An Analysis of the Basic Issues in the Construction of Subjectivity in the Discipline of Ideological and Political Education over the Past 40 Years

Disciplinary subjectivity is the foundation of a discipline’s standing and the source of its vitality; it is the fundamental attribute that cultivates professional characteristics, maintains disciplinary reputation, and promotes disciplinary development. Since its establishment in 1984, the specialty of ideological and political education has traversed a 40-year journey, completing the transition from specialty initiation to disciplinary initial formation, achieving considerable accomplishments in disciplinary construction, scientific research, education and teaching, talent cultivation, social service, international exchange, and cultural inheritance and innovation. Standing at the historical juncture of the 40th anniversary of the founding of the ideological and political education specialty, reflecting on the course and experience of the specialty’s development and disciplinary construction naturally raises many issues worthy of summary and discussion. Among them, the issue of constructing the subjectivity of the ideological and political education discipline is quite leading, a key proposition that requires attention when reflecting on the 40-year history of the specialty’s development and disciplinary construction as a whole. Centering on the generation and construction of the subjectivity of the ideological and political education discipline, a series of dominant and expansive disciplinary subjective elements and categories—such as knowledge, value, institutions, and culture—enter the researcher’s reflective horizon and scope of discussion. A simple and clear truth is that for the ideological and political education discipline to become an independent discipline, it cannot lack its own disciplinary subjectivity, nor can it merely derive and graft an independently characterized discipline from ancient concepts, categories, propositions, and principles borrowed from other disciplines. So, to enhance the subjectivity of the ideological and political education discipline, what issues are worth our consideration? This article focuses on the keyword of disciplinary subjectivity, combining the course and achievements of the ideological and political education specialty’s development over the past 40 years, attempting to examine the path taken and the direction forward for ideological and political education, in order to commemorate the 40th anniversary of the founding of the ideological and political education specialty and to look ahead to the future path and development prospects of the ideological and political education discipline.

学科主体性是学科的立身之本和活力之源，是培育专业特质、维系学科声誉和促进学科发展的根本属性。自1984年成立以来，思想政治教育专业已经走过了40年的历程，完成了从专业初创到学科初成的转变，在学科建设、科学研究、教育教学、人才培养、社会服务、国际交流和文化传承创新等方面取得了不俗成就。站在思想政治教育专业创立40年之际的历史节点上，反思思想政治教育专业发展和学科建设的历程和经验，自然有许多值得总结和探讨的问题。其中，关于思想政治教育学科主体性建设的问题颇具引领性，是从总体上反思40年来思想政治教育专业发展和学科建设时需要重视的关键命题。围绕思想政治教育学科主体性的生成和建构，知识、价值、制度和文化等一系列具有支配性和扩展性的学科主体要素与范畴便进入研究者的反思视野与讨论范围。一个浅显而明白的道理是，思想政治教育学科要成为独立的学科，就不能没有自身的学科主体性，不能仅仅从其他学科借鉴一些古旧的概念、范畴、命题，原理中衍生和嫁接出具有独立特质的学科。那么，要提升思想政治教育学科的主体性，我们又有哪些值得思考的问题呢？本文聚焦于学科主体性这一关键词，结合40年来思想政治教育专业发展的历程和成就，尝试省察思想政治教育的来路与进向，以纪念思想政治教育专业创立40周年，展望思想政治教育学科未来取径和发展前景。

Specialty and Discipline: The Core Task of Constructing Subjectivity in Ideological and Political Education

专业与学科：思想政治教育主体性建设的核心任务

As is well known, the specialty of ideological and political education was established on April 13, 1984, in accordance with the “Opinion of the Ministry of Education on Establishing the Specialty of Ideological and Political Education in Twelve Institutions,” as a pilot specialty aimed at cultivating specialized personnel for ideological and political education work. In June of the same year, the Ministry of Education further issued the “Opinion on Offering Second Bachelor’s Degree Classes in the Specialty of Ideological and Political Education in Six Higher Education Institutions” and the “Opinion on Offering Undergraduate Classes in Ideological and Political Education in Higher Education Institutions,” realizing the establishment of undergraduate classes, second-degree programs, and two-year on-the-job undergraduate classes, marking the birth of the ideological and political education specialty.

众所周知，思想政治教育专业是1984年4 月13日按照《教育部关于在十二所院校设置思想政治教育专业的意见》而设立的以培养思想政治教育工作专门人才为目的的试点专业。同年6月，教育部又通过《关于在六所高等院校开办思想政治教育专业第二学士学位班的意见》《关于在高等学校举办思想政治教育本科班的意见》，实现了从本科班、第二学位和两年制在职本科班的设置，标志着思想政治教育专业的诞生。

Although the establishment of the ideological and political education specialty also initiated corresponding curriculum construction and disciplinary research, strictly speaking, the founding of a specialty is not precisely equivalent to the founding of a discipline. The reason lies in the fact that there are indeed obvious differences between a specialty and a discipline. First, from the perspective of division of labor, a specialty is a category of academic study, a specialized division of knowledge and a field of cultivation. A discipline is an academic classification, a research category and regulatory system formed based on the differentiation and integration of knowledge. Second, from the perspective of scope, a specialty is more specific, while a discipline is more macroscopic. Generally speaking, the scope of a discipline is larger than that of a specialty; within a discipline, different specialties and research directions can be delineated. Third, from the perspective of emphasis, the focus of a specialty lies in cultivating specialized talents of a specific specification through specialized education and teaching, while the focus of a discipline points to the academic, institutional, and theoretical systems related to the specialty, with emphasis on development indicators and structural systems in terms of scholars, affairs, institutions, and norms. Fourth, from the perspective of goals, the goal of a specialty is to educate people, that is, to cultivate workers with professional literacy, knowledge, and skills for specific industries and fields to meet social needs. The goal of a discipline is to accumulate and create knowledge, theory, and paradigms, and to promote academic progress and scientific development through the establishment of rules and institutions. Finally, from the perspective of content, although a specialty may also expand with disciplinary construction and research, it is relatively fixed and less inclusive, while a discipline has greater inclusiveness and variability, with a relatively broad scope of research content and greater thematic flexibility. Despite the differences in the above aspects, specialties and disciplines are still complementary, possessing obvious compatibility and synergy. Specialty development and disciplinary construction are inseparable from each other, interrelated, and often integrated together.

尽管思想政治教育专业创立后也启动了相应的课程建设和学科研究，但严格说来，专业的创立并不严格等同于学科创立，个中的原因在于专业和学科之间事实上存在着明显的差异。首先，从分工上看，专业是学业门类，是专门化的知识分工和培育领域。学科是学术分类，是基于知识分化与综合而形成的研究部类与规制体系。其次，从范围上看，专业更具体，学科更宏观。一般说来，学科的范围要大于专业，在一个学科内容可以划分出不同的专业和研究方向。再次，从侧重上看，专业的重心在于通过专门化的教育教学培养特定规格的专门人才，而学科重心则指向与专业相关的学术、学制和学理体系，重点在于从学人、事务、制度和规范等方面的发展指标和结构体系。复次，从目标上看，专业的目标在于育人，即为特定行业和领域培育具备专业素养、知识和技能的劳动者，以满足社会需要。学科的目标在于积累和创造知识、学理和范式，通过建章立制推动学术进步和科学发展。最后，从内容上看，专业尽管也会随着学科建设和研究有所拓展，但相对固定，包容性较小，而学科则具有较大包容性和变动性，研究内容涵盖面相对广泛，主题灵活性较强。尽管存在以上诸方面的差异，但专业和学科还是相辅相成的，二者具有较为明显的兼容性和协同性。专业发展与学科建设互相离不开，也相互关联，常常统合在一起。

Reviewing the course of the development of the ideological and political education specialty, it can be seen that the actual situation of this specialty is that the specialty was established first, followed by the construction of the discipline. During this period, the disciplinary affiliation also underwent several changes along with the specialty’s development and the adjustment of the disciplinary catalog in higher education institutions. At the beginning of the establishment of the ideological and political education specialty, it belonged to the discipline of education. Later, with disciplinary adjustments, it was transferred into political science. In 2006, with the establishment of the first-level discipline of Marxist theory, ideological and political education, as a second-level discipline within it, was transferred into the discipline of Marxist theory under the category of law. The shift from education to political science and then to Marxist theory indicates changes in the cognition and positioning of this discipline, but in reality, the construction of the ideological and political education specialty itself was not greatly affected, maintaining a stable disciplinary order and development model. Whether in specialty development or disciplinary construction, a series of important issues surrounding the knowledge system, core competencies, and educational structure of ideological and political education have gradually expanded and enriched over 40 years of development. Although it cannot yet be said that the ideological and political education discipline has reached maturity, compared with other second-level disciplines within Marxist theory, ideological and political education remains a discipline and specialty with an early start, deep accumulation, and strong stability. From this perspective, the 40-year development of the ideological and political education specialty is also a process of continuous advancement and deepening of the construction of the ideological and political education discipline. Specialty development and disciplinary construction have been highly integrated and closely coordinated in this process, prompting ideological and political education to gradually enter a favorable state and increasingly demonstrate its achievements in professionalism, theory, subjectivity, and practice.

回顾思想政治教育专业发展的历程可见，该专业的真实情况是先有专业后建学科，期间学科归属也伴随着专业发展和高校学科目录调整而发生过数次转变。在思想政治教育专业建立之初，它隶属于教育学学科，后随着学科调整而转入政治学之中。2006年，伴随着马克思主义理论一级学科的设立，思想政治教育作为其中的二级学科，转入法学门类下马克思主义理论学科之中。从教育学到政治学再到马克思主义理论学科的转变，表明对该学科认知和定位的变化，但实际上思想政治教育专业建设本身并未受到太多影响，始终保持着稳定的专业秩序和发展模式。不论是专业发展还是学科建设，围绕着思想政治教育学的知识体系、核心素养和教育结构的一系列重要议题也在40年的发展中逐渐拓展和丰富。尽管迄今仍不能说思想政治教育学科臻于成熟，但相较于马克思主义理论学科中的其他二级学科，思想政治教育依旧是发端早、积淀深、稳定性强的学科和专业。由此来看，思想政治教育专业40年发展的历程，也是思想政治教育学科建设不断推进和深化的进程。专业发展和学科建设在这一进程中高度融合、密切协同，促使思想政治教育在专业性、理论性、主体性和实践性上渐入佳境、日彰其成。

Where does the subjectivity of the ideological and political education discipline lie? What is the focus of constructing the subjectivity of ideological and political education? These are questions that the academic community of ideological and political education has always explored over the past 40 years, and they are also questions that colleagues in the ideological and political education academic community need to seriously reflect on and strive to answer on the occasion of celebrating the 40th anniversary of the establishment of the specialty and the development of the discipline of ideological and political education.

思想政治教育学科的主体性何在？思想政治教育主体性建设的重点何在？这是40年来思想政治教育学界始终探索的问题，也是庆祝思想政治教育专业建立和学科发展40年之际思想政治教育学界同仁需要认真反思并努力做出回答的问题。

The author believes that specialty and discipline are key concepts in modern education and scientific development, knowledge construction and academic research, and are also basic categories that manifest the independence of a specialty and the subjectivity of a discipline. The two are both interconnected and distinct. From the perspective of interconnection, both specialty and discipline have distinct prescriptiveness and normativity, displaying the unique characteristics of an object in terms of subjectivity. From the perspective of distinction, a specialty emphasizes subjective educability and normativity, referring to “categories of specialties established according to the needs of the social division of labor. The teaching plan of each specialty reflects the training objectives and requirements of that specialty.” Therefore, “the training objectives, scope, depth, and emphasis of the specialty must be fully reflected in the specialty teaching plan.” Relatively speaking, a discipline emphasizes subjective research and scientificity. “A discipline is both connected to and distinct from its corresponding science. A discipline should teach students recognized scientific concepts, basic principles, laws, and basic facts, and should reflect the latest research results of this scientific field.” However, once established, whether a specialty or a discipline inherently contains the subjective components of ideological theory and knowledge value, reflecting the implication of independence and subjectivity that the professional discipline needs to maintain in education, teaching, and scientific research. The establishment of the ideological and political education specialty and the construction of the discipline naturally raise the core issue of exploring the theoretical subjectivity of ideological and political education. In this regard, the 40-year history of ideological and political education is a course of mutual complementarity and coordinated advancement in specialty development and disciplinary construction, jointly progressing on the track of continuously enhancing specialty prescriptiveness and disciplinary normativity. It is also a course of cultivating the knowledge professionalism and disciplinary subjectivity of ideological and political education. Viewed in this light, specialty development and disciplinary construction centered on subjectivity are both the basic responsibility of scientific research in ideological and political education and the common mission of builders of ideological and political education.

笔者认为，专业与学科是现代教育与科学发展、知识建设与学术研究中的关键概念，也是彰显专业独立性和学科主体性的基本范畴，二者既相互联系，又有所区别。从联系的角度看，专业与学科都具有鲜明的规定性和规范性，展示某对象在主体性上独一无二的特征。从区别的角度看，专业强调主体教育性和规范性，指“根据社会专业分工的需要设立的专业类别。各专业的教学计划，体现本专业的培养目标和要求”。因此，“专业的培养目标、范围、深度、重点要全面地体现在专业教学计划中”。相对而言，学科则强调主体研究性和科学性，“学科同它相应的科学既有联系又有区别。学科应当把公认的科学概念、基本原理、规律和基本事实教给学生，并能反映这门科学研究的最新成果”。但一经设立，不论是专业还是学科都内在地包含着思想理论和知识价值的主体成分，体现专业学科在教育教学和科学研究中需要保持的独立性和主体性的意蕴。思想政治教育专业设立和学科构建，自然地提出了发掘思想政治教育学理主体性的核心议题。就此而言，40年来思想政治教育就是在专业发展与学科建设上相辅相成、协同推进，在不断增强专业规定性和学科规范性的轨道上共同迈进的历程，也是培育思想政治教育知识专业性和学科主体性的历程。照此看来，围绕着主体性而进行的专业发展与学科建设既是思想政治教育科学研究的基本责任，也是思想政治教育建设者的共同使命。

Crossover and Integration: The Basic Path for Constructing Subjectivity in the Discipline of Ideological and Political Education

跨界与融合：思想政治教育学科主体性建设的基本路径

Discipline construction is a process of growing from small to large and from weak to strong. Under normal circumstances, a discipline is often born from the specialized categorization and high refinement of scientific research, taking classified knowledge issues and specially independent theoretical categories as the logical starting point and scientific fulcrum, and is accumulated and expanded on the basis of specialized educational practice and branched research activities. However, the birth of a discipline is not purely the result of rational deduction and logical inference; to a large extent, it is inseparable from scientific development and practical needs.

学科建设是一个从小到大、由弱及强的过程。通常情况下，一个学科往往从科学研究的专业门类化和高度精细化中脱胎出来，以分门别类的知识议题和特殊独立的学理范畴为理论逻辑的起点和科学研究的支点，依据专业化的教育实践和分支化的研究活动而得到积淀与拓展。但是，学科的诞生也并非纯粹理性演绎和逻辑推论的结果，在很大程度上是与科学发展和实践需要分不开的。

The discipline of ideological and political education is a practical applied discipline with Chinese characteristics. It was born from the living practice of ideological and political work led by the Communist Party of China during the revolutionary war years. It is an objective and realistic proposition raised after reform and opening up to adapt to the state of ideological work among state-owned enterprise workers and staff, and it is also an active construction and positive response to the scientization, adaptation to the times, and theorization of ideological and political work. Precisely because of this, at the symposium on workers’ ideological and political work organized by the First Ministry of Machine-Building Industry in 1981, scholars from many adjacent humanities disciplines, such as philosophy, sociology, psychology, behavioral science, and management, joined the discussion on the scientization of ideological and political work. [1]1 “What knowledge is most valuable” is a reference to the question posed by the British philosopher Herbert Spencer in his 1859 essay “What Knowledge Is Most Worth?” which became a foundational question in curriculum theory.

思想政治教育学科是具有中国特色的实践应用学科，它脱胎于革命战争年代中国共产党领导开展的思想政治工作的鲜活实践，是改革开放后适应国企职工的思想工作状态而提出的客观现实命题，也是对思想政治工作科学化、时代化和学理化作出的主动建设和积极应对。在这个意义上说，思想政治教育专业的设立从一开始就与培育崭新的思想教育学科、建设政治工作学的学科觉悟分不开。正缘于此，在 1981年由第一机械工业部组织的职工思想政治工作座谈会上，诸多人文科学中的相邻学科，如哲学、社会学、心理学、行为科学和管理学领域的学者纷纷加入思想政治工作科学化的讨论中来。

There is no doubt that over the past 40 years, the construction of the discipline of ideological and political education has advanced along a path of multidisciplinary reference and interdisciplinary integration. From the perspective of the basic theoretical framework of the discipline, the conceptual categories and theoretical structure of ideological and political education have been borrowed from Marxist philosophy and the science of man. [2]2 The “scientization of ideological and political work” (思想政治工作科学化) refers to a movement in the early 1980s within the Chinese Communist Party to transform ideological and political work from a set of practical experiences into a systematic, scientific discipline, leading to the formal establishment of the specialty and discipline of ideological and political education in Chinese universities. In terms of the theoretical creation and methodological construction of the discipline, ideological and political education has borrowed knowledge categories and methodological principles from pedagogy, sociology, and psychology, enriching and expanding the theoretical system and methodological system of ideological and political education. As a result, after decades of discipline construction, ideological and political education has become the sub-discipline under the first-level discipline of Marxist theory with the longest construction period, the most rigorous theoretical system, and the highest degree of disciplinary self-consistency.

毫无疑问，40年来思想政治教育学科建设是沿着一条多学科借鉴、跨学科融合的道路不断推进的。从学科的基本理论架构上看，思想政治教育学科的概念范畴和理论结构是从马克思主义哲学和人学中借鉴而来。在学科的理论创造和方法建构上，思想政治教育学科从教育学、社会学和心理学中又借鉴了知识范畴和方法原则，对思想政治教育学的学理体系和方法体系作了丰富和拓展。这样一来，经过数十年来的学科建设，思想政治教育学成为目前马克思主义理论一级学科下属的二级学科中学科建设周期最长、理论体系最严整、学科自洽性最高的学科。

However, over the past 40 years, a fundamental question that the academic community of ideological and political education has always pursued is: Where is the subjectivity of the discipline of ideological and political education? Furthermore, how is the subjectivity of the discipline of ideological and political education generated, presented, constructed, and sustained? Especially under the premise that in the early stage of discipline construction, a large amount of knowledge, theory, and method from adjacent disciplines were borrowed to meet the requirements of cultivating professionals in ideological and political education, how can the existing discipline of ideological and political education transition and advance towards a stricter, more scientific, and purer disciplinary subjectivity? This is an important proposition facing colleagues in the academic community.

然而，40年来，思想政治教育学界始终追问的一个根本问题是：思想政治教育学科的主体性何在？进而言之，思想政治教育学科的主体性何以生成、何以呈现、何以建设、何以延续？尤其是在学科建设前期为适应培养思想政治教育专业人才的要求而大量借鉴了相邻学科知识、理论和方法的前提下，现有思想政治教育学科如何向更加严格、更加科学、更加纯粹的学科主体性过渡和迈进，这是摆在学界同仁面前的一个重要命题。

In a general sense, whether in the natural sciences or the humanities and social sciences, all disciplines are innovated and developed within a dialectical relationship that is both relatively independent and mutually interpenetrating. Any completely closed, isolated discipline can hardly exist permanently. Within the disciplinary horizon, cross-border disciplinary exchange is the norm, and mutual knowledge reference is also a necessary condition for disciplinary innovation. However, how to maintain and enhance disciplinary subjectivity amidst crossover and integration has always been the essence of each discipline’s construction. Kant pointed out: “Every science is in itself a system… We must… design and construct it as an independent building. We must regard it as a self-existing whole, not as a wing or part of another building—even though we may pass back and forth from one part to another.” [3]3 The quotation is from Jürgen Habermas, *Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy*, translated by William Rehg (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1996), p. 6. The translation here follows the Chinese author’s rendering. For the discipline of ideological and political education, enhancing disciplinary subjectivity does not mean clinging to the existing knowledge communities and research paradigms, but rather how to promote disciplinary integration to a greater extent through interdisciplinary crossover, as well as disciplinary regeneration based on practical needs and future trends. In other words, the new mission of constructing the discipline of ideological and political education is to enhance its own innovative capacity and level of subjectification in the process of promoting interdisciplinary exploration, creating a knowledge system, theoretical system, and methodological system with independent disciplinary characteristics.

从普遍意义上讲，不论是自然科学学科还是人文社会科学学科，所有学科都是在既相对独立又彼此互涉的辩证关系中得到创新和发展的。任何完全封闭、与世隔绝的学科都难以恒久存在。在学科视域中，跨越边界的学科交流是常态，知识互鉴也是学科创新的要件。不过，如何在跨越和融合中保持并增进学科主体性，却始终是每个学科建设的要旨。康德指出：“每一门科学本身就是一个系统……我们必须……把它作为一个独立的建筑来进行设计建造。我们必须将它视为一个独立存在的整体，而不是另一座建筑的一个侧翼或一部分——尽管我们可能会从一个部分到另一个部分来回穿行。”对于思想政治教育学科而言，增强学科主体性并不意味着要固守业已形成的知识群落和研究范式，而是如何在学科跨界中更大程度地促进学科融合以及基于现实需要和未来趋势的学科再生。换言之，思想政治教育学科建设的新使命是在推进学科跨域涉猎中提升自身的创新能力和主体化水平，创造具有独立学科特点的知识体系、理论体系和方法体系。

Accordingly, to build a future-oriented discipline of ideological and political education, first, we must continue to promote the cross-border integration of the discipline of ideological and political education with other disciplines, strive to keep pace with modern scientific and technological development and the development of leading and trend-setting dominant ideological theories, and promote the renewal of knowledge and innovation of methods in ideological and political education. Second, we must combine the actual changes in people’s ideological concepts, psychological will, and value systems amid the changes of the times and social transformation, explore the practical logic and application laws of ideological and political education and ideological and political work, and thereby promote the reconstruction of the theoretical logic of the discipline of ideological and political education itself. Third, we must promote the innovation of the autonomous knowledge system of ideological and political education itself and the public discourse system of the discipline to which it belongs, enabling the discipline of ideological and political education to grow into a scientific discipline that speaks for the discipline of Marxist theory, advances together with the discipline of Marxist theory, and possesses a high degree of communicative capacity and universal guiding value.

借此，建设面向未来的思想政治教育学科，一要继续推进思想政治教育学科与其他学科的跨界融合，努力与现代科学技术发展和带有引领性、趋势性的主导思想理论发展保持同步，促进思想政治教育学科知识更新和方法创新。二要结合时代变化、社会转型中人们的思想观念、心理意志和价值体系的转变实况，探寻思想政治教育和思想政治工作的实践逻辑和应用规律，借此推进思想政治教育学科自身的理论逻辑重建。三要促进思想政治教育学本身的自主知识体系和所属学科的公共话语体系的创新，使思想政治教育学科成长为替马克思主义理论学科代言，与马克思主义理论学科共进且具有高度沟通能力和普遍指导价值的科学学科。

Politics and Scholarship: The Predicament of Dominance in the Theoretical Construction of Ideological and Political Education

政治与学术：思想政治教育学理建设的主导性困境

Politics and scholarship constitute the two-dimensional realm of the intrinsic value of the discipline of Marxist theory and thus also of the discipline of ideological and political education. They are also the constraining categories faced by the scientization and academization of ideology. Among them, politics is the dominant factor, and scholarship is the main purpose, respectively embodied as the political nature and academic nature of the discipline.

政治与学术是构成马克思主义理论学科从而也是思想政治教育学科内在价值的二维领域，也是意识形态学科化和科学化所面临的制约性范畴。其中，政治是主导，学术是主旨，二者分别体现为学科的政治性和学术性。

Political nature is the essential stipulation of the discipline of ideological and political education and the original aspiration and essential meaning of establishing the discipline. [4]4 “Original aspiration” (初心) is a key term in CPC discourse, referring to the founding mission and core goals of the Party, often linked to serving the people and realizing communism. In the final analysis, the discipline of ideological and political education, like the discipline of Marxist theory, exists to defend, consolidate, and develop Marxism as the Party’s guiding ideology and the state’s dominant ideology. Therefore, professionals in the specialty and discipline of ideological and political education should study Marxism, believe in Marxism, and adhere to Marxism. This was already made clear when the specialty of ideological and political education was established in 1984. At that time, the document of the Ministry of Education clearly stipulated that the “training objective of the ideological and political education specialty is to enable students to become specialized personnel in ideological and political work who are developed morally, intellectually, physically, and aesthetically, and who are both red and expert. [5]5 “Red and expert” (又红又专) is a Mao-era slogan meaning that a person should be both politically reliable (“red”) and professionally competent (“expert”). They should earnestly study Marxism-Leninism and Mao Zedong Thought, establish a Marxist worldview, adhere to the Four Cardinal Principles, [6]6 The Four Cardinal Principles (四项基本原则) are the four fundamental principles upheld by the CPC: the socialist path, the people’s democratic dictatorship, the leadership of the CPC, and Marxism-Leninism and Mao Zedong Thought. They were formally articulated by Deng Xiaoping in 1979. and have good moral character.” Therefore, the discipline of ideological and political education is destined to study politics, policy, and political theory, which requires that research in ideological and political education must speak of politics, understand policy, and achieve political theory.

政治性是思想政治教育学科的本质规定性，是创建学科的初心和要义之所在。说到底，思想政治教育学科同马克思主义理论学科一样，都是为捍卫、巩固和发展马克思主义作为党的指导思想和国家主导意识形态而存在的。因此，思想政治教育专业和学科人才理应研究马克思主义、信仰马克思主义和坚持马克思主义。这一点，在1984年设立思想政治教育专业时就已有所明确。当时教育部的文件明确规定，思想政治教育专业的“培养目标是使学生成为德智体全面发展、又红又专的思想政治工作的专门人才。他们应当认真学习马列主义、毛泽东思想，树立马克思主义世界观，坚持四项基本原则，品德好”。因此，思想政治教育学科注定要研究政治、政策和政理，这就要求思想政治教育研究必须讲政治、懂政策、成政理。

At the same time, as a scientific discipline, ideological and political education cannot but speak of scholarship, discuss theory, and take learning as the lifeblood of the discipline. Judging from the actual situation of the development of the specialty and the construction of the discipline of ideological and political education over the past 40 years, scholars of ideological and political education have a pre-existing and well-prepared grasp of politics and policy, and are able to implement political thought and policy direction into the practice of ideological and political education. However, the existing problem is that because the relationship between politics and scholarship cannot yet be scientifically handled and properly balanced, the interpretation of politics and policy in the research and teaching of ideological and political education often remains at the level of simple knowledge popularization, information dissemination, and truth-telling. Theoretical construction is relatively insufficient, academic nature is relatively weak, the degree of integration between theory and practice is low, and the support of existing theory for practice is relatively weak. This shortcoming is naturally not unique to the discipline of ideological and political education, nor is it solely caused by the discipline itself; the reasons are naturally multifaceted.

与此同时，作为科学学科，思想政治教育学又不能不讲学术、不谈学理、不以学问为学科生命之源。就40年来思想政治教育专业发展和学科建设的实际情况看，思想政治教育学者对政治和政策的把握是先在的和有准备的，也能够把政治思想和政策方向贯彻落实到思想政治教育实践中。但其中存在的问题是因为尚不能够科学地处理和妥善平衡好政治与学术的关系，因此在思想政治教育研究和教学中对政治和政策的阐释往往停留于简单的知识普及、信息传播和道理讲述，学理建构相对不足，学术性相对较弱，学理和实践的结合度较低，已有学理对实践的支撑力偏低。这种短板自然也并非仅思想政治教育学科独有，当然也并非其自身所致，其中的原因自然是多方面的。

Politics and scholarship are both dominant elements in the discipline of ideological and political education and can embody the subjectivity of this discipline. Their internal unity undoubtedly shapes the subjectivity of ideological and political education as a practical applied discipline and a social science theory. Political character can be regarded as the core value of the dominance of the discipline and its theoretical principles, manifested in the fact that the discipline’s political stance, content boundaries, organizational structure, and training objectives must all serve the dominant ideology. Scholarly character, on the other hand, is the intrinsic defining quality of ideological and political education as a discipline and a science, reflected in the depth of theoretical research and the strength of scientific discovery. Although many philosophical and social sciences find it difficult to avoid balancing and choosing between politics and scholarship, as a practical discipline that propagates, educates, and researches the dominant ideology of the Party and the state, ideological and political education encounters the entanglement of politics and scholarship in the construction of its subjectivity more prominently and more profoundly. On the one hand, the natural rationality of the Party and state ideology and the natural legitimacy of political policies set a political red line for the discipline of ideological and political education. Upholding real-world politics is the inherent value and ethical responsibility of this discipline. Therefore, in the construction of the discipline of ideological and political education, political character exists as an inherent defining quality of the discipline. On the other hand, to advance scientific research on ideological and political education, and even to explore the developmental logic and construction laws of ideological and political education as a social science, it is necessary to treat it as a science, allowing for diverse understandings, scientific reflection, and even friendly criticism of its specific theoretical principles. Through this, the theoretical research of the discipline of ideological and political education must, on the basis of upholding the legitimacy of the political entity, pursue the rationality of political theory, that is, achieve a proper balance and organic integration of political character and scholarly character in terms of the dominance of its theoretical principles.

政治与学术均为思想政治教育学科中占据主导性，且能体现该学科主体性的重要元素，二者的内在统一无疑塑造着思想政治教育作为实践应用学科和社会科学理论的主体性。政治性可以被看作思想政治教育学科和学理主导性的核心价值，体现为学科的政治站位、内容边界、组织结构、培养目标等都必须服务于主导意识形态，而学术性又是思想政治教育作为学科和科学的内在规定性，体现为学理研究的深度和科学发现的力度。尽管很多哲学社会科学都很难避免在政治与学术之间作出平衡与选择，但作为对党和国家主导意识形态进行宣传教育和研究普及的实践性学科，思想政治教育在主体性建设领域遭遇到的政治与学术的纠葛会更加显著、更加深刻。一方面，党和国家意识形态的天然合理性与政治政策的自然合法性为思想政治教育学科设定了政治红线，维护现实政治是思想政治教育学科的天定价值和责任伦理。因此，在思想政治教育学科建设中，政治性是作为该学科与生俱来的规定性而存在的。另一方面，要推进对思想政治教育的科学研究，乃至探寻思想政治教育作为社会科学的发展逻辑和建设规律，就需要把它当作一门科学来对待，允许对其具体学理存在多元理解、科学反思甚至友善批评。借此，思想政治教育学科的学理研究要在维护政治实体的合法性基础上追诉政治理论的合理性，即学理的主导性上实现政治性与学术性的妥善平衡与有机融合。

Tang Zhen of the Qing dynasty said: “The sages of antiquity, their words were their actions, their actions were their words; their learning was their governance, their governance was their learning.” [7]7 Tang Zhen (1630–1704) was a Qing dynasty scholar and thinker. The quotation is from his work *Qian Shu* (潜书). Although this refers to the conduct of learning and affairs by the ancients, in fact, if handled and managed properly, scholarship and politics can be very well integrated. After all, politics also has its own internal theoretical logic and practical laws to follow. Therefore, although the discipline of ideological and political education encounters the entanglement and dilemma of politics and scholarship more sensitively and sharply than other disciplines, this does not mean that the relationship between the two is absolutely one of mutual exclusion.

清人唐甄说：“古之圣人，言即其行，行即其言，学即其政，政即其学。”这里虽然是就古人为学处事而言的，但实际上，如果能够驾驭和处理得当，学术和政治是完全可以很好地融合在一起的，毕竟政治也有其内在的理论逻辑和实践规律可循。因此，尽管思想政治教育学比其他学科更敏感、更尖锐地遭遇到政治与学术的纠结与困境，但也并不意味着二者之间是绝对非此即彼的关系。

In the construction of the discipline of ideological and political education, moving from reasoning to theoretical principles, from theoretical principles to political principles, and from political principles to philosophical principles should be the developmental direction for the dominance of the theoretical principles of ideological and political education. In other words, the dominant trajectory of theoretical research in ideological and political education is an interactive zone that integrates political practice and scholarly practice, exploring scholarship and theoretical principles from within politics and policy, while simultaneously serving politics and policy with scholarship and theoretical principles. In this process, it is impossible for any scholarship to completely detach itself from politics, and scholarship that serves politics is not simply obedience and sycophancy, but rather a scientific approach and integration. That is to say, the dominant direction of the theoretical principles of ideological and political education is to break free from the simplistic binary opposition between politics and scholarship and to establish a system of political principles that is more transcendent and more targeted. From this perspective, the integration of politics and scholarship in the discipline of ideological and political education is actually the unity of conformity to purpose and conformity to law in the construction of the dominance of its theoretical principles.

在思想政治教育学科建设中，从道理升华为学理，从学理凝练政理，从政理归纳哲理，应当是思想政治教育学理主导性的发展方向。换言之，思想政治教育学理研究的主导性轨迹是融合政治实践和学术实践的交互区间，从政治和政策中探寻学术和学理，同时以学术和学理服务于政治和政策。在这个过程中，任何学术要完全脱离政治是不可能的，而服务于政治的学术也并非简单的服从和趋附，而是科学的接近与融合。也就是说，思想政治教育学理的主导性方向是摆脱政治与学术二元对立的简单思维，建立其更具超越性和更有针对性的政理体系。照此看来，思想政治教育学科中政治与学术的融合实际上也是学理主导性建设中合目的性与合规律性的统一。

Knowledge and Value: The Internal Tension in the Knowledge Innovation of the Subject of Ideological and Political Education

知识与价值：思想政治教育主体知识创新的内在张力

Any independent discipline should have its own exclusive knowledge system and value system. The knowledge system represents the endogenous characteristics of the discipline, while the value system reflects its exoteric characteristics. For all disciplines, the knowledge system and value system are complementary and interdependent. However, due to differences in the type and nature of the discipline, the degree to which its educational orientation relies on knowledge and value varies. In other words, some disciplines primarily focus on imparting intuitive knowledge for acquiring certain techniques or abilities, while others primarily focus on imparting experiential knowledge, the principles of socialized survival, and values. The British philosopher Bertrand Russell believed: “Knowledge commonly spoken of is divided into two types: the first is knowledge of facts; the second is knowledge of the general connections between facts. Closely related to this is another distinction: there is a kind of knowledge that can be called ‘reflective’ knowledge, and another kind of knowledge that can exert controlling power.” [8]8 Bertrand Russell (1872–1970), British philosopher, logician, and social critic. The quotation is adapted from his work *The Analysis of Mind* (1921). In other words, knowledge includes factual direct knowledge and experiential indirect knowledge. Here, what Russell refers to as knowledge of the general connections between facts and knowledge that can exert controlling power belongs to experiential indirect knowledge.

任何一个独立的学科都应该有专属的知识体系和价值体系。知识体系代表学科的内生特征，价值体系反映学科的外烁特征。对所有学科而言，学科的知识体系与价值体系都是相辅相成、相依相生的，只不过由于学科类型和属性不同，它所呈现出的教育指向对知识和价值的依赖程度就有差别。换言之，有的学科以传授获得某种技术和能力的直观知识为主，而有的学科则以传授经验性知识、社会化生存的道理和价值为主。英国哲学家罗素认为：“一般所说的知识分为两类：第一类是关于事实的知识；第二类是关于事实之间的一般关联的知识。与此紧密相关的还有另一种区分：有一种可以叫作‘反映’的知识，还有一种能够发挥控制能力的知识。”换句话说，知识有事实性的直接知识和经验性的间接知识。这里，罗素所说的关于事实之间一般关联的知识和发挥控制能力的知识，就属于经验性的间接知识。

Generally, the disciplinary knowledge of the natural sciences explains the objects of study in the natural world and facts within the natural realm, revealing the logic, principles, and laws of connections between natural objects, thereby highlighting the scientific attributes and natural values of the discipline. In contrast, the disciplinary knowledge of the humanities and social sciences more often explains the laws of the development, operation, and change of human society, revealing the empirical rules and common-sense rationality of the operation of people and society, thereby highlighting the humanistic and social values of the discipline. According to this classification, as a special discipline explored and established by the Chinese Communist Party in practice, based on the summarization of the Party’s experience in conducting ideological and political work, and embodying the Party’s guiding ideology and political will, the discipline of ideological and political education does not deal with factual knowledge that directly reflects what practice itself is. Instead, it deals with experiential knowledge abstracted from experience, which embodies the Party’s ideological concepts, ideological awareness, and value beliefs in leading and educating people and doing political work well. In other words, the knowledge provided by the study of ideological and political education, and the discipline of Marxist theory to which it belongs, is not practical knowledge that directly reflects natural laws, equivalent to that of the natural sciences (commonly called “hard knowledge”). Rather, it provides theoretical knowledge that can connect and regulate the subject’s abilities, qualities, will, values, and beliefs (commonly called “soft knowledge”). In view of this, in the disciplinary construction and academic creation of ideological and political education, we must pay attention to the particularity of the knowledge type of ideological and political education and the inherent proposition of its correlation and compatibility with the values it transmits.

一般情况下，自然科学的学科知识都是解释自然界的研究对象和自然领域的事实，揭示自然对象联系的逻辑、原则和规律，彰显学科的科学属性和自然价值。而人文社会科学的学科知识则更多是阐释人类社会发展、运行和变化的规律，揭示人和社会运行的经验法则和常识理性，彰显学科的人文价值和社会价值。按照这种分类，作为由中国共产党在实践中探索和创建、基于党开展思想政治工作的经验总结、体现党的指导思想和政治意志的特殊学科，思想政治教育学科所面对的并不是直接反映实践本身是什么的事实型知识，而是从经验中抽象出来的体现党引领和教育人、做好政治工作的意识观念、思想觉悟和价值信念的经验型知识。或者说，思想政治教育学以及它所属的马克思主义理论学科所提供的知识，并不是与自然科学等同的直接反映自然规律的实践知识（俗称“硬知识”），而是提供能够联系和调控主体能力、素质、意志、价值和信仰的理论知识（俗称“软知识”）。有鉴于此，在思想政治教育学科建设和学术创造中，我们必须注意到思想政治教育知识类型的特殊性及其与所传递的价值的关联性与匹配度这一内在的命题。

From its inception, the specialty and discipline of ideological and political education have been committed to promoting the scientification of ideological and political work, to summarizing the Party’s experience and methods in leading ideological and political work, and then elevating these practical experiences and methods into scientific knowledge and scientific theory, promoting the transformation of ideological and political work from reasoning to theoretical principles and philosophical principles, and constructing the basic knowledge system and theoretical system of the study of ideological and political education. In this regard, promoting the scientification and disciplinization of ideological and political work, constructing a scientific theoretical basis and knowledge genealogy for the study of ideological and political education, and transforming scattered, unsystematic experience in ideological and political work and the Party’s ideological and political work policies into scientific, systematic, and theorized knowledge is undoubtedly a necessary path for the theorization and knowledge-based development of ideological and political work.

从创立之初，思想政治教育专业和学科就致力于推进思想政治工作科学化，致力于总结党领导思想政治工作的经验和方法，进而把这些实践经验和方法上升为科学知识、科学理论，促进思想政治工作由道理向学理和哲理的转化，建构出思想政治教育学的基本知识体系和理论体系。就此而言，推进思想政治工作科学化、学科化，为思想政治教育学建构科学的理论依据和知识谱系，让散在的、不系统的思想政治工作经验和党的思想政治工作政策转变为科学的、系统的、学理化的知识，无疑是思想政治工作理论化、知识化的必要路径。

However, it must be pointed out that the purpose of constructing the specialty and discipline of ideological and political education is not to build an ivory tower of rational science, nor is it simply for the sake of knowledge transmission. It has a more important and irreplaceable goal of educating people and value education. This means that, for the study of ideological and political education, the knowledge it seeks to develop can neither be generated detached from practice nor exist deviating from values. To properly handle the relationship between knowledge and value in ideological and political education, it must be made clear that the knowledge system to be constructed is beneficial and useful, must be highly matched and organically integrated with the value goals of ideological and political education, must transmit values in the process of imparting knowledge, and ultimately achieve the goal of shaping values through knowledge.

但是，需要指出的是，建构思想政治教育专业和学科的目的并不是为了建构理性科学的象牙塔，也并不是单纯为了进行知识传授，而是有着更为重要且不可替代的育人目标和价值教育的目的。这也就意味着，对于思想政治教育学而言，它所要发展的知识既不能脱离实践而生成，更不能背离价值而存在。要处理好思想政治教育学知识与价值的关系，必须明确要建构的知识体系是有益且有用的，要与思想政治教育的价值目标高度匹配和有机结合，在传授知识中传递价值，并最终完成以知识塑造价值的目的。

For a modern discipline, what needs to be taken seriously in the relationship between knowledge and value is not merely “what knowledge is most valuable,” but also “whose knowledge is most valuable” and “what type of knowledge can best transmit the greatest value.” Ideological and political education is an education conducted on Chinese soil under the leadership of the Communist Party of China; its knowledge system ought to be a localized knowledge system with the strongest Chinese characteristics. However, due to the infiltration of Western ideological systems and intellectual frameworks, the current subject narrative and knowledge base of China’s ideological and political education still drift within the conceptual systems, knowledge systems, and theoretical systems of borrowed Western disciplines such as political science, sociology, and pedagogy, bearing a rather pronounced character of theory-first and theory-borrowing. Consequently, the internal tension in the autonomous knowledge system innovation of ideological and political education persists and is prominently manifested in two aspects: first, the tension between theory and practice—that is, how better to excavate, summarize, and create theory from practice, realizing that theory originates from practice and serves practice; second, the tension between the imported and the indigenous in theory—that is, how to adaptively transform the concepts, categories, and principles of Western scholarship so that they connect with China’s localized theory of ideological and political education and produce beneficial supplementation and promotion.

对于一门现代学科而言，在知识和价值关系上需要重视的不仅仅是“什么知识最有价值”，而且是“谁的知识最有价值”以及“何种样式的知识才能最好地传递最大的价值”。思想政治教育是中国共产党领导的在中国大地上开展的教育，它的知识体系理应是最具中国特色的本土化的知识体系。然而，由于受到西方思想体系和知识思维的渗透，目前我国思想政治教育学的主体叙事和知识基础仍在所借鉴的西方政治学、社会学、教育学等学科概念体系、知识体系和理论体系中游弋，带有较为显著的理论先行和理论借鉴的特点。因此，思想政治教育学自主知识体系创新的内在张力依然存在并突出地表现在两个方面：一是理论和实践之间的张力，即如何更好地从实践中发掘概括和创造理论，实现理论来源于实践并服务于实践；二是理论的外来与本来之间的张力，即如何对西方学术中的概念、范畴、原理进行适应性改造，使之与中国本土化的思想政治教育理论相衔接并产生有益的补充和促进作用。

In sum, for the discipline of ideological and political education, the key to promoting autonomous knowledge system innovation lies in properly handling the relationship between knowledge localization and value normalization, and in advancing the knowledge construction and value derivation of ideological and political education in accordance with the principle of relying on Chinese values to create Chinese knowledge and of Chinese knowledge bearing Chinese values.

总之，对于思想政治教育学而言，促进自主知识体系创新的关键在于处理好知识本土化和价值规范化的关系，按照依靠中国价值创造中国知识、中国知识承载中国价值的原则推动思想政治教育学的知识构建和价值衍生。

Facts and Norms: The Generative Rationale of the Subjectivity of the Discipline of Ideological and Political Education

事实与规范：思想政治教育学科主体性的生成理据

The subjectivity of a discipline has multiple limiting factors and constructive conditions, among which disciplinary facts and disciplinary norms are the keys to forging disciplinary subjectivity. In a general sense, disciplinary subjectivity is formed in the actual course of disciplinary construction and development; disciplinary facts and norms give birth to disciplinary subjectivity. The establishment of the discipline of ideological and political education has a real and solid factual foundation. The ideological problems that emerged in the ideological and political work of state-owned enterprise employees in the early 1980s, the ideas and methods for solving these problems, the subsequent birth of the specialty and discipline of ideological and political education from the scientization of ideological and political work, and the actual process of ideological and political education practice—all these have written the developmental picture of the discipline of ideological and political education as a unique discipline. Meanwhile, the original intention of establishing the discipline, the purpose of its construction, its developmental goals and practical principles, and even the systems and plans for ideological and political education all belong to the norms associated with the construction and development of ideological and political education.

一个学科的主体性是有多方面限制因素和建构条件的，其中学科事实和学科规范是熔铸学科主体性的关键。从一般意义上说，学科主体性是在学科建设和发展的实际历程中形成的，学科的事实和规范孕育着学科的主体性。思想政治教育学科的创立有真实且扎实的事实基础。20世纪80年代初在国有企业职工思想政治工作中出现的思想问题以及解决这些问题的思路和办法，乃至后来从思想政治工作科学化中诞生的思想政治教育专业和学科，以及思想政治教育实践过程实际上都书写了思想政治教育学科作为独特学科的发展图景。而思想政治教育学科的创立初衷、建设意图、发展目标和实践原则，乃至思想政治教育的制度和规划，都属于与思想政治教育建设发展的规范。

As is well known, the generation of theory is processed according to the unique logic of thought on the basis of the repeated interaction between thought and reality, and between cognition and practice. It cannot be a castle in the air, nor should it grow in a disorderly manner; rather, it is created and innovated in the dialectical unity of facts and norms. Based on the facts of ideological and political education, and guided by Marxist thought and theoretical paradigms, to induce, summarize, and refine the theoretical principles of ideological and political education—this is the basic paradigm for the theoretical innovation of ideological and political education as a practical and applied discipline. When reflecting on the practical creation and theoretical development of the discipline of ideological and political education over the past 40 years, especially when considering the construction of its subjectivity, one cannot but reflect on the issues of facts and norms that determine and present the subjectivity of the discipline.

众所周知，理论的产生是在思想与实际、认识和实践反复交互作用的基础上，按照思维特有的逻辑加工而成。它不能是空中楼阁，也不应无序生长，而是在事实和规范的辩证统一中得到创造和创新。基于思想政治教育的事实，按照马克思主义的思想指导和理论范式，归纳、概括和提炼出思想政治教育的学理，这是作为实践性、应用性强的思想政治教育学理创新的基本范式。当思考40年来思想政治教育学科的实践创造和理论发展时，尤其是思考思想政治教育学科的主体性建设时，就不免要对决定并呈现思想政治教育学主体性的事实与规范问题进行省思。

Facts and norms constitute the subjective and objective elements of the development and change of things; both play an irreplaceable role in forging the subjectivity of things. However, the effect of facts and norms on things is not a simple linear mapping or cross-action relationship; rather, there exists a very complex interactive relationship. According to Habermas’s explanation, the relationship between facts and norms is fundamentally a relationship between facticity and validity, and the dialectical unity of the two, along with the open perspective derived from it, is precisely the attitude that should be upheld in disciplinary construction. He points out: “The normativistic approach always runs the danger of losing contact with social reality, while the objectivistic approach forgets all normative aspects. The tension between these two aspects can be understood as a reminder to us: not to stubbornly adhere to the perspective of a single discipline, but to maintain an open attitude toward different methodological positions (participant and observer), different theoretical goals (meaning interpretation, conceptual analysis and description, empirical explanation), different role perspectives (judge, politician, legislator, party, and citizen), and different pragmatic research attitudes (hermeneutic, critical, analytical, etc.).” In the process of constructing the discipline of ideological and political education, what line of thought should be followed to expand practice and innovate theory is in fact a major proposition concerning the construction of the discipline’s subjectivity. What is certain is that the construction of the subjectivity of the discipline of ideological and political education cannot be separated from either the facts of ideological and political education or the norms of ideological and political education. The integration of the facts and norms of ideological and political education is precisely the key to forging the subjectivity of the discipline.

事实与规范构成了事物发展变化的主客体要素，二者在锻造事物主体性方面都发挥着不可替代的作用。但是，事实与规范对于事物的作用并不是单纯的直线映射或交叉作用关系，而是存在着十分复杂的互动关系。按照哈贝马斯的解释，事实与规范的关系根本上是事实性和有效性的关系，二者的辩证统一以及由此衍生的开放视野却是学科建设中应当秉持的态度。他指出：“规范主义的思路始终有脱离社会现实的危险，而客观主义的思路则淡忘了所有规范的方面。这两个方面之间的紧张关系，可以被理解为对我们的一种提醒：不要固执于一个学科的眼光，而要持开放的态度，不同的方法论立场（参与者和观察者）、不同的理论目标（意义诠释、概念分析和描述、经验说明），不同的角色视域（法官、政治家、立法者、当事人和公民），以及不同的语用研究态度（诠释学的，批判的，分析的，等等），对这些都要持开放态度。”在思想政治教育学科建设的进程中，到底该沿着什么样的思路来拓展实践、创新理论，实际上是一个事关思想政治教育学科主体性建设的重大命题。可以肯定的是，思想政治教育学科的主体性建设既离不开思想政治教育事实，也离不开思想政治教育规范。思想政治教育事实和规范的统合，才是熔铸思想政治教育学科主体性的关键。

The facts of ideological and political education constitute a category with broad coverage and rich connotations, pointing to all objective realities related to the emergence and development of ideological and political education, especially including the real existence of the various elements, the entire process, and the whole system of conducting ideological and political education under specific spatiotemporal conditions and social environments. In a certain sense, the many problems faced in conducting ideological and political education, the ideas for solving these problems, the process of ideological and political education, and the actual effects it produces—all these constitute the facts of ideological and political education.

思想政治教育事实是一个覆盖面广、内涵丰富的范畴，指向一切与思想政治教育发生发展有关的客观真实，尤其包括在特定的时空条件和社会环境中开展思想政治教育的诸要素、全过程和全体系的真实存在。在一定意义上说，开展思想政治教育所面临的诸多问题、对这些问题的解决思路、思想政治教育的发生过程及其产生的实际效果，如此等等，都构成了思想政治教育的事实。

The facts of ideological and political education are closely related to the practice of ideological and political education but are not limited to that practice. From a genetic perspective, the objective conditions and practical process of ideological and political education both possess significant uniqueness, providing the irreplaceable subjective characteristics of ideological and political education; the facts of ideological and political education thus formed give birth to and shape the subjectivity of ideological and political education. From the perspective of theoretical creation, people’s thoughts come from practice, and the theoretical principles of ideological and political education naturally also come from the practice of ideological and political education. However, the development of any discipline is not arbitrary or disorderly; rather, human design and planning play a leading role in it. Under normal circumstances, the design and planning of a discipline are mostly presented through guiding policies, mechanisms, and organizational setups for the discipline. The process of disciplinary construction also often requires the support of policies, institutions, and organizations. Thus, the plans, disciplinary policies, institutions, and organizational systems for disciplinary construction and development all belong to the important norms of disciplinary construction. In this way, under the dual constraints of objective factual conditions and subjective normative conditions, the discipline of ideological and political education presents itself as a subjective discipline based on disciplinary conditions, possessing its own characteristics, and achieving its own growth.

思想政治教育事实与思想政治教育的实践紧密相关但不限于思想政治教育实践。从发生学的角度看，思想政治教育的客观条件、实践过程均具有显著的独特性，提供了思想政治教育不可替代的主体特征，由此形成的思想政治教育事实孕育和塑造了思想政治教育的主体性。从理论创造的视角看，人的思想是从实践中来的，思想政治教育学的学理自然也从思想政治教育的实践中来。然而，任何学科的发展都不是随意的、无序的，而是有人为设计与规划在其中发挥主导作用。通常情况下，学科的设计与规划多以对学科指导性的政策、机制和组织设置呈现出来。学科建设进程也常常需要政策、制度和组织的支撑。由此，学科建设发展的规划、学科政策、制度和组织体系，均属于学科建设的重要规范。这样，在客观性的事实条件和主观性的规范条件双重制约之下，思想政治教育学科便呈现出基于学科条件、具有自身特色、实现自身成长的主体性学科。

Viewed from the 40-year history of the growth and construction of the discipline of ideological and political education, disciplinary subjectivity is precisely embedded in the facts and norms of ideological and political education. In this regard, all future efforts to enhance the subjectivity of the discipline of ideological and political education must both follow the facts of disciplinary development and construction and strengthen the planned, purposeful, and step-by-step norms of disciplinary development and construction, promoting a benign and coordinated interaction between the facts and norms of ideological and political education, and avoiding the one-sided orientations of fact-only theory and will-only theory. Only in this way can the discipline of ideological and political education grow into a modern scientific discipline that achieves the organic unity of scientificity and revolutionary character, the high compatibility of political nature and academic nature, and the full integration of theoretical nature and practical nature.

从40年来思想政治教育学科的成长和建设史看，学科主体性恰恰寓于思想政治教育的事实与规范之中。就此而言，未来提升思想政治教育学科主体性的一切努力，既要遵循学科发展和建设的事实，也要增强有计划、有目的、有步骤的学科发展和建设的规范，促进思想政治教育学科事实与规范的良性协调互动，避免唯事实论和唯意志论的片面取向。唯此，思想政治教育学科方可成长为科学性和革命性有机统一、政治性和学术性高度契合、理论性和实践性充分融汇的现代化的科学学科。

Online Editor: Tongxin

网络编辑：同心