Capability, Freedom, and Difference: The Proposition of the Capability Approach and Its Implications for a Theoretical Pivot in Educational Equity Research
-
摘要: 教育公平一直是学界和社会公众都较为关注的热点话题。在西方学界过往讨论中，功利主义和资源主义学派重视教育的功利价值和资源的公平分配原则，但对人的差异性缺乏关注。而阿玛蒂亚·森的可行能力理论则独树一帜，该理论认为人际差异对个体资源转化的能力有重要影响，强调关注人实质自由的实现要深入分析不同群体所拥有的自由选择的机会及其障碍，进而推动个体最终获得其想要的发展结果。我们对可行能力理论应持批判性的态度，该理论虽存在些许缺陷，如可行能力清单模糊，有较重的个人主义色彩、实施路径缺乏操作性等，但对于我国当前教育公平研究转向而言，该理论在关注个体差异的自由发展、剖析影响教育公平的制度性因素和构建提升教育资源转化效能的实践路径等问题上，都具有一定的启示意义。Abstract: Educational equity remains a critical concern to both the academia and the public. In past discussions in Western academia, the utilitarian and resourcism emphasized the utilitarian value of education and the principle of equitable distribution of resources, but lacked attention to human diversity. In contrast, Amartya Sen's Capability Approach theory(CA) offers a distinct theoretical framework, which posits that interpersonal differences fundamentally shape individuals' capacity to convert resources into valued functionings, emphasizing the realization of substantive freedoms. This necessitates rigorous analysis of opportunity structures and barriers across diverse groups to enable individuals to achieve their desired developmental outcomes. While we advocate a critical stance toward CA's limitations—including its ill-defined capability set, individualistic orientation, and operational gaps in implementation pathways—the theory holds significant relevance for China's educational equity research. It provides crucial insights for: 1) Prioritizing differential development pathways aligned with individual heterogeneity; 2) Deconstructing institutional factors perpetuating educational inequities; 3) Constructing actionable strategies to enhance resource-to-capability conversion efficacy.
-
Key words:
- Education equity /
- Capability approach /
- Substantial freedom /
- Interpersonal differences /
- Amartya Sen
-
[1] CLARK D A. Sen's capability approach and the many spaces of human well-being[J]. The Journal of development studies, 2005(8): 1339-1368. [2] UNTERHALTER E. The capabilities approach and gendered education[J]. Theory & research in education, 2003(1): 7-22. [3] ANAND P, HUNTER G, MITH R. Capabilities and well-being: evidence based on the Sen-Nussbaum approach to welfare[J]. Social indicators research, 2005(1): 9-55. [4] 姚大志. 当代功利主义哲学[J]. 世界哲学, 2012(2): 50-61+161. [5] 董骏. 阿玛蒂亚森能力人权观研究[M]. 北京: 法律出版社, 2019: 59. [6] 森. 以自由看待发展[M]. 任赜, 于真, 译. 北京: 中国人民大学出版社, 2002. [7] STEWART F, DENEULIN S. Amartya Sen's contribution to development thinking[J]. Studies in comparative international development, 2007(2): 61-70. [8] SEN A. Rights and agency[J]. Philosophy & public affairs, 1982: 3-39. [9] 胡道玖. 可行能力: 阿马蒂亚·森经济伦理方法研究[D]. 苏州大学, 2006. [10] CORBRIDGE S. Development as freedom: the spaces of Amartya Sen[J]. Progress in development studies, 2002(3): 183-217. [11] CROCKER D A. Functioning and capability: the foundations of Sen's and Nussbaum's development ethic[J]. Political theory, 1992(4): 584-612. [12] 罗尔斯. 正义论[M]. 何怀宏, 何包钢, 廖申白, 译. 北京: 中国社会科学出版社, 1988. [13] RAWLS J. Social unity and primary goods[J]. Frontier Issues in economic thought, 1997(3): 276-280. [14] 森. 正义的理念[M]. 王磊, 李航, 译. 北京: 中国人民大学出版社, 2012. [15] COSTA L. The Capability Approach[J]. Springer international publishing, 2016(1): 93-117. [16] SEN A. Justice: means versus freedoms[J]. Philosophy & public affairs, 1990: 111-121. [17] Nussbaum M. Human functioning and social justice: in defense of Aristotelian essentialism[J]. Political theory, 1992(2): 202-246. [18] SEN A. Equality of what?[J]. The tanner lecture on human values, 1998(1): 197-220. [19] SUGDEN R. Welfare, resources, and capabilities: a review of inequality reexamined by Amartya Sen[J]. Journal of economic literature, 1993 (4): 1947-1962. [20] SEN A. Well-being, capability and public policy[J]. Giornale degli economisti e annali di economia, 1994(7/9): 333-347. [21] SEN A. Development as capability expansion[J]. The community development reader, 1990(1): 41-58. [22] ROBEYNS I. Sen's capability approach and gender inequality: selecting relevant capabilities[J]. Feminist economics, 2003 (2-3): 61-92. [23] 张人则, 于含英. 发展就是扩展自由——阿马蒂亚·森和他的《以自由看待发展》[J]. 经济理论与经济管理, 2002(08): 12-17. [24] ANAND P, HEES M V. Capabilities and achievements: an empirical study[J]. Journal of socio-economics, 2006(2): 268-284. [25] GASPER D, STAVEREN I V. Development as freedom-and as what else?[J]. Feminist economics. 2003(2-3): 137-161. [26] 黄燕东, 姚先国, 杨宜勇. 完备能力、功能扩展和基本幸福能力平等——关于阿玛蒂亚·森的能力方法理论的拓展研究[J]. 经济社会体制比较, 2015(2): 97-105. [27] 姚进忠. 福利研究新视角: 可行能力的理论起点、内涵与演进[J]. 国外社会科学, 2018(2): 53-67. [28] 李翔. 阿马蒂亚·森正义思想评析——马克思主义视域下的研究[J]. 求索, 2017(10): 189-197. [29] 程天君. 新教育公平引论——基于我国教育公平模式变迁的思考[J]. 教育发展研究, 2017(2): 1-11. [30] 秦子忠. 以可行能力看待不正义: 论阿马蒂亚·森的正义理论[J]. 上海交通大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2016(03): 16-27. [31] 姚大志. 罗尔斯与功利主义[J]. 社会科学战线, 2008(7): 13-19. [32] 陆韵. 义务教育阶段"民办择校热"背后教育不公平的生成与治理[J]. 中国教育学刊, 2020(12): 35-41. [33] 冯娉婷, 肖磊峰, 周达等. 家长教育满意度现状及其影响因素研究——基于对S省140所高中的调查[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2020(12): 99-108. [34] 李响. 可行能力视域下教育公平的意蕴与实现[J]. 安徽师范大学学报(人文社会科学版), 2020(4): 139-145. [35] 何经纬, 严登才. "脱嵌与重塑": 乡村学校课后服务实践困境及优化路径——基于皖北S镇初级中学的个案研究[J]. 基础教育, 2022 (3): 59-68. [36] 吴易雄, 王桐. 共生理论视域下城乡教育一体化发展的困局与突破[J]. 中国电化教育, 2022(11): 61-67. [37] 张娜娜. 客观主义、主观效用、可行能力: 阿马蒂亚·森的治贫观[J]. 当代经济研究, 2020(5): 58-65. [38] ALKIRE S. Dimensions of human development[J]. World development, 2002(2): 181-205. [39] NUSSBAUMA M. Capabilities as fundamental entitlements: Sen and social justice[J]. Feminist economics, 2003(2-3): 33-59. [40] 徐丽敏. 农民工随迁子女社会融入的能力建设——基于森"可行能力"视角[J]. 学术论坛, 2015(5): 78-84. -
下载:
点击查看大图
图(1)
计量
- 文章访问数: 50
- HTML全文浏览量: 39
- PDF下载量: 12
- 被引次数: 0