上外英语语言文学考研翻译《教育与规训》中英文对照版分享
Education and Discipline
by Bertrand Rusll
教育与规训[①]
［英］伯特兰·罗素 著
怎样解开手机锁屏密码
刘任翔 试译
榆次逸夫小学
Any rious educational theory must consist of two parts: a conception of the ends of life, and a science of psychological dynamics, i.e., of the laws of mental change. Two men who differ as to the ends of life cannot hope to agree about education. The educational machine, throughout Western civilization, is dominated by two ethical theories: that of Christianity, and that of nationalism. The two, when taken riously, are incompatible, as is becoming evident in Germany. For my part, I hold that where they differ, Christianity is pr
只要你在我身边eferable, but where they agree, both are mistaken. The conception which I should substitute as the purpo of education is civilization, a term which, as I meant it, has a definition which is partly individual, partly social. It consists, in the individual, of both intellectual and moral qualities: intellectually, a certain minimum of general knowledge, technical skill in one's own profession, and a habit of forming opinions on evidence; morally, of impartiality, kindliness, and a modicum of lf-control. I should add a quality which is neither moral nor intellectual, but perhaps physiological: zest and joy of life. In communities, civilization demands respect for law, justice as between man and man, purpos not involving permanent injury to any ction of the human race, and intelligent adaptation of means to ends.
鱼斯拉
任何一种严肃的教育理论都包括两部分：有关生命之目的的观念，以及有关人的心理如何运作（例如，情绪变化的规律是什么）的理论——我们没法指望两个对于生命目的理解不同的人会在教育问题上达成一致。在整个西方文明中，教育的机制被两种价值观所主导：一种是基督教，另一种是民族主义[②]。如果两者的理念都被严格地执行，它们的冲突就不可避免，正如我们在德国看到的那样[③]。我认为，在两者产生分歧之处，基督教价值观更
为可取一些；但两者达成一致之处则无一正确。在我看来，“文明”应当替代它们作为教育的目的，而“文明”一词的定义则兼有个人与社会的方面。个人意义上的文明包括智识的和道德的品质：前者指必要的常识、专业的技能、根据确凿证据形成观念的习惯；后者指不偏不倚、善心以及适度的自控力。恐怕我还得加上智识和道德之外的、大体属于生理方面的第三点——生活中的愉悦和激情。而社会意义上的文明则包括对法律的尊重、对人与人之间正义的追求、对于任何行为都不能伤害人类族群中任何一部分的自觉意识、以及能够机智地调整方法以达到目标的素质。
If the are to be the purpo of education, it is a question for the science of psychology to consider what can be done towards realizing them, and, in particular, what degree of freedom is likely to prove most effective.
假如以上就是教育的目标，那么如何实现它、尤其是在此过程中何种程度的自由收效最好，就是一个亟待解决的问题，为此我们需要诉诸心理科学。
On the question of freedom in education there are at prent three main schools of thought, deriving partly from differences as to ends and partly from differences in psychol
ogical theory. There are tho who say that children should be completely free, however bad they may be; there are tho who say they should be completely subject to authority, however good they may be; and there are tho who say they should be free, but in spite of freedom they should be always good. This last party is larger than it has any logical right to be; Children, like adults, will not all be virtuous if they are all free. The belief that liberty will insure moral perfection is a relic of Rousauism, and would not survive a study of animals and babies. Tho who hold this belief think that education should have no positive purpo, but should merely offer an environment suitable for spontaneous development. I cannot agree with this school, which ems too individualistic, and unduly indifferent to the importance of knowledge. We live in communities which require cooperation, and it would be utopian to expect all the necessary cooperation to result from spontaneous impul. The existence of a large population on a limited area is only possible owing to science and technique; education must, therefore, hand on the necessary minimum of the. The educators who allow most freedom are men who success depends upon a degree of benevolence, lf-control, and trained intelligence whi
ch can hardly be generated where every impul is left unchecked; their merits, therefore, are not likely to be perpetuated if their methods are undiluted. Education, viewed from a social standpoint, must be something more positive than a mere opportunity for growth. It must, of cour, provide this, but it must also provide a mental and moral equipment which children cannot acquire entirely for themlves.
基友是什么在有关教育应当允许多少自由的问题上，目前有三种观点；其间的分歧，部分来自人们对人生目标的理解，部分来自他们所运用的心理学理论。有些人认为，无论孩子可能会变得多坏，他们都应当被给予绝对的自由；其中一些还补充说，尽管我们给了孩子们绝对的自由，他们也总是会成为好孩子。这群人中真正在逻辑上站得住脚的寥寥无几；就像成人一样，孩子在绝对的自由之下并不都会变得有美德。相信自由能够保证一个人在道德上的完善，是卢梭思想[④]的残余，并且很容易被有关动物和婴儿的研究所证伪。卢梭主义者否认教育应当有任何积极的目标，而觉得它仅仅应当为自发的成长提供合适的环境。这种观点过于强调个体，而且对知识的重要性显得很漠然，这些是我所不能赞同的。我们所生活的社群需要合作，而指望一切必要的合作都出自人们自发的意愿，是一种乌托邦[⑤]式的空想。如果不是因为发达的科学技术，一大群人生活在一块大小有限的地区就是不可能的；
因此教育至少要传承一些基本的科技知识。那些容许最大程度自由的教育家们，自己的成功却建立在一定程度的仁慈、自制及智识训练之上，这些几乎不可能在一个一切冲动都不受干涉的环境中养成；因此，如果他们所支持的教育方式不经修正、缓和，他们身上所具有的优点便不太可能传给下一代。从社会的立场来看，教育绝不仅仅是提供一个成长的机缘——成长的机缘当然是必要的，然而教育还应促进儿童心理和道德上的完善，儿童不可能自发地完成它。
武汉停水
The arguments in favor of a great degree of freedom in education are derived not from man's natural goodness, but from the effects of authority, both on tho who suffer it and on tho who exerci it. Tho who are subject to authority become either submissive or rebellious, and each attitude has its drawbacks.
那种在教育中要求极大程度自由的论调，并非是因为考虑到自由是人的一种善的天性，而毋宁说是威权作用的结果，这种作用对受压迫者和压迫者都有影响。受威权所压迫的人，要么变得驯顺，要么变得叛逆，而这两种态度都是有缺陷的。
The submissive lo initiative, both in thought and action; moreover, the anger generated
by the feeling of being thwarted tends to find an outlet in bullying tho who are weaker. That is why tyrannical institutions are lf-perpetuating: what a man has suffered from his father he inflicts upon his son, and the humiliations which he remembers having endured at his public school he pass on to "natives" when he becomes an empire-builder. Thus an unduly authoritative education turns the pupils into timid tyrants, incapable of either claiming or tolerating originality in word or deed. The effect upon the educators is even wor: they tend to become sadistic disciplinarians, glad to inspire terror, and content to inspire nothing el. As the men reprent knowledge, the pupils acquire a horror of knowledge, which, among the English upper class, is suppod to be part of human nature, but is really part of the well-grounded hatred of the authoritarian pedagogue.
驯顺者在思想和行动方面都会失去创造力；而且，压抑引起的愤怒常以欺凌更弱者的方式得到发泄。这就是暴政的机制得以维系的原因：一个人把父辈给他的痛苦同样地施加给他的儿女；当他成为帝国的缔造者时，则把它在中学时所受的耻辱施加给他的“国民”[⑥]。因而，一种威权泛滥的教育把孩子们都变成了怯懦的暴君，在言行方面既不能提出自己的、又不能容忍别人的独创。教育者受到的影响甚至更坏：他们往往变成萨德[⑦]式的规训者，
除了散布恐惧之外别无所求。由于教育者们代表着知识［及其权力］，学生们对知识的恐惧便与日俱增。英国的上流社会认为这种恐惧是人性的一部分，但实际上它却揭示了人们对于充斥着威权之教育的普遍仇视。
Rebels, on the other hand, though they may be necessary, can hardly be just to what exists. Moreover, there are many ways of rebelling, and only a small minority of the are wi. Galileo was a rebel and was wi; believers in the flat-earth theory are equally rebels, but are foolish. There is a great danger in the tendency to suppo that opposition to authority is esntially meritorious and that unconventional opinions are bound to be correct: no uful purpo is rved by smashing lamp-posts or maintaining Shakespeare to be no poet. Yet this excessive rebelliousness is often the effect that too much authority has on spirited pupils. And when rebels become educators, they sometimes encourage defiance in their pupils, for whom at the same time they are trying to produce a perfect environment, although the two aims are scarcely compatible.
补水保湿产品排行榜
