用户中心
THE THEORY OF THE LIBERAL COLLEGE
通识学院的理论
By Alexander Meiklejohn
亚历山大·米克尔约翰
In a corresponding way the work of the professional school differs from that of the liberal college. In the teaching of engineering, medicine or law, we are or may be beyond the realm of mere skill and within the realm of ideas and principles. But the selection and the relating of these ideas is dominated by an immediate practical interest which cuts them off from the intellectual point of view of the scholar. If an undergraduate should take away from his studies of chemistry, biology, and psychology only those parts which have immediate practical application in the field of medicine, the college teachers would feel that they had failed to give the boy the kind of instruction demanded of a college. It is not their purpose to furnish applied knowledge in this sense. They are not willing to cut up their sciences into segments and to allow the students to select those segments which may be of service in the practice of an art or a profession. In one way or another the teacher feels a kinship with the scientist and the scholar which forbids him to submit to this domination of his instruction by the demands of an immediate practical interest. Whatever it may mean, he intends to hold the intellectual point of view and to keep his students with him if he can. In response, then, to demands for technical and professional training our college teachers tell us that such training may be obtained in other schools; it is not to be had in a college of liberal culture.
同样，职业学校的工作与通识学院的工作也迥然相异。在工程学、医学或法学的教学中，我们关注的不是或可能不会去关注纯粹的技术领域，而是步入思想观点与理论原理的疆域。但对这些思想观点的择取与关联则受现实旨趣所支配，这一旨趣与学者的思想性视角相割裂。假如一名大学生从他的化学、生物学和心理学课程中仅仅获得能直接快速地运用于医学领域实践的知识内容，大学教师一定会感到他们未能成功给予这名学生大学所应有的那种教育，因为，他们的目的不在于提供这个意义上的应用型知识。他们不愿将科学切割成段，任由学生们去选取那些可能对他们的技术或职业有用的碎片。在某种意义上，大学教师感到他与科学家和学者有一种亲近感，这种亲近感阻止他将他的教育屈从于直接的现实利益。无论如何，他努力秉持知识思想性的观点，尽量让学生紧跟自己的脚步。至于技术和职业训练，我们的大学教师会说，这样的训练应在其他学校习得，而不是在一所弘扬博雅文化的大学获得。
通识学院的理论
By Alexander Meiklejohn
亚历山大·米克尔约翰
In a corresponding way the work of the professional school differs from that of the liberal college. In the teaching of engineering, medicine or law, we are or may be beyond the realm of mere skill and within the realm of ideas and principles. But the selection and the relating of these ideas is dominated by an immediate practical interest which cuts them off from the intellectual point of view of the scholar. If an undergraduate should take away from his studies of chemistry, biology, and psychology only those parts which have immediate practical application in the field of medicine, the college teachers would feel that they had failed to give the boy the kind of instruction demanded of a college. It is not their purpose to furnish applied knowledge in this sense. They are not willing to cut up their sciences into segments and to allow the students to select those segments which may be of service in the practice of an art or a profession. In one way or another the teacher feels a kinship with the scientist and the scholar which forbids him to submit to this domination of his instruction by the demands of an immediate practical interest. Whatever it may mean, he intends to hold the intellectual point of view and to keep his students with him if he can. In response, then, to demands for technical and professional training our college teachers tell us that such training may be obtained in other schools; it is not to be had in a college of liberal culture.
同样，职业学校的工作与通识学院的工作也迥然相异。在工程学、医学或法学的教学中，我们关注的不是或可能不会去关注纯粹的技术领域，而是步入思想观点与理论原理的疆域。但对这些思想观点的择取与关联则受现实旨趣所支配，这一旨趣与学者的思想性视角相割裂。假如一名大学生从他的化学、生物学和心理学课程中仅仅获得能直接快速地运用于医学领域实践的知识内容，大学教师一定会感到他们未能成功给予这名学生大学所应有的那种教育，因为，他们的目的不在于提供这个意义上的应用型知识。他们不愿将科学切割成段，任由学生们去选取那些可能对他们的技术或职业有用的碎片。在某种意义上，大学教师感到他与科学家和学者有一种亲近感，这种亲近感阻止他将他的教育屈从于直接的现实利益。无论如何，他努力秉持知识思想性的观点，尽量让学生紧跟自己的脚步。至于技术和职业训练，我们的大学教师会说，这样的训练应在其他学校习得，而不是在一所弘扬博雅文化的大学获得。
