本研究從台灣學生在國際評量的結果談起，在亮麗成績的背後可以發現儘管學生有極為優異的數學與科學表現，但卻不喜歡學習或對其評價甚低，而且在學習上相當缺乏自信心，學生間的學習落差也持續擴大。在逐步的歸結中本研究排除了謙虛的文化因素使然，而是升學所造成繁重的課業壓力、冗長的在學時間與普遍的課後補習等額外壓抑(surplus-repression)所造成，它們不僅造成學生學習上的異化，更影響了學生的身心健康發展。這些可算是目前我們所須面對的教育困境之一。 技術理性社會(the society of technological rationality)會將升學視為很合算的經濟投資，而國家則將教育視為推動社會與經濟發展的一個關鍵性因素。在這樣的社會中，不僅依最有效率的方式來開發資源，更將人視為極度有待開發的「人力資源」(human resources)。這套企業化、技術化與科學性的語言與思考模式，藉由提升效能與改善生產力來取得群眾的支持與擁護；更將教育人員、知識份子和廣大經濟秩序的價值系統予以銜接。如此應運而生的技術理性教育方式，一方面協助生產並維持現存主宰經濟、政治與文化所需的知識類型，另一方面更進而合理化這套經濟和文化權力分配的模式。 在此境況之下的教育，逐漸淪為一種企業經營，講究的是管理、效益與成本，如將將企業管理的模式移植到教育行政之中，為的是以最高效率來達成既定的政策與目標；所孕育出的開發課程觀，其課程設計與發展所追求的是提升社會效率，使得課程(curricula)的意義不再是有待理解的文本或內容，而是達成既定目標的課程技術；在教學上則不思原有諸多方法的改進，而是將資訊科技視為是提升教學效率的最佳利器，使得教學成為教學工程學，而這些既是教育的困境也是教育的異化。 技術理性能成為思維的主流模式，不僅得力於其能大大提升生產力、改善民眾生活與增加社會財富，進而獲得民眾的認同與取得合法性而已，同時也得力於數學與科學為其合理性的撐腰，對此的瞭解與批判主要應歸功於Marcuse與Husserl的貢獻。此外，作為技術批判先行者的Heidegger，則對算計性思維(calculative thinking)展開追根究柢的哲學性反思，就過度張揚的主體性、對象化的世界、技術成為時代的形上學(metaphysics)也有發人深省與獨到之處。藉由前述等學者的論述，本研究展開嘗試性地探索與追問，希望有助於技術理性框架性教育的鬆解。 關鍵詞：技術理性、額外壓抑、算計性思維、框架的教育 / This study aims to analyze what lies behind Taiwanese students’ brilliant performances on international assessment. Though our students surpass in math and science, they don’t seem to enjoy learning or have enough confidence in their own learning. On the contrary, Taiwanese students show very low interest in learning. The gap between students’ academic performances among one another has been widening. Throughout the process of deduction, this study excludes the Chinese cultural element of being humble. It is believed that surplus-repression, like the heavy study load caused by entrance exams and long school hours coupled with the common phenomenon of going to cram schools after school, leads to diverse results of students’ learning as well as immense influences on both their mental and physical development. These are parts of the educational predicaments we have to face them now. The society of technological rationality considers advanced education as a good investment while the government treats education as a key component to promoting economic development. In this kind of society, the resources are used in the most efficient ways. Human beings, known as human resources, are considered potential resources waiting to be developed. This enterprise and technology driven, and scientifically thinking pattern, has gained support and popularity from the public by improving efficiency and productivity, so as to cast a link among educationalists, intellectuals, and the value system of the tremendous economic order. This generated education of technological rationality, in one way, assists production and maintains the knowledge genre that the present dominant economy, politics, and culture need. On the other hand, the education rationalizes the pattern that the economic and cultural power dominates. Under this circumstance, education has gradually become a managing business; emphasizing on management, benefits, and expense. To implement the enterprise managing pattern into education, administration is to carry out designated policy and reach goals with the best efficiency. What the thus-gestated curricula viewpoints is trying to pursue is the elevation of social efficiency with its curricula arrangement. Hence, curricula would no longer mean context or content waiting to be comprehended, but the strategies to attain appointed objectives. In teaching, the focus would switch to make the most of information technology, thus making it the greatest tool to boost teaching efficiency and to transfer teaching into teaching engineering instead of adopting traditional teaching methods to improve teaching. These’re not only the educational predicaments but also the alienations of education. The reason technological rationality has become the main stream in thinking is because it not only advances productivity excessively, shapes up public life, accumulates public wealth, and earns the public’s identity to get legitimacy, but it wins support for its rationality from math and science. Marcuse and Husserl should be honored for their devotion to figuring it out thoroughly. Nonetheless, Heidegger, the pioneer to conduct technological criticism, has initiated philosophical reflections over calculative thinking to go into whys and wherefores. He has got thought-provoking and unique opinions toward over-exaggerating subjectivity, objectized world, and technology becoming the era’s metaphysics. Based on the statements given by the previous scholars, this thesis is attempting to launch some explorations and queries, in hope of assisting the relief to the enframing education through technological rationality. keywords: technological rationality, surplus-repression, calculative thinking, enframing education

This paper considers the way Herbert Marcuse’s re-formulation of the instrumental reason as a technical reason can be understood as an intensification or acceleration of some of the themes presented by Theodor W. Adorno and Max Horkheimer in The Dialectics of Enlightenment. By reading Marcuse´s The One-Dimensional Man in dialogue with Martin Heidegger’s The Question Concerning Technology, the paper explores a thesis that Marcuse draws on concepts from Heidegger, especially Ge-stell and Bestand, in his notion of the “technical reason” and “technological rationality” to think and think beyond modern technology. By positing modern technology as the focal point of the instrumentalization of reason, Marcuse sheds light of historical and contemporary problems with human thinking. The staging of this conversation with Marcuse and Heidegger that never really took place allows the paper to fully explore and understand Marcuse’s invoking of the aesthetical dimension, as well as his re-appropriation of Freudian terminology, as a model to re-establish negative thinking as a necessary counteraction to the one-dimensional positive thinking that is dominating private and public sphere.

在1960年為《理性與革命》寫的序言中，馬庫塞就曾提過所謂的「既定事實的力量」(the authority of established fact)，他認為「這是一種壓迫的力量」。 馬庫塞在其著作當中已多次提及所謂「既定的現實」(the established reality)，所意指的不外乎是身處於先進工業社會中的個體受到既定體制的壓迫(oppression)與制約，換言之，先進工業社會充滿著非解放的因素。 「現今，自由(freedom)與奴役(servitude)的結合變得『理所當然』(“natural”)，它已成為進步的一種手段(a vehicle of progress)。」此一論點馬庫塞在《愛欲與文明》一書中已提出，並在《單向度的人》一書中更充分地開展。 《單向度的人》的主要論點在於整體社會的意識受制於後期資本主義社會的結構，致使人們的思維無法覺醒，「現實即是合理」已經成為社會的正常看法，也就是大多數人皆依循此種模式過生活，而不去變革現狀(the status quo)。因為這一種消費與生產已形成人們的固定思維模式，即單向度的思維，由於人們不再反省現實社會的單向度現象，因此人們無法從單向度的現象中解放出來，大多數人仍處於不自覺的狀態，受到操控，社會中的成員共同架構出壓迫性的思維方式(oppressive mode of thinking)，「人的意識受制於社會的存在」，人心加重現實的趨勢致使「單向度」(one-dimensionality)的態勢逐步成形。

公共行政做為人類日常活動中之一環，其角色則是越來越重要；尤其是近 百年來，人類無論是於智識、技術或文化均呈現多元、異質與跳躍的變化 。公共行政所面對的是越益複雜與迅速變遷的環境，面對變遷如此劇烈的 社會，現代政府已無法再以過去的行政措施來解決日益複雜的公共問題， 而傳統公共行政理論面對如 此之挑戰不僅無力指引公共行政實務，甚且 自身亦漸喪失方向而形成公共行政理論危機，此種困境不但使得公共行政 學失去了反 省進步的能力，亦使得公共行政實務日漸隳墮。 基於 前述的理由，筆者遂自批判的觀點對公共行政理論之現機存危機做一探討 ，同時建議各危機之重建方向，以期能趨使公共行政理論朝向更”公共” 之方向邁進，並成為公共行政實務之指引。以下僅就各章研究問題概述如 下：第一章 緒論：說明本論文之研究目的、研究範圍、研究方法與限制 ，以及研究大剛等，以為後續探討之引言。 第二章 理論危機 ：本章乃從批判之角度對公共行政理論之危機提出反思；包括對『學科認 同』危機、『技術理性』危機、『研究典範』危機與『研究方法』危機等 四方面進行探討，並強 調其對公共行政理論之影響。第三章 公共哲學 ：本章首先探討公共哲學之意涵及其基礎，並自歷史的角度探究公共哲學 於人類政治、社會生活中之角色，且提出五種較為普遍之公共哲學觀點以 為說明，並特別著重於『公民』觀點之公共哲學的重要性。第四章 溝通 理性：本章針對技術理性過度膨脹所形成之危機而提出溝通理性以為公共 行政理論重建之方向。第五章 自然論典範：本章係自與實證論之各面向 均呈相對之自然論典範著手，建議公共行政理論之研究典範。第六章 質 的研究：筆者於本章中特別自質的研究方法之意義、倫理、研究過程等項 介紹質的研究方法，以利於瞭解其與量的研究方法之差異。 第七章 結論：本章係就本論文之研究 主題做一回顧，並對未 來之研究方向提出建議，以供對此論題有興趣從 事更進一步探討者之參考。