| DC 欄位 |
值 |
語言 |
| DC.contributor | 哲學研究所在職專班 | zh_TW |
| DC.creator | 黃瑞堯 | zh_TW |
| DC.creator | Ruei-Yao Huang | en_US |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2024-1-11T07:39:07Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2024-1-11T07:39:07Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2024 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://ir.lib.ncu.edu.tw:88/thesis/view_etd.asp?URN=109154003 | |
| dc.contributor.department | 哲學研究所在職專班 | zh_TW |
| DC.description | 國立中央大學 | zh_TW |
| DC.description | National Central University | en_US |
| dc.description.abstract | 效益主義的提出者—傑瑞米‧邊沁（Jeremy Bentham，1748-1832）以及改良者—約翰‧史都華‧彌爾（John Stuart Mill，1806-1873），兩位代表效益主義的學者皆關切的原則在於：不是行為者個人利益的最大化，而是人類社會、甚至宇宙整體利益的最大化。而這看似正與特殊教育所關切的少數族群（本文以身心障礙者族群為研究對象)中是否互相衝突，或者兩者間是否能取得一個平衡，抑或是世人對於效益主義產生誤解？本文想以此來作為研究動機，並從教育現場、教育工作者、以及法令層面三個面向作為研究範圍，探討效益主義在特殊教育中的應用與其理論所強調的，是否能作為教育以及公共立法的指引。透過文獻以及實際案例的分析來作為研究方法進行推論，同時也探討效益主義是否會犧牲少部分人的權益；以及教育工作者應要具備何樣的倫理觀念。
本文預期得到的結論在於效益主義所謂的「最大多數的最大幸福」並非如部分人所以為的會對於少數者有不合理的要求。反之，甚至其理論內涵還為少數者爭取其權利。故本文想主張的是，效益主義所強調的其實已經是特殊教育中的核心理念。因此，最大幸福的原則其實能在保有少數族群的權益前提下，達到一個多贏的局面，並且能以此核心理念來作為融合教育的根本。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | The proposer of Utilitarianism - Jeremy Bentham ( 1748-1832 ) and the reformer - John Stuart Mill ( 1806-1873 ).Two representatives of Utilitarianism are concerned about is: not the maximization of the individual interests, but the maximization of the overall interests of human society and even the universe. Does this seem to be in conflict with the minority groups that special education is concerned about (this article takes the disabled group as the research object), or can a balance be achieved between the two, or some people misunderstanding Utilitarianism This article would like to use this as the motivation for research, and explore the application of Utilitarianism in special education and its theoretical emphasis on whether it can be used as a basis for education and public legislation from three aspects: the education scene, educators, and the legal level. Guidelines. Through the analysis of literature and actual cases, it is used as a research method to make inferences. It also explores whether Utilitarianism will sacrifice the rights and interests of a small number of people; and what kind of ethical concepts educators should have.
The expected conclusion of this article is that the so-called ＂greatest happiness for the greatest number＂ of Utilitarianism does not have unreasonable requirements for the minority as some people think. On the contrary, even its theoretical connotation is to fight for the rights of minorities. Therefore, this article advocate that Utilitarianism emphasizes is actually the core concept in Special Education. Therefore, the principle of maximum happiness can actually achieve a win-win situation while preserving the rights and interests of minority groups, and this core concept can be used as the foundation of inclusive education. | en_US |
| DC.subject | 特殊教育 | zh_TW |
| DC.subject | 效益主義 | zh_TW |
| DC.subject | 邊沁 | zh_TW |
| DC.subject | 彌爾 | zh_TW |
| DC.subject | 最大幸福原則 | zh_TW |
| DC.subject | Special Education | en_US |
| DC.subject | Utilitarianism | en_US |
| DC.subject | Bentham | en_US |
| DC.subject | Mill | en_US |
| DC.subject | Greatest Happiness Principle | en_US |
| DC.title | 彌爾的效益主義與特殊教育是否相衝突—以台灣特殊教育為例 | zh_TW |
| dc.language.iso | zh-TW | zh-TW |
| DC.type | 博碩士論文 | zh_TW |
| DC.type | thesis | en_US |
| DC.publisher | National Central University | en_US |