Michel Foucault知識考古學之教育科學蘊義

Abstract

本研究旨在闡明傅科的知識考古學，用以瞭解教育科學論述的演變及其對人類圖像的定位。首先，就二次戰後法國哲學中獨特的「反人文主義」思潮，縷析傅科考古學思想的理論淵源，勾勒傅科與結構主義的關聯；復次，就知識考古學的方法，冀求深度理解考古學的分析策略。接續，就傅科人文考古學的分析，進一步探討各時代的知識型。最後，批判地檢視傅科的知識型理論，用以檢視教育科學知識型的發展，並探討其所預設的人類圖像。

綜合前述探討，所得的研究結論如下：

一、傅科獨到的考古學研究，係站在時興的反人文主義思潮背景中，以傳承自法國科學哲學的歷史視野，用以答覆康德的「啟蒙」問題，否定自啟蒙運動的歷史線性進步觀。

二、傅科的知識考古學一種力倡「非連續性」、「消解主體中心」、「以文獻作為文物」途徑的歷史研究。從「論述」角度探討知識的內部層次，探討論述的構成規則，其論述分析直指無意識層面，且質疑我們習以為常的分類方式。

三、自文藝復興以來，關於人文科學知識的解析，發掘出三個時代斷層蘊含著三種迥然相異的知識型發展，分別代表三種不同的知識秩序，體現各個時代的真理意志及其相應的人類圖像，從而發現人類作為知識主體地位的不穩固性。

四、現代時期中以自然科學為仿效對象的（教育）科學論述，係古典時期素樸表徵知識型的現代轉化。此種表徵性/科學性論述型構具有「唯我論」的色彩，此種「唯我論」的教育科學論述將複雜的世界化約為簡單的命題，卻不能觀察或描述自身，造成以人類作為能思維的知識主體圖像難以確立。

根據以上之結論，爰提以下建議作為教育革新參考：

一、摒棄當前教育改革中線性進步觀的迷思。

二、廢除高等教育體制中跨領域、跨學門的相關學籍限制；並於後期中等教育融入「哲學」領域的課程，已培養人文科學與自然科學素養兼備的學術菁英。

三、教育議題的討論應秉持開誠布公的態度，而能廣納諸「異見」。

四、積極從事華（台）人教育學術本土化工作。

五、關於實證教育科學的研究，宜採取後實證的研究觀點，以彰顯教育研究者的主體能力。This study aims mainly to explicate Foucault’s “The archaeology of knowledge” so as to make clear the evolvement of discourse of educational science and the position of human picture. Firstly, starting from the unique “anti-humanism” trend in French philosophy after World War II, this study analyzes in detail the theoretical inheritance of Foucault’s archaeological thoughts, depicting his connections with structuralism. Secondly, from the approaches adopted in the archaeology of knowledge, this study is designed to explore deeply the analytical strategies in Foucault’s archaeology. Next, based on Foucault’s analyses of human archaeology, this study takes a further step to investigate the episteme in different times. Lastly, this study critically reviews Foucault’s theory of episteme in order to examine the development of episteme in educational science, and inspects the presupposed human picture.

The conclusions of the study are as follows:

1. Foucault’s unique archaeological study, set against the backdrop of the ideological trend of anti-humanism and inheriting the historical view of French scientific philosophy, tries to reply Kant’s Enlightenment problems so as to controvert the linear view of historical progress embedded in the Enlightenment movement.

2. Foucault’s archaeology of knowledge initiates a new approach of historical research which stresses “discontinuity” and “decentering”. Employing “discourse” as the starting point to explore the inner levels of knowledge, it discusses the rules of discursive formation, and the discursive analyses point directly to the unconscious aspects, questioning the classification taken for granted.

3. Foucault’s analyses of knowledge of human science exposes that, from the Renaissance, there exist three completely different developments of knowledge in three breaks of era, representing respectively three different orders of knowledge and embodying the will to know, the corresponding human pictures, so as to disclose the instability of human beings as the subject of knowledge.

4. The discourses of educational science in modern times , while imitating the natural science, is actually the up-to-date incarnation of naïve Representative Episteme in classical age. This Representative/scientific discursive formation is tinted with “solipsism,” which turns the complex world into simple propositions but fails to observe or describe itself, resulting in the breakdown of human beings pictured as the reflective subjects of knowledge.

According to conclusions above, suggestions for future education in Taiwan would be offered as follows:

1. The myth of linear progress lying in current educational reform should be abandoned.

2. The cross-field and interdisciplinary limits existing in higher educational system should be abolished, and courses related to “philosophical” field should be added in the later period of secondary education.

3. The discussion of educational issues should be conducted openly as well as publicly in order to incorporate all the “disagreements.”

4. The localization of Chinese academic educational work should be actively engaged.

5. The study of positive educational science should employ the standpoint of post-positivism so as to highlight the agency of educational researchers.