《学记》“石化”的比较考察

摘要

The Note of Learning is called the prototype of education,but also becomes the fossil of Chinese teachings ideas.Taking Zhuxi and Abelard as examples,we compare the classical philology of China with that of the West.Taking Wang Shou¯ren and Loyola as examples we also compare the un¯ derstanding and research of the law of education of China with that of the West and the development of academies after the Southern Song Dynasty with the legalization of earlier universities in Europe.The fossilization of the Note of Learning should be ascribed to the deficiency of constructive basis.Why the Note of Learning can not be developed ,why WangYangming can not solve the problems and why academies turn to imperial examination are all due to the lack of maintenance and support from Logos, law,Specialist and Religion.%《学记》被称为“教育学的雏形”，却是“中国教诲观念的化石”。以朱熹和阿贝拉尔为例比较中西方的经学研究，以王守仁和罗耀拉为例比较中西方对于教育教学规律的认识和研究，以及比较我国南宋以后书院发展和欧洲早期大学合法化历程，“建制性基础缺失”应是《学记》“石化”的根本原因。《学记》所以“长不大”，王阳明所以难挽衰世之弊，书院所以要皈依科举，缺少 Logos、Law、Specialist、Religion 的维护和支持应是关键。