In this essay, Emil Višňovský and Štefan Zolcer outline John Dewey’s contribution to democratic theory as presented in his 1916 classic Democracy and Education. The authors begin with a review of the general context of Dewey’s conception of democracy, and then focus on particular democratic ideas and concepts as presented in Democracy and Education. This analysis emphasizes not so much the technical elaboration of these ideas and concepts as their philosophical framework and the meanings of democracy for education and education for democracy elaborated by Dewey. Apart from other aspects of Deweyan educational democracy, Višňovský and Zolcer focus on participation as one of its key characteristics, ultimately claiming that the notion of educational democracy Dewey developed in this work is participatory. Introduction Pragmatism and democracy are inseparable.1 Of course, this does not mean that the relation between them is simply mechanical or linear. Still, especially in times of crisis, which many suggest is our current situation, pragmatism and democracy are “mutually reinforcing.”2 This is to say that pragmatism (among other things) might help to rescue democracy, and democracy might serve as the most appropriate framework for keeping pragmatism alive. In pragmatist social thought, it is democracy that is genuinely allied with social hope, if there is to be any.3 The same applies to the relation between pragmatism and education. Education lies at the heart of the philosophy of pragmatism, and even though one can imagine education without pragmatism (as many have done), democratic education is hardly imaginable absent the key ideas of pragmatism. Of course this also applies to education and democracy, as John Dewey argued in his classic Democracy and Education.4 Even though the relation between 1. This rather more standard than radical claim has been defended by many, recently, for example, by Michael Sullivan and Daniel J. Solove, “Radical Pragmatism,” in The Cambridge Companion to Pragmatism, ed. Alan Malachowski (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013), 324–44, in opposition to the pragmatic theory of democracy as presented by Richard A. Posner in his Law, Pragmatism, and Democracy (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2003). Dewey’s conception of democracy may not need a metaphysical backup, as Richard Rorty infamously claimed (see, for example, “The Priority of Democracy to Philosophy,” in Objectivity, Relativism, and Truth [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991], 175–96). And it may have other resources such as are found in the work of G. W. F. Hegel (see, for example, Eric MacGilvray, Reconstructing Public Reason [Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2004]). But it would be radically mistaken to separate the two. 2. Sullivan and Solove, “Radical Pragmatism,” 338. 3. See Judith M. Green, Pragmatism and Social Hope: Deepening Democracy in Global Contexts (New York: Columbia University Press, 2009); and Stephen M. Fishman and Lucille McCarthy, John Dewey and the Philosophy and Practice of Hope (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2007). 4. John Dewey, Democracy and Education (1916), in John Dewey: The Middle Works, 1899–1924, vol. 9, ed. Jo Ann Boydston (Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1985). This work will be cited in EDUCATIONAL THEORY Volume 66 Number 1–2 2016 © 2016 Board of Trustees University of Illinois 56 E D U C A T I O N A L T H E O R Y Volume 66 Number 1–2 2016 democracy and education is complex, it should nevertheless be clear that there cannot be democracy without education, nor can there be education without democracy. Moreover, despite the fact that Dewey earned the well-deserved title “American philosopher of democracy,”5 his democratic theory has been neither fully understood nor universally accepted. Democracy and Education is by any measure one of Dewey’s most important works, and it has been both influential and controversial from the very beginning. Arguably, neither social nor political philosophers have given the work its due. Some have even asked whether there is any theory of democracy in the book. In comparison to other works by Dewey that address social and political issues,6 and that are considered to be his major contributions to democratic theory, Democracy and Education includes just a single chapter that explicitly deals with democracy: chapter 7, “The Democratic Conception of Education” (DE, 87–106). Alison Kadlec rightly suggests that the title of Democracy and Education is a bit misleading since the book “appears to be about neither democracy nor even education as such.”7 She claims that this work instead presents the “summation” of Dewey’s “philosophy of the social” in which democracy and education, and both in their conjunction, play the most crucial role: “The primary expression of Dewey’s philosophy of the social is his core concern with the role and function of education in the pursuit of a democratic society.”8 His particular contribution consists in demonstrating the mutual interdependence between democracy and education: (1) the meaning of democracy (understood philosophically as a way of life) for education, and (2) the meaning of education (understood philosophically as a social process) for democracy. But before turning to a detailed exposition the text as DE for all subsequent references. All references to Dewey’s works will be to the multivolume series comprising The Early Works, 1882–1898, The Middle Works, 1899–1924, and The Later Works, 1925–1953, edited by Jo Ann Boydston and published by Southern Illinois University Press. Volumes in this series will henceforth be cited as EW, MW, and LW, respectively; for example, the citation “Democracy and Education (1916), MW 9, 39” indicates that this work appears in Middle Works from this series, volume 9, and the discussion or quotation cited is on page 39. 5. See Sidney Hook, John Dewey: An Intellectual Portrait (New York: John Day, 1939). 6. Notably, in Dewey’s political philosophy trilogy published a decade after Democracy and Education: The Public and Its Problems (1927), LW 2; Individualism Old and New (1930), LW 5; and Liberalism and Social Action (1935), LW 11. 7. Alison Kadlec, Dewey’s Critical Pragmatism (Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2007), 66.

中文翻译：

---

杜威的参与式教育民主

在这篇文章中，埃米尔·维索夫斯基（EmilVišňovský）和斯特凡·佐尔塞（ŠtefanZolcer）概述了约翰·杜威（John Dewey）对民主理论的贡献，正如他在1916年发表的经典《民主与教育》中所阐述的那样。作者首先回顾了杜威的民主概念的总体背景，然后重点研究了民主与教育中提出的特定民主思想和观念。这种分析并没有强调这些思想和观念的技术阐述，而是其哲学框架以及杜威阐述的民主教育和民主教育的意义。除了杜威教育民主的其他方面，维斯霍夫斯基和佐尔瑟还把参与作为其主要特征之一，并最终声称杜威在这项工作中发展出的教育民主概念具有参与性。引言实用主义和民主是密不可分的。1当然，这并不意味着它们之间的关系仅仅是机械的或线性的。但是，特别是在危机时期，这在许多人认为这是我们当前的状况时，实用主义和民主正在“相互促进”。2这就是说，实用主义（除其他外）可能有助于拯救民主，而民主可能是最重要的。保持实用主义的适当框架。在实用主义社会思想中，民主是真正与社会希望联系在一起的，如果有的话。3实用主义与教育之间的关系也是如此。教育是实用主义哲学的核心，尽管人们可以想象没有实用主义的教育（正如许多人所做的那样），缺少实用主义的关键思想，民主教育是难以想象的。当然，这也适用于教育和民主，正如约翰·杜威（John Dewey）在他的经典《民主与教育》中指出的那样。4尽管1.之间的关系如此之多，而不是激进的主张已为许多人辩护，例如最近迈克尔·沙利文（Michael Sullivan）和丹尼尔·索洛夫（Daniel J. Solove），《激进实用主义》，《剑桥实用主义同伴》编辑。Alan Malachowski（剑桥：剑桥大学出版社，2013年），第324-44页，反对理查德·波斯纳在法律，实用主义和民主中提出的实用主义民主理论（剑桥，马萨诸塞州：哈佛大学出版社，2003年） 。杜威（Dwey）的民主概念可能不需要形而上学的支持，正如理查德·罗蒂（Richard Rorty）臭名昭著地宣称的那样（例如，参见“民主对哲学的优先考虑，“客观性，相对主义和真理”（剑桥：剑桥大学出版社，1991年），第175-96页）。它可能还有其他资源，例如在全球自然基金会黑格尔的工作中可以找到的资源（例如，参见埃里克·麦克吉尔弗里，《重构公共理性》 [剑桥，马萨诸塞州：哈佛大学出版社，2004年]）。但是将两者分开是完全错误的。2. Sullivan和Solove，“激进的实用主义”，第338页。3.参见Judith M. Green的《实用主义与社会希望：深化全球语境中的民主》（纽约：哥伦比亚大学出版社，2009年）；斯蒂芬·菲什曼（Stephen M. Fishman）和露西尔·麦卡锡（Lucille McCarthy），杜威（John Dewey）和希望的哲学与实践（Urbana：Illinois University Press，2007）。4.约翰·杜威，《民主与教育》（1916年），载于约翰·杜威：中间作品，1899年至1924年，第一卷。9版。乔·安·博伊斯顿（Jo Ann Boydston）（Carbondale：伊利诺伊州南部大学出版社，1985）。这项工作将在《教育理论》 2016年第1卷第2期©2016伊利诺伊大学董事会56教育理论2016年第66卷第1-2期民主和教育是复杂的，但应该明确的是，没有教育就不可能有民主没有民主就没有教育。此外，尽管杜威（Duwey）获得了当之无愧的“美国民主哲学家”称号，[5]但他的民主理论并未得到充分理解或普遍接受。无论如何，民主与教育是杜威最重要的作品之一，并且从一开始就一直具有影响力和争议性。可以说，社会哲学家和政治哲学家都没有给予应有的重视。甚至有人问这本书中是否有民主理论。与杜威处理社会和政治问题的其他作品6相比，这被认为是他对民主理论的主要贡献，《民主与教育》仅包括一章明确论述了民主：第七章，“民主思想”。教育”（DE，87-106）。艾莉森·卡德莱克（Alison Kadlec）正确地指出，民主与教育的标题有点误导，因为这本书“似乎既不是关于民主，也不是关于教育。” 7她声称，这部著作反而代表了杜威的“世界哲学”的“总结”。 “民主”和“教育”及其两者共同发挥着最关键的作用：“杜威的社会哲学的主要表达是他对教育在追求民主社会中的作用和功能的核心关注。” 8他的特殊贡献在于展示了民主与教育之间的相互依存关系：（1）民主对教育的意义（从哲学上将其理解为一种生活方式），以及（2）教育的意义（从哲学上将其理解为一种社会过程） ）争取民主。但是在进行详细说明之前，所有后续参考文献均以DE表示。杜威作品的所有参考文献均为多卷本系列，包括1882–1898年的早期作品，1899–1924年的中间作品和1925–1953年的后来作品，这些作品由Jo Ann Boydston编辑并由南伊利诺伊大学出版社出版。此后，该系列的卷将分别称为EW，MW和LW。例如，引文“民主与教育（1916），第9、39卷”表明该作品出现在该系列的《中间作品》中，第9卷，引用的讨论或引语在第39页上。5.参见Sidney Hook，John Dewey：《知识分子肖像》（纽约：John Day，1939年）。6.值得注意的是，在杜威的政治哲学三部曲发表于《民主与教育：公众及其问题》（1927年），《法治》第2期十年之后。新旧个体主义（1930），LW 5; 以及《自由主义与社会行为》（1935年），第11页。7.艾莉森·卡德莱克（Alison Kadlec），杜威的批判实用主义（兰纳姆，马里兰州：列克星敦图书，2007年），第66页。