尊敬的克利奇马教授，时值圣诞之际，祝您节日快乐！有一个问题想向您咨询，还请不吝赐教。在中国，几乎所有体育专业的学生都会有一门必修课《体育基本理论》或《体育概论》。请问在美国高校，体育专业本科生或研究生是否也有这样一门课程？如果有的话，课程的主干教材是什么？

You asked about entry level classes in our Kinesiology departments.

In the 20th century almost every program had a course called history and principles. The history part was to provide some context and cultural information as background for physical education practice. The principles part was mostly educational philosophy--because nearly 100% of our students were being prepared to teach or coach.

Today the situation is much more complex, because the majority of undergraduate students are heading toward fitness, health, or allied health careers, and only a few toward teaching and coaching. The old "history and principles" courses are mostly gone. They have been replaced by Introduction to Kinesiology Texts . . . the most popular of which is Hoffman et al. (Human Kinetics Publishers). It, as well as most competing books, covers the professions and subdisciplines--a chapter for philosophy of sport, a chapter for physiology, a chapter for sociology of sport, a chapter for biomechanics, etc. Attempts are made in these texts to unify the field, to indicate why and how it "holds together." Some so-called foundations books exist, but they are much like the intro books. Some foundations books lean toward the sciences. Kines is a science-intensive field. Others are more democratic and provide support for foundations in the humanities, social sciences and sciences.

你问的是美国人体运动学系学生的入门课程。

在20世纪，几乎每个培养方案都有一门称为“历史和原理”的课程。历史部分是提供一些体育实践的背景和文化知识。原理部分主要是教育哲学，因为当时几乎所有体育专业本科生毕业后都是从事教师或教练工作。

如今，情况变得复杂了，因为大多数本科生正朝着健身、健康或医疗保健行业转向，只有少数人会从事教学和教练工作。旧的“历史和原理”类课程基本已消失了，取而代之的是人体运动学导论之类的课程。最受欢迎的教材是Hoffman等人编著，Human Kinetics出版社出版的《人体运动学导论》（Introduction to Kinesiology）。这本书与其他同类书籍一样，涵盖了体育职业和体育各子学科的知识，有一章介绍体育哲学、有一章是生理学、有一章是体育社会学、有一章是生物力学......。在这些教材试图对体育领域加以整合，诠释“整合”的理由和方法。美国也存在一些所谓的基础理论书籍，但也很像入门书籍。一些基础理论书籍倾向于自然科学，因为人体运动学是科学密集型学科。其他书籍则更加通俗，提供人文社会科学和自然科学方面的基础知识。

谢谢您的解答。上世纪30年代，有一批中国留学生在哥伦比亚大学杰西·威廉姆斯（Jesse F. Williams）的指导下获得学位，其中好几位学成归国后参照威廉姆斯的《体育原理》编写了同名教材，这些书成为当时中国的体育理论教材。上世纪五六十年代，中国的体育理论主要借鉴自苏联。到80年代，中国的体育学者对体育理论开展了大讨论，“体育理论”课程也随之更名为“体育概论”“体育基本理论”等，并出版了同名教材。这门课程主要关注“什么是体育”“体育的功能和价值”“体育的目标”“体育的方法”“体育与社会经济的联系”等问题。如今，如您所说，体育专业面临着更复杂的现实情况，本科生的入门课程也面临着改革与创新的需求。我想知道您的看法，体育专业是否还需要这样一门课程？

I wasn't aware that Columbia had an influence on your literature. My Dad got his doctorate from Columbia and studied with Jesse F. Williams. And Williams' Principles of Physical Education went through 8 editions. It was the dominant history/principles text through the 1960's in the U. S.

The field has become more complex for many reasons, not the least of which is the move away from education. Most of our Kinesiology students are preparing for fitness/allied health careers. Many of our Penn State students, upon graduation, will enroll in physical therapy, physician's assistant, or other medically related grad programs. But we still have a minority of students who will get certified to teach and/or coach. Thus, we have a more diverse student body.

There is also the tension between the discipline and the various professions--a fight for space in the curriculum, and an application gap. Some of the theory the students receive is not clearly tied to practice. And unfortunately, some of the theory teachers don't much care.

You asked if I thought an introductory/fundamentals/principles course was needed. I do. Students need to be oriented, have a context for their studies. Like Karl Newell, I think the glue that holds us together is physical activity. We are the proponents in higher education of physical activity . . . with an emphasis on recreational and health-promoting forms of movement.

Some folks in the U.S. think we should identify with "public health." I strongly disagree. We are broader than that. Physical activity impacts human life in much broader ways. So I resist the narrowing of our field to health purposes and values. We value physical activity because it is usefulandbecause it is beautifully useless!

没想到哥伦比亚大学对中国体育理论研究有此影响。我父亲早年就读于哥伦比亚大学，也是师从威廉姆斯，并获得博士学位。威廉姆斯的《体育原理》共8个版本。直至上世纪60年代，该书一直是美国的主要体育理论教材。由于多种原因，体育领域如今变得比以往复杂了，其中最重要的一点就是体育逐渐偏离教育。我们的大多数人体运动学专业学生正为从事健身、健康相关职业做准备。我们系有许多学生毕业后都会报名参加理疗、医师助理或其他医学相关的研究生课程。但我们仍然有少数学生会获得相关证书从事教学和教练工作。总之，我们的学生群体更加多样化了。

学科课程与专业课程之间也存在竞争关系——都在培养方案中争夺空间，都在试图缩小理论和实践间的“鸿沟”。同时，学生接受的一些理论知识显得与实践脱节。但不幸的是，一些理论教师并没有注意到这点。

你问我“入门/基础/原理课程”是否必要，我的答案是肯定的。学生需要有指引，需要了解专业的相关背景知识。我赞成卡尔·纽维尔（Karl Newell）的观点，将我们凝聚在一起的就是身体活动。我们是体育高等教育的推动者......重视休闲运动和促进健康的运动形式。

在美国，有一些人认为体育应该等同于“公共卫生”，我完全不同意。体育远比公共卫生内涵丰富。身体活动在许多方面影响着人类的生活。因此，我拒绝将体育领域局限到仅以健康为目的。我们重视体育活动，因为它的有用性，也因为它美妙的“无用性”！

关于未来

在对以上两个问题回答的基础上，克雷奇玛教授补充了在寻求理论援助的过程中，未来应将目光更多地投射于整体主义以及东方哲学。

I'm not sure turning to the West is the best idea. Some philosophic work in the West is turning to the East. Both McCloy and Williams essentially operated out of a dualist framework . . . even though both espoused Dewey and tenets of holism. I call them "enlightened dualists"--enlightened because they saw reciprocal causation between body and thinking, moving and intelligence, but still found it necessary to talk about humans in terms of their parts. As Williams often wrote, you can't treat one without affecting the other. But that is still essentially dualistic. (Ellen Gerber's dissertation provided a good analysis of their dualistic tendencies.)

I think our future lies more in holism. And holism is compatible with much eastern thought . . as you know better than I.

我不确定向西方寻求理论是否是个好主意，当下一些西方的哲学研究正在转向东方。尽管麦克乐和威廉姆斯都拥护杜威的思想及整体主义的宗旨，但他们的思想本质上都是二元论的。我把麦克乐和威廉姆斯称作“开明的二元论者”，因为他们看到了身体与思维，运动和智力之间的相互因果关系，但他们仍认为有必要将身心分开来讨论。正如威廉姆斯自己经常写到的那样，“身心之间，你无法触动其一而不影响另一半”，这种看法本质上仍然是二元的。（Ellen Gerber的论文很好地分析了麦克乐和威廉姆斯的二元倾向）

我认为我们的未来更多地在于整体主义。整体主义与东方哲学是相契合的，这一点你肯定比我更清楚。