The article once said that Confucius was "used to indoctrination education", and Bo You

Renrenping d

My classical Chinese is not good. In fact, I have always felt that the classical Chinese understood by modern people may not necessarily mean what the ancients meant. Furthermore, I don't think the ancients really expressed their hearts in classical Chinese. However, in order to facilitate the discussion, I will first use the online explanation to see the meaning of this passage: "If you don't understand in your heart, don't enlighten me;" Don't tell him the answer if you can't tell him clearly; If you give a student an example, but he can't answer the other three questions, don't teach him any more. "

To tell the truth, this translated sentence is really good. To some extent, it is consistent with the view of constructivism. According to the viewpoint of constructivism,

Teachers are not only the presenters of knowledge, but also the symbols of knowledge authority. Instead, we should pay attention to students' own understanding of various phenomena and listen to their current views.

Think about the origin of their ideas and guide students to enrich or adjust their own explanations on this basis. Teaching should be student-centered under the guidance of teachers.

In my opinion, this idea of respecting learners' self-construction is similar to that of Confucius. But if we want to find out some differences, the constructivist view may be more equal in thought, and pay more attention to the status of teachers' learning partners rather than the identity of trainers (at this point, I am still not sure about my position-do I really regard myself as a student's companion? )。 At least, I think the DIY teaching method I created is based on Confucius' idea to some extent, such as letting students learn by themselves before discussing, such as letting them bring questions into the classroom, and so on. So judging from what Confucius said, he is somewhat similar to the thought expressed in the red text I quoted. I really wronged Confucius.

However, I still have dissatisfaction with Confucius. Besides finding his words difficult to understand, I also think he is a little too conceited, which makes the students awe in front of him and most of them fall at his feet. This is unacceptable to me. It may also be because of this reason, or because of his vanity, I think Confucius did not practice his words well in his behavior, and his views did not reflect the ideas expressed in the above green article.

Yan Hui, for example, likes to keep his word, as can be seen from the following examples.

There is a saying in the Analects of Confucius, Confucius said: I talk back to you all the time, and I don't violate it like a fool. Returning it is enough to keep my privacy, and I'm not stupid enough to send it back. Confucius said: "I give lectures to Yan Hui all day, and he never raises objections or questions, like a fool." After he retired, I inspected his private remarks and found that he played a part in what I taught, which shows that Yan Hui is not stupid. "

But he doesn't like asking questions and having his own opinions. Take Zaiyu as an example. He is active in thinking, studious and good at asking questions. He is the only one of Confucius' younger brothers who dares to disagree with Confucius' theory. He pointed out that the "three-year mourning" system of Confucius was not desirable and said, "Three years of mourning has been a long time. If a gentleman is not polite for three years, the courtesy will be bad; If you don't have fun for three years, your happiness will collapse So you think it can be changed to "one year's mourning", which Confucius criticized as "giving it mercilessly"

(See The Analects of Confucius Yang Huo). Zaiyu slept during the day and was called "rotten wood" and "dung wall" by Confucius. Confucius thinks that Zaiyu's words and deeds are different, saying that he "takes people by words, and gains them back". Zaiyu changed his previous shortcomings and said: "I start from others, I listen to me and believe me; Today, I am a man. I listen to his words and watch his actions. Giving and changing are. " As for Luz, there is a similar situation, so I won't give many examples. Interested readers can study The Analects.

In Confucius' view, if students have questions, they should be answered by teachers, not by themselves, otherwise they will be suspected of making trouble. If students can only be considered good students if they finally listen to their teachers, how can Confucius help them acquire objective knowledge? Confucius can't go beyond his own dignity and viewpoint, and can't respect students' opinions from the perspective of knowledge self-construction. From the perspective of constructivism, he really can't be called a good teacher.

Confucius took his own answer as the final standard answer. Although Confucius emphasized inspiration, it was based on a standard answer blueprint in his own mind, which restricted students' independent thinking and the growth of free personality. In the view of constructivism, teachers are helpers and promoters of meaning construction, not providers and instigators of knowledge. Students are the subject of learning information processing and the initiative of meaning construction, rather than the passive receiver and indoctrination object of knowledge, which is completely different from Confucius' point of view. Confucius may unconsciously think that he (or other respected teachers) is the arbiter of truth. Compared with what we usually call indoctrination, Confucius is "neither angry nor arrogant, and does not occupy a corner." The sentence "never again" may put more emphasis on the use of inspiration. In the end, whether the listener agrees or not, he must follow Confucius' routine. So in the final analysis, Confucius has the final say, but the students' self-built understanding is not respected enough.

Dialogue in the kingdom of heaven

A series of articles have made a good comparison between Socrates and Confucius' thinking methods.

Finally, I want to show my attitude with a sentence emphasized by Confucius when evaluating Zai Yu: To "listen to his words and observe his actions", only listening to his words does not seem to be indoctrination on the surface, but observing his actions is actually indoctrination. Perhaps I can use a more appropriate word to express Confucius' educational model: authoritarian education. In contrast, Socrates' educational method should be called democratic education. In this sense, dictatorship is not only a bad social system, but also a response to acquiring correct knowledge.