ABSTRACT This article revisits Donald Schön’s notion of reflective practice by interpreting it from a Daoist perspective. In the first part of the essay, I summarise Schön’s critique of technical rationality and his concept of reflection-in-action. I argue that two main weaknesses of Schön’s approach to reflective practice are the presupposition of self-protected individualism, and an insufficient attention to ethical concerns. Next I expound on a Daoist formulation of reflective practice by drawing on the philosophical thought of Zhuangzi. Three salient characteristics are highlighted. First, Zhuangzi’s thought is aligned with Schön’s rejection of a technical approach and concomitant support of reflection-in-action. But unlike Schön’s individualistic tendency, a dao-centric orientation is called for where the practitioner is cognisant of and synchronises oneself with the innate nature of all things. Thirdly, Zhuangzi foregrounds ethics by stressing the primacy of other-regarding considerations and harmonious responses for reflection-in-action. A Daoist understanding of reflective practice offers a non-Western philosophical basis to Schön’s ideas and adds to the existing theories on reflection.

中文翻译：

---

重温唐纳德·舍恩的反思性实践观念：道家的解释

摘要本文从道家的角度对唐纳德·舍恩的反思性实践的概念进行了回顾。在本文的第一部分，我总结了舍恩对技术合理性的批判和他在行动中的反思的概念。我认为，舍恩的反思性实践方法的两个主要弱点是自我保护的个人主义的预设，以及对道德问题的关注不足。接下来，我将利用庄子的哲学思想来阐述道家对反思性实践的表述。突出了三个突出特征。首先，庄子的思想与舍恩对技术方法的拒绝以及对行动中反思的支持相吻合。但是与舍恩的个人主义倾向不同，要求以道为中心的取向，即从业者认识到万物与生俱来的本性并使其与之同步。第三，庄子通过强调其他考虑因素的首要地位和对行动中反思的和谐回应来提倡伦理学。道家对反思实践的理解为舍恩的思想提供了非西方的哲学基础，并为反思提供了现有的理论。