Emmerich Nathan
School of Politics, International Studies and Philosophy, Queen's University Belfast.
New Bioeth. 2014;20(2):186-98. doi: 10.1179/2050287714Z.00000000052.
It is increasingly common for universities to provide cross-curricular education in bioethics as part of contemporary attempts to produce 'global citizens.' In this article I examine three perspectives drawn from research into pedagogy that has been conducted from the perspective of cognitive anthropology and consider its relevance to bioethics education. I focus on: two metaphors of learning, participation and acquisition, identified by Sfard; the psychological notion of moral development; and the distinction between socialization and enculturation. Two of these perspectives have been particularly fruitful in understanding the processes of teaching and learning in a variety of domains. The third perspective has been developed in relation to the formal ethical education of medical students. I examine their relevance for 'non-professional' bioethics education suggesting that if we take seriously the idea that it is part of 'educating for citizenship' then the distinction between 'ethics' and 'politics' is blurred as such programmes aim at the development of student's political subjectivity.
大学提供生物伦理学跨课程教育越来越普遍,这是当代培养“全球公民”努力的一部分。在本文中,我审视了从认知人类学视角开展的教育学研究中得出的三种观点,并思考其与生物伦理学教育的相关性。我关注以下几点:斯法德所确定的两种学习隐喻,即参与和习得;道德发展的心理学概念;以及社会化与文化适应之间的区别。其中两种观点在理解各个领域的教学过程方面成果颇丰。第三种观点是针对医学生的正式伦理教育而发展起来的。我探讨了它们与“非专业”生物伦理学教育的相关性,表明如果我们认真对待生物伦理学教育是“公民教育”一部分这一观点,那么“伦理学”与“政治学”之间的区别就会变得模糊,因为此类课程旨在培养学生的政治主体性。