본 논문은 ‘교육이란 무엇인가?’라는 기초적 고민으로부터 출발하고 또 그 고민을 지속하는 것이 교육철학이라는 주장아래 교육철학자로서의 니체를 성찰한다. 고대 그리스의 교육담론과 마찬가지로 니체는 교육의 주제어로 삶과 나-자신을 채택한다. 이때의 교육은 없는 것을 만드는 것이 아니라 있는 것을 발현하도록 이끈다. 니체에 의하면, 이끄는 교육은 지속적인 수고의 집적이며, 통일성도 그 지점에 위치한다. 본 논문은 그러한 논의와 연관하여 니체의 계보학, 진리, 영원회귀, 운명애 등을 탐구하고 그것을 통해 니체가 말하는 ‘진정한 교육’ 그리고 ‘윤리적 교사’를 제안한다. 또한 교육의 주요 논점인 공동체의 문제에 관한 니체의 시각을 드러낸다. 니체에 의하면, 개별자의 총체가 전체의 변화를 이끈다. 그런 점에서 니체의 논의는 이데아의 실현이라는 공동체의 목표를 우선하는 플라톤의 논의와 변별점을 갖는다.
The very question that this paper seeks to raise is what is the final point that we can"t give up even from conventional educational philosophies. Actually, we forgot fundamental questions we need to raise about education as we uncritically accepted American educational philosophy that had been fluctuated with data varying depending on how they are categorized or processed. What would finally remain if we work through discourses on educational philosophy, which have been just superficial and seemingly similar to one another, over a long period? Assuming that the final thing may be named "educational philosophy" itself, this paper puts thoughts of F. W. Nietzsche on the cornerstone of educational philosophy, setting aside educational arguments by other philosophers such as Plato, Rousseau and Dewey. Nietzsche"s language that we meet in the field of education is not a theory that just provides long but not so effective words within a fixed framework. It is like a combat wagon that runs and penetrates through our internal world. He is a philosopher who is not to be understood, but to be lived with. Those who read Nietzsche"s arguments reflectively should live with his words rather than repeating them. This is the reason why we try to make educational philosophy underlying by Nietzsche"s arguments. As suggested by Foucault"s saying that reading Nietzsche better is using him better, our arguments should lie in using Nietzsche better for educational philosophy. In this sense, Nietzsche"s texts are most unfamiliar ones from the perspective of educational philosophy . But at the same time, they are texts that are unexpectedly and surprisingly fit for our reality. Thus, Nietzsche"s arguments make us to question what an uncomparably important education should be in the reality of education that are still not free from red tapes, reports and assessment and classification processes. As an educational philosopher, Nietzsche focuses on "myself" with life, a key subject that can"t be substituted. Owing his thoughts, we seek to find a conclusion, ‘education is not for understanding, but for living’. As for Nietzsche, roughly speaking, education that doesn"t involve life is ‘false education’. Thus, understanding is a secondary way of living. It is just a part of living. Nietzsche says “no one builds up a bridge through which I cross over the waters of life. It is only myself who can do it”. This saying, he adds, can be invariably heard from anyone only if we do not close our ears. According to him, one should pile up his labors within a painting of his life without embellishing his reality . This is also what ancient Greek philosophers suggested. Education can be something true only when it can explain what the fundamental meaning and origin of our nature are and what are difficult to be educated, formed, approached, contained or withdrawn. In this case, education is not making, but leading. Leading education, differently termed by Nietzsche as ‘true education’, puts its final destination on liberation. Here, liberation requests us to have a courage to live a life of the moment or grasp today that is too instant in accordance with our standards and laws without ignoring our creativity and sticking to the hope of the future. What leads us to have that courage is education.
