Advertisement

Towards Worldview Education Beyond Language-Culture Incommensurability

  • Ken KawasakiEmail author
Article

Abstract

This article presents an axiomatic expression of science education: [SCIENCE EDUCATION] is a system of teaching [SCIENCE]. The axiom includes two indefinable terms, [SCIENCE EDUCATION] and [SCIENCE]. In the same way that axiomatics of geometry distinguishes among axioms, postulates and theorems, the axiom presupposes a distinction among the three stages of cognition: axiom, postulate and theorem. This distinction, which is properly called the axiomatics model, will draw science educators' attention to how scientific concepts are distorted, and will develop science education towards worldview education. In the context of science education, worldview education has the potential to enable science educators and pupils to liberate themselves from their language-culture prejudices. On the basis of the axiomatics model, mutual understanding of different language-culture communities will be greatly promoted in the science classroom.

Key Words

axiomatics and structuralism incommensurability language worldview 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anglin, W.S. & Lambek, J. (1995). The heritage of Thales. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  2. Blanche, R. (1973). Axiomatization. In P.P. Wiener (Editor in Chief), Vol. I, Dictionary of the history of ideas. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons.Google Scholar
  3. Brown, H.I. (1979). Perception, theory and commitment (Phoenix Edition). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  4. Cobern, W.W. (2000). Everyday thoughts about nature. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  5. Culler, J. (1988) [1976]. Saussure (sixth impression). London: Fontana Press.Google Scholar
  6. Jastrow, J. (1900). Fact and fable in psychology. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  7. Kawasaki, K. (1996). The concepts of science in Japanese and Western education. Science & Education, 5(1), 1–20.Google Scholar
  8. Kawasaki, K. (1999). A deductive description of cultural diversity of ‘Observation’. Journal of Science Education in Japan, 23(4), 258–270.Google Scholar
  9. Kawasaki, K. (2001). An aspect of ‘experiment’ in science education in Japan. Kagakukyouiku Kenkyu (Journal of Science Education in Japan), 25(1), 2–10 (in Japanese).Google Scholar
  10. Kawasaki, K. (2002). A cross-cultural comparison of English and Japanese linguistic assumptions pupils’ learning of science. Canadian and International Education, 31(1), 19–51.Google Scholar
  11. Kohn, H. (1973). Nationalism. In P.P. Wiener (Ed.), Dictionary of the history of ideas Vol. III. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons.Google Scholar
  12. Hodson, D. (1998). Teaching and learning science. Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Moise, E.E. (1974). Elementary geometry from an advanced standpoint (2nd edn.). Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing.Google Scholar
  14. Poincaré, H. (1952). Science and hypothesis. New York: Dover.Google Scholar
  15. Popper, K.R. (1994). The myth of the framework. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. Suzuki, T. (1993). Words in context, translated by A. Miura. Tokyo: Kodansha International.Google Scholar
  17. Taylor, P.C. (1998). Constructivism: Value added. In B.J. Fraser & K.G. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 1111–1123). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  18. Whorf, B.L. (1959[1956]). Language, thought, and reality (fourth printing). New York: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of EducationKochi UniversityKochi CityJapan

Personalised recommendations