인간본성 그 의미와 교육적 중요성

Abstract

이 논문은 인간본성의 의미를 분석하고 ,그것이 교육에 줄 수 있는 시사점을 비판적으로 검토하려는 목적에서 이루어졌다 .인간본성이란 인간이라면 누구나 경험적으로 가지고 태어나는 ,다른 존재들과 구별되는 특성이라고 할 수 있다 .인간본성에 관한 여러 이론들은 윤리학적 범주와 인식론적 범주로 구별하여 고찰할 수 있다 .윤리학적 범주로 보면 ,인간본성론은 성선설 ,성악설 ,미정설로 ,인식론적 범주로 보면 인간본성론은 백지설 ,본유관념설 ,절충설로 각각 구분할 수 있다 .인간본성론 각각에 근거한 교육의 모습을 보면 ,성선설은 부드러운 교육 ,성악설은 엄격한 교육 ,미정설은 강력한 교육으로 ,그리고 백지설은 주입으로서의 교육 ,본유관념설은 발현으로서의 교육 ,절충설은 상호작용으로서의 교육으로 각각 규정될 수 있다 .그런데 실제 교육에 있어서는 인간본성에 관한 특정한 입장의 이론적 타당성보다는 그에 대한 신념과 일관된 실천이 보다 중요하다 .영국의 섬머힐 학교가 이 점을 웅변적으로 대변하고 있다 .

This study attempts to clarify the meaning of human nature and to review the educational implications of human nature theories. Though the educational implications of human nature theories have been often explored, the meaning of human nature have been rarely analyzed. Many educators think that it is important for teachers to know a certain sound theory of human nature in order to be a good one. Is that true? This study tackles on this issue. Some say that the meaning of human nature should be regarded as a prescriptive one in the context of education. Because education has something to do with a good or desirable state of human mind, so the human nature in context of education is to be considered not as an innate reality, but as a standard of the educated person. But we think that it is not right. We think that the meaning of human nature should be regarded as a descriptive one. Because here nature means the significant, innate and shared characteristics of a certain existence, so nature is not normative but in existence. The theories of human nature may be examined by the two categories, the ethical and the epistemological. The theories of human nature may be divided into three in the light of the ethical category: the view of human nature as fundamentally good, the view of human nature as fundamentally depraved and the view of human nature as indeterminate. The theories of human nature may be divided into three in the light of the epistemological category: the view of human nature as tabula rasa, the view of human nature as innate ideas and the view of human nature as eclectic.* Professor, Department of Special Education, Changwon National University The educational implications of various human nature theories may be defined as such: If we have the view of human nature as fundamentally good, we will have to pursue the soft education. The view of human nature as fundamentally depraved, the hard education. The view of human nature as indeterminate, the powerful education. If we recognize the human nature as tabula rasa, we will welcome the education as cramming. The human nature as innate ideas, the education as unfolding. The human nature as eclectic, the education as interaction. Then we think that it is more important to do our best consistent with a certain view of human nature rather than to have a sound view of human nature. As you know, education must be a kind of not theoretical but practical activity. So the faith in a certain view of human nature and the consistent practices grounded on the faith seem to be critical of education. Summerhill may be a representative case of this point.