherence for social development. Moreover, these two paradigms of moral education have quite clear difference in their values:one holds freedom as the sole and final value pursuit, while the other deems that an individual shall meet social harmony requirement. After exploring the different influences of moral education paradigms, this paper attempts to probe into the limits and boundaries of moral and politics in moral education paradigms. As moral exists in both paradigms and it has little difference of expressions in these two paradigms, so the final points of discrepancies to be compared between these two paradigms of moral education are the contents and education of politics. The limits of moral-politics separation or combination mean mainly the limitation of politics within moral education paradigm, while the boundaries mean mainly the relationship between moral and politics.The opinion of this paper is:The limits of moral and politics in moral education are mainly constituted of three dimensions:the first is that the philosophy of politics shall be a part of moral education; the second is that contents of realistic politics shall not be excessive in moral education; the third is that moral education shall keep certain distance from real politics. The boundaries of moral and politics in moral education also have three main dimensions:the first is that education of politics cannot replace moral education; the second is that real politics cannot by power make political idea become a part of social moral; the third is that moral education shall not exclude necessary education of politics.The final conclusions of this paper are:1. Moral education is the reflection of social relationship in education. Moral education has its own characteristic as a special discipline of education, while its inevitable social constitution cannot be neglected.2. Moral education paradigm of separate or combined moral and politics are result of social, historical, cultural and educational The moral education paradigms are the result of social, historical and cultural logics development The developing and forming of moral education paradigms are not only the result of education itself, but also are influenced by the development of historical, philosophic, cultural, and social logics.3. Moral education has no transcendent paradigm of truth, Chinese moral paradigm has its practical rationality, western moral paradigm does not have a priori truth, the realistic sense and judgment standard of moral education are to cultivate merits. Moral education paradigms have inherent social background, and no moral education paradigm’s correctness can be assumed without reasoning.