The remaining two intelligences are compliments of each other. Interpersonal intelligence is the capacity to notice, or read, the intentions, desires, and emotions of others. In a classroom setting, children with this ability tend to be leaders among their peers and understand the feelings and motivations of others. They also work wonderfully in groups, assisted by their effective verbal and non-verbal communication skills.
The opposite of interpersonal intelligence is intrapersonal intelligence, the knowledge of the internal aspects of a person （one’s self ）. Individuals with this intelligence understand themselves and their feelings. This intelligence requires evidence and support from language, either written, spoken, or sung. Therefore, individuals with interpersonal intelligence usually exhibit strong linguistic intelligence. Children with this gift may be shy, overly aware of their own feelings, and utilize self-motivation as opposed to outside influences.
Gardner has recently added one more intelligence to his list, with two more aspects of cognitive abilities not yet labeled as intelligences. Naturalist intelligence was modeled by Charles Darwin, and allows people to distinguish among, classify, and utilize features of the environment. Just as most children master language at an early age, most children also exhibit a tendency to explore the world of nature. However, some children display extraordinary abilities to distinguish and identify objects and distinctions in the natural world. Many autobiographical texts of biologists document a keen interest in plants and animals accompanied by a desire to identify, classify, and interact with them. The taxonomic systems for classifying plants and animals in many cultures satisfy the criteria for including naturalist intelligence as the eighth aspect of Gardner’s theory.
The final aspect, presently under scrutiny by Gardner, is that of existential intelligence. People possessing this intelligence understand the human condition according to the significance of life, the meaning of death, and experiences such as love for another person or total immersion in a work of art or literature. There are well-defined stages of sophistication in this aspect of cognitive abilities, and its roots come just prior to the Stone Age. Early humans may have used this grappling with existential issues as a primary form of cognitive abilities. For these reasons, existentialist intelligence has a greater chance of becoming an intelligence than the already dismissed spiritual intelligence.
11、馬克斯·韋伯理論：社會階層三大維度
Max Weber developed a theory that proposed the idea that stratification is based on three factors that have become known as “the three p’s of stratification.” They are:property, prestige and power. He claimed that social stratification is a result of the interaction among property, prestige and power.
1.Property refers to one’s material possessions and their life chances. If someone has control of property, that person has power of others and can use the property to his or her benefit.
2.Prestige is also a significant factor in determining one’s place in the stratification system. The ownership of property is not always going to assure power, but there are frequently people with prestige and little property.
3.Power is the ability to get people to do what one wants, without having much property. This refers to two different types of power which are possession of power and exercising power. For example, some people in charge of the government have an immense amount of power, and yet they do not make much money.
Max Weber developed various ways that societies are organized in hierarchical systems of power. These ways are social status, class power and political power.
12、社會理論：經典社會文化進化論
Although societies over time progressed, and that progress was accomplished through competition, the individual （rather than the collectivity） is the unit of analysis that evolves, that evolution takes place through natural selection and that it affects social as well as biological phenomenon. Nonetheless, the publication of Darwin’s works proved a boon to the proponents of sociocultural evolution. The world of social science took the ideas of biological evolution as an attractive solution to similar questions regarding the origins and development of social behavior and the idea of a society as an evolving organism was a biological analogy that is taken up by many anthropologists and sociologists even today.
13、社會契約理論
The term social contract describes a broad class of philosophical theories whose subjects are the implied agreements by which people form nations and maintain a social order. In laymen’s terms, this means that the people give up some rights to a government in order to receive social order. Social contract theory provides the rationale behind the historically important notion that legitimate state authority must be derived from the consent of the governed. The starting point for most of these theories is a heuristic examination of the human condition absent from any social order, termed the “state of nature” or “natural state”. In this state of being, an individual’s action is bound only by his or her conscience. From this common starting point, the various proponents of social contract theory attempt to explain, in different ways, why it is in an individual’s rational self-interest to voluntarily subjugate the freedom of action one has under the natural state （their so called “natural rights”） in order to obtain the benefits provided by the formation of social structures.
Common to all of these theories is the notion of a sovereign will, to which all members of a society are bound by the social contract to respect. The various theories of social contract that have developed are largely differentiated by their definition of the sovereign will, be it a King （monarchy）, a Council （oligarchy） or The Majority （republic or democracy）. Members within a society implicitly agree to the terms of the social contract by their choice to stay within the society. Thus implicit in most forms of social contract is that freedom of movement is a fundamental or natural right which society may not legitimately require an individual to subrogate to the sovereign will.
14、隱性社會契約理論
The theory of an implicit social contract holds that by remaining in the territory controlled by some government, people give consent to be governed. This consent is what gives legitimacy to the government.
The person who makes this argument is already assuming that the government has some legitimate jurisdiction over this territory. And then they say, well, now, anyone who is in the territory is therefore agreeing to the prevailing rules. But they’re assuming the very thing they’re trying to prove—namely that this jurisdiction over the territory is legitimate. If it’s not, then the government is just one more group of people living in this broad general geographical territory. But I’ve got my property, and exactly what their arrangements are I don’t know, but here I am in my property and they don’t own it—at least they haven’t given me any argument that they do—and so, the fact that I am living in “this country” means I am living in a certain geographical region that they have certain pretensions over—but the question is whether those pretensions are legitimate. You can’t assume it as a means to proving it.
An answer to this argument is that a society which has effective dominion over a territory, that is, a state, is the sovereign over that territory, and therefore the true, legal owner of all of it. This is actually the theory of law for real property in every country. What individuals can own is not the land itself, but an estate in the land, that is, a transferrable right to use and exclude others from use. The true owner is the sovereign, or supreme lawmaking authority, because it can make and enforce laws that restrict what one can do on one’s estate.
15、托馬斯·莫爾著作：《烏托邦》
Thomas More’s Utopia is one of the defining works of the Renaissance period. During this era, there was rampant change all over Eastern Europe. The failing governments were being revamped into more democratic organizations and focus was placed on the community as opposed to the dictator or monarch. Thus, the concept of an ideal society in which citizens governed themselves and strove for the good of the community, such as that in Utopia, seemed revolutionary. His book gained widespread notoriety among the humanists of the Renaissance and to this day it continues to serve as a model of a perfect society.
However, it serves only as a model of a perfect society. Utopia is simply a standard by which to compare all other societies by. More created it as an unrealistic ideal and not an actual goal to be attained. The concept of a Utopia is simply not possible for a wealth of reasons, one of which is the fact that humans are greedy. Not all people are greedy, but, as a whole, human beings are greedy, that is, they always want more. Very rarely will there be a person that is truly satisfied with the condition of his/her life.
In More’s Utopia, everyone is equal; all people have the same amount of everything. Supposedly, this would prevent people from wanting more. When everyone has the same amount, everyone is satisfied, right? Wrong, there is nothing to prevent people from wanting more than their ration of food, firewood, or other resources. In a situation such as a drought where there is only a small amount of a resource and a small ration is given to everyone, people will be that much more likely to want more than their share. Furthermore, the desire for more is not limited to material things, such as food and other resources but also entails the desire for more wealth, power, or higher social standing.
In a society with no class division and no wealth such as Utopia, therefore there is nothing to strive for. When there are no goals, people will not work. Sadly, there is no incentive for people to labor for the community when there is no prospect of gaining anything for themselves. This will produce a community of apathetic, unmotivated workers, which will eventually lead to the downfall of the Utopian society.
Another issue that makes Utopia an unrealistic goal is the fact that in a perfect society everyone would be equal. The concept of equality is incredibly idealistic and simply not possible amongst a large group of people. By adding slaves to the model society, it is obvious even More could not avoid class divisions. It is also human nature to put people into groups, whether it is based on skin color, creed, status or education. Certain groups would be admired, and conversely certain groups would be looked down upon. This will create hostility and unrest amongst the citizens and will ultimately destroy the model society. It was naive of Thomas More to think that humans could exist in a society without ever creating social divisions. More would probably argue that without material possessions and social division people would not make distinctions between each other. However, people will create divisions among themselves, even if it must be based on the most trivial of differences.
A Utopian society certainly sounds like a wonderful place, but is it a realistic place? Most people would say no. Sadly, not too many people have enough faith in human kind to ever see a community such as this one flourish. Several years ago, an experiment in communal living was done on what is known as Brook Farm. This was supposed to be a modern day Utopia, however, it failed miserably due to unrest among the people living in the community. This proves that an ideal society can never exist, not because people are greedy or need to make class distinctions but because people would be unhappy in More’s Utopia due to the lack of growth and progress both in society and individually, thus making it an imperfect society.
16、持久教育論
Perennialists believe that one should teach the things that one deems to be of everlasting importance to all people everywhere. They believe that the most important topics develop a person. Since details of fact change constantly, these cannot be the most important. Therefore, one should teach principles, not facts. Since people are human, one should teach first about humans, not machines or techniques. Since people are people first, and workers second if at all, one should teach liberal topics first, not vocational topics.
A particular strategy with modern perennialists is to teach scientific reasoning, not facts. They may illustrate the reasoning with original accounts of famous experiments. This gives the students a human side to the science, and shows the reasoning in action. Most importantly, it shows the uncertainty and false steps of real science.
Although perennialism may seem similar to essentialism, perennialism focuses first on personal development, while essentialism focuses first on essential skills. Essentialist curricula thus tend to be much more vocational and fact-based, and far less liberal and principle-based. Both philosophies are typically considered as teacher-centered, as opposed to student-centered philosophies of education such as progressivism. However, since the teachers associated with perennialism are in a sense the authors of the Western masterpieces themselves, these teachers may be open to student criticism through the associated Socratic method, which if carried out as true dialogue, is a balance between students, including the on-site teacher who is promoting the discussion.
17、教育革新論及學習五大步驟
Educational progressivism is the belief that education must be based on the principle that humans are social animals who learn best in real-life activities with other people. Progressivists claimed to rely on the best available scientific theories of learning.
Most progressive educators believe that children learn as if they were scientists, following a process similar to John Dewey’s model of learning:
1.Become aware of the problem
2.Define the problem
3.Propose hypotheses to solve it
4.Evaluate the consequences of the hypotheses from one’s past experience
5.Test the most likely solution
18、進步教育論及其十二大特征
Progressive education is a pedagogical movement that began in the late 19th century and has persisted in various forms to the present. More recently, it has been viewed as an alternative to the test-oriented instruction.
The term “progressive” was engaged to distinguish this education from the traditional curriculum of the 19th century, which was rooted in classical preparation for the university and strongly differentiated by socioeconomic level. By contrast, progressive education finds its roots in present experience, is more democratic in outlook, and looks forward.
Most progressive education programs have these qualities in common:
1.Emphasis on learning by doing—hands-on projects, experiential learning
2.Integrated curriculum focused on thematic units
3.Strong emphasis on problem solving and critical thinking
4.Group work and development of social skills
5.Understanding and action as the goals of learning as opposed to rote knowledge
6.Collaborative and cooperative learning projects
7.Education for social responsibility and democracy
8.Integration of community service and service learning projects into the daily curriculum