DOC

Ladies and Gentlemen: Good morning

By Nicholas Franklin,2015-02-07 22:29
103 views 0
1 Inaugural Speech Sun Zhengyu (Chairperson of Research Center for social development theory, Jilin University.) It is surely with great pleasure to see this international seminar of Globalization and Multi-Modernity being held today in Jilin University, with the attendance of so many scholars from home and abroad. On behalf of The Res..

    Inaugural Speech

    Sun Zhengyu

     (Chairperson of Research Center for social development theory, Jilin University.)

    It is surely with great pleasure to see this international seminar of Globalization and Multi-Modernity being held today in Jilin University, with the attendance of so many

    scholars from home and abroad. On behalf of The Research Center of Social Development

    Theory In Jilin University, The Research Center of Fundamental Philosophical Theory and

    The School of Philosophy and Sociology, I would like to present my warm welcome and

    hearty thanks to all of you.

    In 1980s, Jilin University took the lead in our country to establish The Institute of Social Development Study, and in 1990s The School of Philosophy And Sociology was established.

    In 2004, The Research Center of Social Development Theory was established as a national

    innovation base, a comprehensive study of social development in cross-subject therefore

    started. In recent 20 years, Prof. Zheng Hangsheng and other scholars helped us make a

    certain amount of achievement, which made this seminar possible.

    I want to take this chance to talk about my understanding of development.

    Development, in its true meaning, is a particular existing pattern of man, that is to say, it is

    an existing pattern for man to realize his own development through the development of

    society. This particular existing pattern is both the most reality we have to face, and the most

    theory of heated argument in sociological field. This is due to the fact that the logic of

    human existence is now facing a severe challenge in our social activities, especially in the

    course of economical globalization.

    The problem of development is severe because, as an existing pattern, it has an unavoidable two-folded meanings. Human history is a course of aim-pursuing activities, it

    always realizes its progress in a certain kind of setback pattern, unilateralism therefore

    becomes the develop pattern of history. Any progress in historical process would certainly

    pay a corresponding cost, any positive effect would be accompanied wit certain negative

    effect, any realization of collective benefits would mean certain lost of partial benefits, and

    any pursue of long term benefits would mean certain abandonment of partial benefits.

    Either the relationship between man and nature, or that between man and society would face

    the same severe challenge in the course of economic globalization.

    As for the relationship between man and nature, Engels once warned us not to enjoy our victory over nature, for nature would take revenge for any victory we have made. Indeed

     1

    we got what we had expected in every victory, but later, or later after later we found the final result diminished what we had expected. Damage to our homestead would certainly

    threaten our own existence and development. Therefore, it has become a grave task to

    harmonize man and nature in the social development study.

    As for the relationship between man and society, Karl Marx once concluded market economy as human independence based on the matter-dependence In its institutional

    meaning, economical globalization firstly means the globalization of market economy and its

    corresponding principles. Market economy shapes the whole social life according to its

    own requirement, meanwhile its principles such as equivalence exchange and survival of the

    fittest have melted into our life as well. This not only shaped the human independence, but

    also formed a matter-dependence of man. It is the logic of maximum interest rather than

    maximum of happiness that creates the survival logic of modern society. As for man, this

    survival logic becomes a severe challenge to the human logic of expecting good and

    avoiding the bad. Marcuse once said that the inner contradictory of developed industrial

    civilization lies here: its unreasonable part stays in its reasonability. This is the severest

    problem we have to face in the course of economical globalization.

    Social development theory consider development the severest realistic problem, and the primary problem it has to face is how to understand and evaluate the term development

    Development is not only the description but also the evaluation of the existence state and

    process, therefore development is the description of existence with its logical precondition of

    evaluation. This could be summarized as that the problem of development is actually the

    problem of evaluation over existence state and process, and the problem of behavior choice

    according to certain evaluation criterion; in other words, it is a problem to make an orderly

    arrangement in practice. As for the existence logic of expecting good and avoiding bad,

    how to set the criterion of good or bad, and how to choose the right behavior to expect good

    and avoid bad, how to make the orderly arrangement so as to get more good than bad, all this

    form the fundamental problem we have to face. Criterion and choice have become the

    most important nuclear category in social development theory.

    The criterion of development holds a very rich and profound cultural connotation, which includes not only cultural diversity, but also consistency of every age; not only the sure

    tendency of economical globalization, but also the multi-choice of modernization; not only

    the major measure of history, but also the minor measure of history. Here the major

    measure of history refers to the measure we evaluate history from the viewpoint of our

    fundamental interest, long-term interest and collective interest; and the minor measure refers

    to the measure we regulate our historical activities out of our non-fundamental interest,

     2

    temporary interest and partial interest. Life has told us that if we only hold the major measure and neglect the minor one, we cannot realize the ideal promised by the major measure, and even worse, we would distort it into the actual violence which depresses individual growth. On the other hand, if we only hold the minor measure and neglect the major one, we would lose our ideal and, the most serious, our historical activities would threaten human existence and therefore make us feel too anxious to carry out our duties.

    In the process of the building socialism of Chinese characteristics, we create a general

    concept of Fundamental Human, which has been regarded as the fundamental criterion of development. Being the subtle balance of both the major and minor historical measure, the criterion has now become the start of our behavior choice. The notion of scientific development we have formed in the process of building the socialism of Chinese characteristics holds development as the primary concept, with its core the Fundamental Human, its basic requirement the complete harmony and continuance, and its fundamental solution a plan as whole and attention to all. Under such a guidance, the Chinese government is now bending itself to three problems in social development: the first, being the representative of public interest, it is trying to maximum the public interest so as to meet the social fundamental needs; the second, it is seeking to ease the pressure brought by the resources and environment, so as to realize the continuance; the third, it is enhancing its own construction in the public management structure, so as to promote its public service. This is the behavior choice under the guidance of Fundamental Human, which is also the behavior choice of modernity we have made in the process of economic globalization.

    Being contemporary social science researchers, we are determined to liberate our mind

    and promote our study of social development theory on the basis of deriving foreign achievements. To liberate our mind, I think, we need to have the ambition to build the socialism of Chinese characteristics and to realize the grand restoration of Chinese nationalities. Our country has been open for nearly 30 years, and now we are facing an unprecedented opportunity, and yes, we are facing an unprecedented challenge as well. We need a strong ambition and a wide vision to further the study and research of the socialism of Chinese characteristics, because this effort will widen our way. To liberate our mind also requires us the courage to face reality, during the course of building socialistic market economy, many hidden contradiction would gradually appear, which urges us to study them with the courage to face reality and to solve these problems under the notion of scientific development. Only with such courage can we truly liberate our mind and bring forward new questions. To liberate our mind also requires us the courage of new theory creation, it

     3

    is not only a slogan, firstly it requires us to liberate our mind from metaphysics, so that we can further study the new situation and new problems rather than making a brief judgment and evaluation on our performance; secondly it requires us to liberate our mind from doctrinarism, so that we can supply creative research achievements to our construction when we meet new opportunities and challenges; thirdly, it requires us to liberate our mind from the dull and empty language pattern, so that we can form new thoughts and new language to make a brand new argumentation and new explanation.

    Karl Marx once said that problem is the proverb of the age, and it is the voice of the age

    which is open, dreadless and dominant to everyone. Being the self-awareness of society, social science is always mostly concerned with the most realistic problem of its age. The survival logic of expecting good and avoiding the bad has met unprecedented challenge in the time of economical globalization, which has brought about a great many tasks to our attention and expectation. We will be listening to various voices from scholars of either home and abroad, who will show us their enlightening and constructive achievements. This would certainly be a good chance for us to learn from each other, and I do wish it a wonderful success!

    Thank you!

     4

    吉林大学社会发展理论研究中心主任 孙正聿 教授

    尊敬的各位来宾,老师们,同学们:

    在吉林大学召开“全球化与多元现代性”国际学术研讨会,并有众多的国内、外

    著名学者参加,我们感到格外高兴。我仅代表吉林大学社会发展理论研究中心、哲学

    基础理论研究中心和哲学社会学院,向大家表示衷心的感谢和热烈的欢迎!

    20世纪80年代,吉林大学在国内率先创立了社会发展研究所,90年代中期又组建了哲学社会学院,并在2004年成立了作为国家哲学社会科学创新基地的吉林大学社

    会发展理论研究中心,对社会发展理论展开跨学科的综合研究。在这20余年中,我们一直得到郑杭生教授等前辈和各位学者的关心与帮助,从而取得了一定的研究成果,

    并为召开这次研讨会奠定了基础。

    我想利用这个机会,谈一下对“发展”的理解。发展,在其真实的意义上,是人

    的特殊的存在方式,也就是以社会的发展而实现人自身的发展的存在方式。人的这种

    特殊的存在方式,既是当代人类面对的最大的现实问题,也是当代哲学社会科学争论

    最激烈的理论问题。这是因为,趋利避害的人类生存逻辑,在当代人类的实践活动中、

    特别是在“经济全球化”的当代社会的发展中,受到了空前的严峻挑战。

    发展问题的严峻性在于,发展作为人的存在方式,它具有不可避免的二重性。人

    类的历史就是“追求自己的目的的人的活动过程”,它总是以某种“退步”的形式而实

    现自己的“进步”,“片面性”是历史的发展形式。历史过程中的任何进步都要付出相

    应的代价,任何正面效应都会伴生相应的负面效应,任何整体利益的实现都意味着某

    些局部利益的牺牲,任何长远利益的追求都意味着某些局部利益的舍弃。无论是人与

    自然的关系,还是人与社会的关系,在经济全球化的过程中,都面临着严峻的挑战。

    从人与自然的关系说,恩格斯早就警告我们,“不要过分陶醉于我们人类对自然界

    的胜利。对于每一次这样的胜利,自然界都对我们进行报复。每一次胜利,起初确实

    取得了我们预期的结果,但是往后和再往后却发生完全不同的、出乎预料的影响,常

    常把最初的结果又消除了。”破坏人类赖以生存的家园,就必然威胁人类自身的生存与

    发展。如何协调人与自然的关系,是社会发展研究中的重大课题。

    从人与社会的关系说,马克思曾把市场经济概括为“以物的依赖性为基础的人的

    独立性”。在体制的意义上,经济全球化首先是市场经济及其原则的全球化。市场经济

    按照自己的要求去塑造全部的社会生活,也就把市场经济的等价交换、优胜劣汰的原

    则融入整个社会生活,这不仅塑造了人的“独立性”,而且构成了人对“物”的依赖关

     5

系。利益最大化的逻辑,而不是幸福最大化的逻辑,构成了现代社会的生存逻辑。对

    于人类来说,这个生存逻辑是对人类自身的“趋利避害”的生存逻辑的严峻挑战。马

    尔库塞说,“发达工业文明的内在矛盾正在于此:其不合理成分存在于其合理性中”。

    这就是当代人类在经济全球化的过程中所面对的最为严峻的发展问题。

    把“发展”作为最重大的现实问题而予以研究的社会发展理论,它所面对的理论问题,首要的是对“发展”的理解和评价问题。发展,这不只是对存在状态和存在过

    程的描述,而且是对存在状态或存在过程的评价,因此,“发展”是以评价为逻辑前提

    的对存在的描述。这表明,“发展”问题的实质是对存在状态和存在进程如何评价的问

    题,以及依据某种评价的标准作出行为选择的问题,即在实践中作出各种顺序性安排

    问题。作为人类生存逻辑的趋利弊害,“利”与“害”的标准如何确认,怎样的行为选

    择才是当代人类的真正的趋于“利”而避于“害”,怎样的顺序性安排才能使“利”大

    于“害”,这是当代社会发展所面对的根本问题。“标准”与“选择”构成社会发展理

    论的至关重要的核心范畴。

    “发展”的标准具有极为深刻、极为丰厚的文化内涵。它既内涵着文化的多样性,又内涵着每个时代的“广泛而深刻的一致性”;它既内涵着经济全球化的必然趋势,又

    内涵着现代化的多元选择;它既内涵着“历史的大尺度”,又内涵着“历史的小尺度”。

    所谓历史的“大尺度”,就是以人的“根本利益”、“长远利益”、“整体利益”为出发点

    的反观历史的尺度;与此相对应,所谓历史的“小尺度”,则是以人的“非根本利益”、

    “暂时利益”、“局部利益”为出发点的规范人的历史活动的尺度。生活本身告诉我们,

    当我们离开历史的“小尺度”而仅仅承诺历史的“大尺度”的时候,我们不仅无法实

    现“大尺度”所承诺的价值理想,而且尤为惨痛的是会使这个“大尺度”所承诺的价

    值理想变形,把“大尺度”变成某种压抑个人发展的“本质主义的肆虐”;与此相反,

    当我们离开历史的“大尺度”而仅仅着眼于历史的“小尺度”的时候,我们不仅会失

    去“大尺度”的价值理想,而且尤为严峻的是使这个“小尺度”所规范的历史活动危

    及人自身的存在,从而使人们在这种“小尺度”中感受到一种“生命中不能承受之轻”

    的“存在主义的焦虑”。

    在建设中国特色社会主义的过程中,我们形成了“以人为本”的基本理念,也就是形成了“以人为本”的关于“发展”的根本标准。这个“标准”作为“历史的大尺

    度”与“历史的小尺度”的“微妙的平衡”,构成了我们的行为选择的出发点。我们在

    建设中国特色社会主义的伟大实践中所形成的科学发展观,第一要义是发展,核心是

    以人为本,基本要求是全面协调可持续,根本方法是统筹兼顾。以这个科学发展观为

    指导,中国政府正在致力于解决社会发展的三大问题:一是政府作为公共利益的代表,

    致力于解决公共利益最大化、满足全社会基本公共需求的民生问题;二是致力于解决

    资源环境体系的压力问题,以实现可持续发展;三是致力于解决公共治理结构中的政

    府自身建设问题,推进公共服务型政府建设。这是中国社会发展中的“以人为本”的

     6

基本理念下的行为选择,也就是我们在经济全球化中对现代性的行为选择。

    作为当代中国的社会科学工作者,我们需要继续坚定不移地解放思想,在充分汲

    取国外学者的成果的基础上,推进我们的社会发展理论研究。我感到,解放思想,首

    先需要有发展中国特色社会主义、实现中华民族伟大复兴的宏大气魄。经过近30年的

    改革开放,我国发展面临的机遇是前所未有的,同时,我国发展面对的挑战也是前所

    未有的,这就需要我们以宏伟的气魄和开阔的视野继续深化对中国特色社会主义的研

    究和探索,努力使中国特色社会主义道路越走越宽广。解放思想,还需要有直面现实

    的凛然正气。在建设社会主义市场经济的过程中,许多深层次的矛盾不断地凸显出来,

    它要求理论工作者以直面现实的凛然正气去研究这些深层次矛盾,以科学发展观为指

    导来回答这些重大的现实问题。有了这种凛然正气,才能真正地解放思想,提出和探

    索新问题。解放思想,还需要有创新的理论勇气。对于社会科学工作者来说,解放思

    想并不只是一个口号,它要求我们:一是要从两极对立、非此即彼的形而上学的思维

    方式当中解放出来,认真地、深入地研究新情况新问题,而不是对我们正在进行的伟

    大实践作出某种简单化的判断和评说;二是要从唯上唯书、人云亦云的教条主义的研

    究方式当中解放出来,从我们面对的新机遇和新挑战出发,对我国的经济建设、政治

    建设、文化建设和社会建设提供具有创新性的理论研究成果;三是要从僵死枯燥、言

    之无物的话语方式当中解放出来,从发展中国特色社会主义的伟大实践中凝炼新的思

    想和新的语言,作出新的论证和新的阐释。

    马克思说:“问题是时代的格言”,是“公开的、无所顾忌的、支配一切个人的时

    代之声。”社会科学作为社会的自我意识,它的关切点总是自己时代的最为重大的现实

    问题。人类的趋利弊害的生存逻辑,在经济全球化的今天遇到了空前的挑战,并构成

    我们时代的诸多的重大课题,引发了我们的共同的关切与期待。在这次研讨会上,我

    们会聆听到来自国内外学者的多方面的声音,学者们会展现自己的富有启发性和建设

    性的研究成果。这是我们的一次极好的学习机会。我衷心地祝愿研讨会园满成功!

    谢谢大家!

     7

AbstractTitle: Tradition and Modern in the Course of Modernity

    The paper introduced the relation of the “tradition and modern” and the sociology. It retrospected the different relation of the “tradition and modern” and modernized theory,

    modernity theory. And the paper demonstrated the “growing up of modern” and “invention

    of tradition ”that were new understanding of “tradition and modern”. The understanding has

    important significant to the technicality problems in the home and abroad.

    The understanding about tradition and modern is one of the significant basis that the

    sociology founders and the actual founders established sociology in. Tradition and modern,

    tradition society and modern society become two kinds ideals type of the sociology

    analytical. Auguste Comte has had a contrast about tradition society type and modern society

    type at first. Herbert Spencer has developed the society type theory of tradition society and

    modern society and so on. The concepts of “Gemeinschaft” and “Gesellschaft” brought

    forward by Ferdinand Tonnies indicated that the “tradition-modern” compare typology had

    formed the first step. The main axis of E? Durkheim sociology theory is “mechanical

    solidarity” and “organic solidarity”. Weber divides action into four kinds types——work

    rationality action, value rationality action, emotional action and traditional action and he uses

    them to analyse tradition society and industrial society. Georg Simmel’s viewpoint about

    “form” accomplished the type-rization method in the sociology in microcosmic field. In the T?Parsons’ sociology analysis, the “tradition and modern” is one of the significant basis to

    set forth his views when he analyses individual action or social structure. By the same token,

    now the three sociology sages——Giddens, Beck and Habermas—— also relate to the

    problem of “tradition and modern” like this.

    When we analyse the problem of “tradition and modern”, we must relate to the Eruamerican modernized theory and the relation of “tradition and modern” and modernity. In

    the about 80 and 90 age of 20 century, the truth that the sociology theory ken changed to the

    global ascertained modernized utterance was fading in the sociology theory. A few

    sociologists still are looking at the development of modernity with a criticizing sight. The

    modernity has expanded the understanding about the relation of “tradition and modern”. The

    modernity is the process that the society develops from tradition to modern times and then to

    the more modern and changing modern. In the process, the modernity produces its own new

    tradition and renewing tradition. In fact, this is the basic concept of the broad transformation

    theory. Tradition originates from the past and it is “alive past” and the past that can “alive” to

    now. As the alive past, tradition also is “now” and it perhaps is “future” because of they can

    produce more long society trend. For us, “tradition” embodies out itself significance when it

    relatives to “modern” and tradition is one kind of modern’s “invention”. Tradition is another

     8

express of modern and it also is one kind of the truest verifying of modern. There is “the

    growing up of modern” because there is “the invention of tradition”. The modernity, society

    transform study can face to the transition of “tradition and modern” because there is “the

    growing up of modern”.

    In short ,tradition and modern are the two faces of the modernity process. Modern

    exactly shows it is modern through the contrast of modern and tradition. Tradition is the

    factor of modern developing and is the resource of modern.

    中国社会学会会长 中国人民大学 郑杭生 教授

    本文简要地考察了“传统和现代”与社会学的不解之缘,回顾了“传统和现代”与

    现代化理论和现代性理论的不同关系,着重论证了“现代的成长”和“传统的发明”这一对

    “传统和现代”的新认识,这一认识对理解当代国内外一些学术前沿问题具有重大的意义。

    “传统和现代” 现代化 现代性 “现代的成长” “传统的发明”

    对传统和现代关系的理解,是社会学创始人和实际奠基人创建社会学立论的重大根

    据之一。这一点对两大系统的社会学——从马克思开始的马克思主义社会学传统和从

    孔德开始的西方社会学传统,都是如此。此后,传统和现代、传统社会和现代社会逐

    渐成为社会学分析的两种理想类型。

    马克思恩格斯在《共产党宣言》等著作中,对资产阶级统治的现代社会与过去的

    传统社会,做了多方面的极其鲜明的对比。他们指出,资产阶级统治的现代社会是一

    个生产力大发展的时代:“资产阶级在它的不到一百年的阶级统治中所创造的生产力,

    比过去一切世代创造的全部生产力还要多,还要大。”1 指出,这个社会推动了自由竞

    争以及与此相应的经济,政治,社会制度的建立,资产阶级的剥削和统治代替了“由

    2宗教幻想和政治幻想掩盖着的剥削”和统治。指出,这个社会引起了观念的变化;金

     1 《马克思思格斯选集》第1卷第256页。 2同上书第253253254页。

     9

    3钱关系,金钱至上的观念代替了宗法等级观念,“人的尊严变成了交换价值,。指出,

    这个社会还是一个急骤变化的快节奏的现代社会而与千百年沉睡的慢节奏的传统社会

    不同:“生产的不断变革,一切社会关系不停的动荡,永远的不安定和变动,这就是资

    4产阶级时代不同于过去一切时代的地方。”总之,西欧资本主义代替封建主义社会转型,1789年以法国大革命为标志的政治大革命、18世纪在英国开始的产业革命,使社会从生产力到生产关系、经济墓础到上层建筑,思想观念到政治制度都发生了变化深刻变

    化,凸显了传统社会与现代社会的差异。作为上述变化突出表现的工业化(机器大工业

    普遍地代替工场手工业)和都市化(城市规模的扩大,作用的增大等)以及与此相联系的

    社会问题的产生,对社会学的产生了直接的影响。例如,作为社会瘟疫的经济危机的

    周期性发作,作为贫富悬殊标志的富人区和贫民窟的并存,从劳资对立到工人怠工,

    罢工,破坏机器以至起义,从大鱼吃小鱼到企业破产,倒闭,从童工的使用到工人丧

    失劳动能力后的悲惨处境;从失业大军的形成到犯罪率的提高;边是“生产过剩”,很

    大一部分粮食和其他制成品被销毁,另一边是挣扎在饥饿线上的穷人饥寒交迫,如此

    等等。所有这些,也以极其鲜明的形式,提出了资本主义社会能否良性运行和协调发

    展的问题。正是对这一问题的两种不同回答——革命的回答和改良的回答,产生了两

    大系统的社会学。

    在西方社会学中,孔德本人已初步有了传统社会和工业社会不同类型的对比。孔

    德并对工业社会类型的特征做了概括

    5 他强调的特点有:科学而合理的劳动组织;人的主要活动表现为从对他人的战争和掠夺(孔德认为这是军事类型社会尚武精神的表)转向开发大自然;产业工人和资本家两大阶级集团的形成和对立等等。在孔德看来,

    认清传统的军事社会和现今工业社会的对立,理解社会由神学阶段的军事尚武型向实

    证阶段的工业科学型转化时造成的一系列社会和道德问题,并着手去解决这些矛盾和

    问题,是证实社会学的关键。不过,在孔德那里,社会发展被假定为单线式的,西方

    世界的过程则是人类的先驱。

    稍晚于孔德的英国社会学家斯宾塞突出地发展了传统社会与现代社会等社会类型

    的理论,而且与孔德的单线进化观点直接对立。他说:“认为全世界各野蛮的以及文明

    的种族所呈现的各种形式的社会都只是一种形式社会演进的各个不同阶段,这是一种

    严重的偏见。实际是,社会各种类型,正如个别有机体的类型一样,并非形成一个系

    列,而是可划分为分散的群体。”

    6 因此取代孔德历史的逻辑的是生物学基础上的类比法。于是,军事社会与工业社会的类型,不再被看作简单的历史发展中的两个阶段,

    而是被看作一定社会条件下社会组织结构和管理形式的特征。强制性社会组织与协作

    型社会组织成为后来社会学分析的两个广泛运用的基本模式,发展出各种变形。

     3同上书第253253254页。 4同上书第253253254页。 5 参见雷蒙?阿隆《社会学主要思潮》一书中论孔德部分的有关分析。 6 斯宾塞:《社会学研究》,纽约,1891年,第32页。

     10

Report this document

For any questions or suggestions please email
cust-service@docsford.com