Advertisement

Thai Higher Education and an Epistemological Theory of Attasammāpaṇidhi

  • Theptawee Chokvasin
Chapter
Part of the Education in the Asia-Pacific Region: Issues, Concerns and Prospects book series (EDAP, volume 49)

Abstract

This essay is a philosophical construction of an epistemological theory of self-knowledge when one is an autonomous moral agent with right self-guidance. It is called, in Buddhist thought, Attasammāpaṇidhi, which means the characteristics of right self-conduct or right self-guidance. An exploration of the concept is important in Thai higher education because of the related Buddhist precept of Yonisomanasikāra, which are methods of thinking with critical reflections. This chapter considers some explanations of what knowledge might be when one knows that one is capable of proper self-guidance, with specific attention to the university learning environment. The question of Attasammāpaṇidhi is examined in terms of epistemological arguments between moral particularism and moral generalism. The arguments from both of the encampments are mistaken about the status of being a knower. I argue that the knowledge of Attasammāpaṇidhi should be explained as moral self-knowledge from performative understanding in the core idea of knowing.

Keywords

Attasammāpaṇidhi (right self-conduct) Critical reflections Moral autonomy Self-knowledge Thai higher education 

References

  1. Abdullah, A. H., & Halabi, K. A. (2017). The wisdom: A concept of character building based on Islamic view. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 7(5), 412–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bai, H. (1999). Decentering the ego-self and releasing the care-consciousness. Philosophical Inquiry in Education, 12(2), 5–18.Google Scholar
  3. Barad, K. (2003). Posthumanist performativity: Toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 28(3), 801–831.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chantharasakul, A., & Boonsathirakul, J. (2005). Constructing a training package for developing Yonisomanasikāra thinking method for higher education students (In Thai). Unit of Training and Research in Consulting Psychology, Department of Educational Psychology and Guidance, Faculty of Education, Kasetsart University.Google Scholar
  5. Chokvasin, T. (2007). Mobile phone and autonomy. In S. Hongladarom & C. Ess (Eds.), Information technology ethics: Cultural perspectives (pp. 68–80). Hershey, PA: Idea Group Reference.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Egege, S., & Kutieleh, S. (2004). Critical thinking: Teaching foreign notions to foreign students. International Education Journal, 4(4), 75–85.Google Scholar
  7. Khazaei, Z. (2011). Moral generalism or particularism? Philosophy Study, 1(4), 247–257.Google Scholar
  8. Lancaster, B. L. (1997). The mythology of anattā: Bridging the East-West divide. In J. Pickering (Ed.), The authority of experience: Readings on Buddhism and psychology (Curzon studies in Asian philosophy series) (pp. 170–202). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Law, D. C. (1963). Studies in the Aṅguttara Nikāya of the Suttapiṭaka. The Journal of the Ganganatha Jha Research Institute, 20–21, 1–50.Google Scholar
  10. Mar, A. A. (2011). A study of self-reliance as a moral criterion in Myanmar Buddhist Society. Universities Research Journal, 4(7), 37–49.Google Scholar
  11. Office of the Higher Education Commission. (2006). National qualifications framework for higher education in Thailand implementation handbook. http://www.mua.go.th/users/tqf-hed/news/FilesNews/FilesNews8/NQF-HEd.pdf. Accessed 1 Dec 2017.
  12. Panthiya, P. (1998). A critical study on the concept of Attasammāpaṇidhi in Buddhism (In Thai) (Master Thesis in Humanities (Philosophy)). Graduate School, Chiang Mai University.Google Scholar
  13. Phra Dhammapitaka (P.A. Payutto). (1995). Dictionary of Buddhism (8th ed.). Bangkok, Thailand: Mahachulalongkorn University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Phucharoen, S. (2017). Actualization for teacher (In Thai). Bangkok, Thailand: Poncopy Service & Supply.Google Scholar
  15. Ridge, M., & McKeever, S. (2016). Moral particularism and moral generalism. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of philosophy (Winter 2016 ed.), https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/moral-particularism-generalism/. Accessed 1 Dec 2017.
  16. Siegel, H. (2017). Education’s epistemology: Rationality, diversity, and critical thinking. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Srisa-an, W. (2008). The significance and concept of general education: Morality precedes knowledge (In Thai). Journal of General Education, 1(1), 1–3.Google Scholar
  18. Thera, N. (2004). Buddhist dictionary: Manual of Buddhist terms and doctrines (5th ed.). Kandy, Sri Lanka: Buddhist Publication Society.Google Scholar
  19. Zimmerman, A. (2010). Moral epistemology (New problems of philosophy series). London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Theptawee Chokvasin
    • 1
  1. 1.Kasetsart UniversityBangkokThailand

Personalised recommendations