The Theory Of Dialogue Moral Education

"Dialogue moral education" is a further inquiry and imagination of the new moral education mode which is filled with conversational wisdom. Using language to express himself is an important practical activity for human being, every using and expressing way of the language reveals the person's information of existence, and only when people's philosophical thought and living quality improve that they begin to catch the information. This means that whether to look into the existing way and the survival quality of a specific community or an individual or to reconstruct people's life, language is an important perspective. A person can recognize himself by the using and expressing way of the language, find the deviation of himself, or review the humanity wisdom reflected in certain language activities. The "dialogue" can bring to the human the experience of hand in hand with wisdom. Her charm is irresistible to moral education and she leads us to the place where moral education has been distorted to seek the solution. This is the "dialogue moral education". Compared with moral education immersed in monologue logic, our hope can be placed on the dialogue moral education and the value concept that people advocate can be involved in it."Dialogue moral education" intended to penetrate the spirit of the "dialogue" through the whole process of moral education. Therefore, in the first part of this article, the important concept of the "dialogue" can be clarified as "prototype", considered in embryology, analyzed in activation and read in philosophical implication. "The dialogue" by no means equates in general daily speaking, and is different from the non-daily speaking such as debate or discussion. It is an equal relationship between people that has overcome "the totalitarian authority" tendency. It is the most free, the most thorough and the most unrestrained way of communication. From the perspective of embryology, at the birthplace of human culture, the "dialogue" is the ancients' life style. It combines perfectly freedom and order. There was a motive force which promoted "the dialogue" involved in the individuals. "The dialogue" as a social event should have some necessary conditions. The activity of the "dialogue" is to reject those boundaries which cause opposition and isolation and to open a dually or multiply co-existed, open, interactive new zone. There were so many ideas of the dialogue philosophy in ancient time. As previous people hoped, the "dialogue" has become the key word of contemporary philosophy. Phenomenology from Husserl to Merleau-Ponty, Gadamer's philosophical hermeneutics and the existentialism camp Martin Buber, Karl Jaspers and Habermas, the thinkers have interpreted the philosophical implications of dialogue from different angles which are plans full of humanity for human life including education life. And the plans have aroused strong reflection and response in the field of education and moral education."Dialogue moral education" has been conceived at the background of social life. The background are analyzed by the two key words "Monologue" and "Dialogue" to express that the difficulties the modern education faces and search for wisdom are closely related to the social background. Modernization process of human beings under the monologue logic of the subject-object dichotomy has taken human being into the "fragmentation" crisis that people can not feel the connection with nature and also refuse empathy with others. And people are taken never before into a multicultural encounter and collision time. For the running of this new interactive system, there are three solutions:the monism pursuing absolute homogeneousness, the dualism pursuing absolute heterogeneity as well as the "dialogue" which achieves both surpassingness and order. People are realizing the superiority of the "dialogue" solution and it has become the best choice to respond to crisis, especially to reach a common destination.From a philosophical point of view, the choice on moral education depends on the understanding of human nature. In the third part we examine the "monologue moral education" to analyze and criticize the logic and principle of it and to determine the future goal of "dialogue moral education" by negating of "monologue moral education". In the theological world, the morality is either from God or from "heaven" of laws that "man" is the material that must be shaped through morality. Before learning to make their own voices heard, the morality has firstly killed the consciousness of people of making their own voices, so that the individual has got used to the moral life "aphasia". Moral education of God becomes an education that needs only hearing and reciting, along with the reprimand and corporal punishment which trains absolute obedience. Since modern times, human scientific activities have accelerated the pace of understanding the material world. People have found himself the power to conquer the world while tasting the "disenchantment" surprise, and has taken the "Cartesian order" from the world of science into the human world. Then, "people" no longer belong to the divine world, but bear the "restore" fate by science. Morality has become objective knowledge. Moral education and science education together treat man as raw materials waiting for processing. Moral teachers remain in full flight and "people" are still silent. Although following different logic premises, the divine moral education and intellectual moral education have both followed the monologue habit. In traditional society, the divine moral education has got social success at the cost of individual failure. In modern times, a social system that everyone can present himself is the cornerstone of a democratic society. Moral education is expected to be the key in developing students into critical thinkers and responsible participants in the democratic process. And the multi-cultural era has never before turned the problems only philosophers think about in the past into everyone's problems that challenge him. Thus, intellectual moral education has deprived the opportunity of success both from the individual and the society.The fourth part is about the theoretical boundary of "dialogue moral education". It is established in the two premises as "Moral dialogue is impossible" and "Moral education is closely connected with dialogue" Actually the interpretation of the two premises is the re-proclaim and clarification of the theory of truth and education. First, people have been dominated by entity philosophy in a long time, considering the truth as absolutely objective "discovery". Therefore the moral truth has characteristics such as dogmatism and self overweening, becoming a mandatory rule for individuals. "Dialogue moral education" firmly believes in creative theory of truth. Moral truth is a common realization formed in the collision and inspiration of thoughts and ideas among people. Moral dialogue is not only possible, but also in the true place where the moral truth emerged. Second, moral education and the dialogue originally coincided together at the birthplace of human education. Ancient China Confucius and Socrates in ancient Greece carried out their moral education in the dialogue and enjoyed the communication and insights with a "friend from far away" and ignited "the flame of mutual understanding. " They also openly expressed a negative attitude towards the "fake" moral education---onologue and instilling education, which were regarded as an absurd behavior as implanting vision into a blindness eye. This shows that, since the birth of moral education, there begins a distinction and competition between dialogue education and monologue education. Although the history of moral education was almost a history of monologue education, it can not conceal the fact that moral education has been corresponding to the dialogue and people's desire and quest for "dialogue moral education" has never ceased. In modern times, existentialism education has contrived "From I to You" educational relationship; Border pedagogy experts hope teachers and students can go across the boundary; Educations for the oppressed pursuit the common liberation of both the oppressor and the oppressed. All of these are not only heavy accumulation of modern educational achievements, but also multidimensional proof of the fact that moral education is corresponding to the dialogue. Actually, today, it is not that moral education should go to dialogue, but should return to dialogue. The moral education that returns to dialogue is the "moral dialogue"In the fifth part there is a comprehensive description of "dialogue moral education" as a free teaching practice. "Dialogue moral education" is such a moral education mode which is permeated with the openness of the dialogue spirit. In the world of dialogue moral education, moral education will review the ontological commitment of free growth of human spirit and retrieve the "real" education power. Power is always connected with conquer and has some violent composition, especially in the monologue moral education, the power of education is negative. It firstly denies the status and the strength of the educated as a person. Second, it gives the teachers the "monologue" power according to the institutional identity and refuses the teachers'real "person" to appear in the education field. Power is on the teacher's side, which makes it difficult for the hearts of students and teachers to get closer and also make the teachers undergo the isolation of their external appearance and inner world. Dialogue moral education believes that the education power lies in real people and the institutional relationship must be replaced by dialogue relationship.In the world of dialogue moral education, moral education regains its moral dimension, becoming a cause going in a joint body filled with moral relations. Moral education has always been considered as a cause shining light of humanity, even when it, by "monologue", succeeded in preventing individuals finding themselves and discovering the world, making the individual behaved as a "tame" and a "tool" for use. However, the morality of monologue moral education is limited only to the morality of its purpose. If moral education is the active choice of good life, then, the method, the process itself is supposed to be the embodiment of this good life. Therefore, dialogue moral education should achieve the desired goal through an ethical way and process. The whole process will be full of freedom, equality, sharing and love.In the world of dialogue moral education, students and teachers grow together. Moral growing should be a phenomenon of inter subjectivity, the moral self-generation should go through an interacting and mutually beneficial "dialogue" process, it should be a period of coexistence and cooperation experience of both students and teachers. Moral dialogue not only gives teachers and students the new role of explorers, but also the expected results of education is the together growing of students and teachers. Moral education is no longer only the good thing for students, but teachers and students together in dialogue climb up new heights of moral growth.