本文選題：受教育義務(wù) + 受教育權(quán)利��； 參考：《教育發(fā)展研究》2017年Z1期

【摘要】：受教育的憲法規(guī)定使得受教育的權(quán)利義務(wù)特性被模糊化處理,不但造成理論上的困惑,而且也不利于實(shí)際問(wèn)題的解決。梳理受教育義務(wù)產(chǎn)生、從義務(wù)到權(quán)利轉(zhuǎn)換后受教育義務(wù)存在的合理性,受教育權(quán)利存在功能上的局限,即無(wú)法解決現(xiàn)實(shí)中存在的反權(quán)利問(wèn)題,未能涵蓋社會(huì)維度的合理需求,這種功能上的局限為受教育義務(wù)的存在提供了外在的合理性。受教育義務(wù)的內(nèi)在合理性來(lái)源于"法律家長(zhǎng)主義"(Legal Paternalism)和"公民身份社會(huì)學(xué)"(The Sociology of Citizenship)。文章進(jìn)而在對(duì)荷載權(quán)利義務(wù)的"受教育"進(jìn)行具體分析的基礎(chǔ)上解讀受教育權(quán)利和受教育義務(wù)的關(guān)系,厘定受教育的權(quán)利范圍與義務(wù)界限,目的是澄清理論困惑和解決實(shí)際問(wèn)題。
[Abstract]:The constitutional provisions of education make the characteristics of rights and obligations of education blurred, which not only causes theoretical confusion, but also is not conducive to the solution of practical problems. Combing the emergence of the obligation of education, the rationality of the existence of the obligation of education after the transition from obligation to right, the functional limitations of the right to education, that is, the inability to solve the problem of anti-rights in reality, and the failure to cover the reasonable needs of the social dimension. This functional limitation provides external rationality for the existence of the obligation to receive education. The intrinsic rationality of the obligation to receive education comes from "legal paternalism" and "sociology of citizenship" / the Sociology of Citizenship. On the basis of the concrete analysis of the "education" of the load right and obligation, this paper interprets the relationship between the right to education and the obligation of education, and determines the scope of the right to education and the boundary of the obligation. The purpose is to clarify the theoretical confusion and solve practical problems.
【作者單位】： 吉林大學(xué)法學(xué)院;
【基金】：“國(guó)家2011計(jì)劃司法文明協(xié)同創(chuàng)新中心”的部分成果
【分類號(hào)】：G512.3

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 吳鵬;;論公民的受教育義務(wù)[J];清華大學(xué)教育研究;2008年03期

，

本文編號(hào)：1845884