1. People were defined as rational animals before. However, for nearly a century and a half, rationality, as a prominent essential feature of human beings, has shaken its position. 2. Secondly, from the perspective of modern history, cognitive problems have always been the focus of the whole philosophy. This touches on the second reason: in recent decades, various sciences have revealed a series of surprising new knowledge about people, so that people have doubts about many traditional concepts and are at a loss. With these three reasons, we can easily see the background of the whole philosophical anthropology, and people begin to ask and explore the essence of human beings.
Then there is the philosophical anthropology of Scheler and Plaisner. Although they have different views, they have the same understanding, that is, they all think that human nature can be understood by bringing people into the all-round development stage of animals. People began to discuss the essence of human beings from the difference between human beings and animals, and the research on human beings has never stopped since then.
Next, Bornoff further explained the application of philosophical anthropology in pedagogy through three universal principles of philosophical anthropology. How does entering anthropology affect pedagogy? These three principles are anthropological reduction principle, instrumental principle and anthropological explanation of individual phenomena. Obviously, when we talk about these three principles, we cannot look at them separately. Bornoff made it very clear from the beginning. The authentication of these three principles is not difficult to understand. Here I want to sum up my overall or partial understanding of these three principles.
Let's look at the principle of reduction first. As the name implies, it is to reduce the problem to a more primitive level for research. When it comes to people, we can't examine people from their position in the universe, but from the relationship between people and the world they originally created, so we use dynamic investigation instead of static investigation. This is a principle of reduction. Of course, the reduction principle of anthropology is not a simple regression, it does not mean retrogression, it is to return the alternate concrete culture to the origin of mankind. Restore yourself, touch some aspects of rich phenomena, but try to reflect the original role of some phenomena in people's lives, and regain anthropological significance from the explained structural relationship.
About the principle of tools, we can see some clues from this sentence "Through this understanding, we can see all aspects that can only be seen in long-term observation of educational practice ... However, pedagogy is not a branch of philosophical architecture, but a tool and a medium belonging to it."
As for the third question, it is actually to understand people from phenomena. It is interesting to give some examples about fear. Fear is not an accidental defect, not a defect that people should get rid of as much as possible at a certain moment, but a perfect performance of people, because only under the attack of fear can people get rid of their casual daily life and understand their real existence. With this example, we can understand the so-called explanation of individual phenomena. Then Bornoff said that there is a sharp contradiction between daily trifles and reality. According to this understanding. It seems that only by completely breaking away from the accidental concept of people's daily existence can we find a way to truly understand people. This tells us that if we want to really understand people, we can't have an accidental concept, but always have a holistic spirit.
Finally, after the background introduction is completed, the author makes a general explanation of his own discussion alone. Bornoff said that this article is no longer an auxiliary science of pedagogy, nor a supplementary branch of pedagogy, but an attempt to reinterpret the whole pedagogy from the perspective of anthropology. These words of Bornoff can almost direct his discussion tendency and focus.