文化比较视域下“五四”新文化运动再思考

  本文关键词：文化比较视域下“五四”新文化运动再思考，由笔耕文化传播整理发布。

        在中西碰撞、古今更替的历史背景下,在国家和民族面临救亡图存之时,“五四”新文化运动高举“德”“赛”两面旗帜,发挥了重大的文化启蒙作用。它一直成为学术界讨论的热点问题。现代中国文化的发展,隐含着一条对“五四”新文化运动不断解读的反思之路。“引论”部分首先对“五四”新文化运动的概念加以厘定,对其起讫时限予以界定,梳理了过去的研究成果。“五四”新文化运动的多重面相、多种意义在过去的文化反思中不断被揭示出来,不论是对“五四”新文化运动与学生爱国主义运动概念的辨析,对新文化运动思想启蒙内涵的诠释,还是对新文化运动思想流派的梳理、传统在后现代中的意义等方面,都有了新的进展。经历了20世纪80年代的文化热和90年代的文化保守主义思潮,近年来“五四”新文化运动的研究出现一个趋于平和、寻求融合的时期,人们不再拘泥于启蒙与反启蒙的论争,而是以开放的文化心态,突破“五四”新文化运动以来的学术范式,在回应时代课题的基础上综合创新。然而,“五四”新文化运动轰轰烈烈的文化启蒙并没有如人们所愿,真正实现科学与民主。与西方启蒙运动相比,“五四”新文化运动的启蒙究竟发生了什么样的变化?遇到了哪些特殊的困境?依然是需要深化的课题。从文化比较的视域出发,彰显启蒙的坐标意义,对“五四”新文化运动的启蒙特征与特殊困境有更明晰的呈现,为反思与超越“五四”寻找到突破口,即是本论文要努力做的工作。第一章追溯了“五四”新文化运动以前文化比较思想及面临的问题。“五四”新文化运动与西方启蒙运动相似,是促成中国文化近现代转型的文化启蒙运动,但不同的是,作为一种外源性启蒙,它是在中西文化碰撞、冲突中发生的,表现为文化比较视域下的文化启蒙。洋务运动时期,“中体西用”是在中西学割裂基础之上的文化比较框架,在意识到船坚炮利只是西学之末以后,时人对西学之体的理解开始上升到政治制度层面,如何在中学之中安置西体的问题成为国人亟待解决的难题,中学之体正统的至上地位开始受到质疑与威胁。维新派虽然也坚持“中体西用”,但内涵已有所变化,倾向于“新旧之争”基础上的中西会通,在一定意义上消除了体用框架中文化价值判断的偏见。严复是“五四”新文化运动“发现”范式奠基人,他所指出的“黜伪而崇真”的自然科学方法和“屈私以为公”的民主政治制度即是科学与民主的先声,他对进化论的信奉和对实证经验的推崇也确立了“五四”新文化派与“科玄论战”中的科学派的基本前提。在“五四”新文化运动前夜,东西方文化无处不在昭示着文化时代性的巨大落差,在中西文化比较中文化时代性凸显表现为“世界主义”倾向的形成和“变”的思想的激进化。第二章对“五四”新文化运动中的两次文化论战和科学主义思潮的兴起作了概述和简要的比较分析。从洋务运动、戊戌变法、辛亥革命,到“五四”新文化运动,由器物层面的图强到政治制度的变革,再到思想文化领域的觉悟,为东方文化与西方文化的论战在历史与逻辑的双重意义上提供了前提。从东西文化论战中可以看出,对科学与民主的肯认、对东西文化之间根本性差异的认识,新文化派与文化保守主义者是一致的,但两者在东西文化的差异性质的判断、新旧文化的理解、世界文化未来走向等方面表现出迥然不同的理解。科学与民主是西方启蒙运动孕育出的两大成果,“五四”新文化运动则试图在缺乏两者的社会基础上,通过对两者的提倡来回应救亡图存的时代主题,表现出科学与民主的泛化趋向。“五四”新文化运动深化了对民主的认识,强调了人的解放,肯定人的价值和生命的意义,但表现出批判中国传统伦理思想,侧重民主的文化启蒙意义,带有民族主义色彩等特点,把民主视作一种价值概念,启迪民智的一种工具。在缺少近代科学的现实条件下,科学更多的是在哲学、文化的语境中被认识的,科学不仅是求真的智识,还成为一种自明的信仰。科学超越了知识领域,扩及社会科学,甚至是宇宙人生各个领域,摇身变为无所不能的新偶像。科学泛化表现为“求善”到“求真”文化价值取向的转变,实证主义和形而上化的浓厚色彩和科学的信仰化取向。“科玄论战”是东西文化论战的延续与深入,既有中西文化关系问题,又有中国文化、哲学现代性问题；既反映了西方文化中科学主义与人文主义关系问题,也折射了形而上学与现代性的纠结。“科玄论战”中的科学派受西方实证主义思潮的影响,从科学与哲学的联系入手,试图实现哲学的科学化,以科学统一宇宙人生,具体表现为：第一,科学代替经学,试图重新建立一种形而上的世界图景；第二,科学主义视域中人与人生的机械化；第三,真对善的遮蔽；第四,通过科学方法的万能,实现价值领域的僭越。当科学派将科学作为一种全息的视野审视宇宙人生时,科学视野的独断化就导致了科学主义的产生。玄学派对形而上学与科学视野的不同有着强烈的自觉,而这种自觉来源于对人的存在的二重性的深刻认识,虽然在论战中黯然谢幕,但其提出的人生观及自由意志问题关涉着人的终极关怀,是“安心立命”之所在,更有其深刻的历史意蕴,有力地揭示了任何一种外源性启蒙必须坚持自身文化民族性维度的必要性。“科玄论战”还标志着早期马克思主义与自由主义的分道扬镳。文中对早期马克思主义与自由主义从“问题与主义”之争到“科玄论战”的分歧进行了简要的分析。在“问题与主义”之争中,两者表现为主义的历史与当下作用、再造文明与社会革命、点滴改良与根本改造、对马克思主义阶级竞争说的不同认识。胡适奉行的实验主义也显示出了自身的两大缺陷：实验主义通过方法论的化约成为了一种“真理”；实验主义长于批判,短于建设。“科玄论战”中早期马克思主义与自由主义的分歧更突出学理预设上的不同：基础的一元论与多元论的分野；物质本体论与存疑的唯心论之区别。第三章的主要内容是考察“五四”新文化运动与西方启蒙运动的异同。“五四”新文化运动使得中国文化迅速转入现代文化的轨道,但科学与民主仍然是摆在我们面前的一项未竟的事业,与西方启蒙运动塑造的现代性历史潮流形成鲜明对比。首先,通过西方启蒙运动中人权代替君权、人本代替神本、科学代替信仰特征的分析,揭示启蒙的实质即通过理性发现人的自我。“五四”新文化运动中的启蒙表现形式,是通过对科学与民主的高扬和对封建的纲常名教的批判挺立起人的主体性,从而凸显人的理性精神。与西方启蒙运动的具体内容虽然不同,但它们的实质都是通过理性发现人的自我,人的发现是中西启蒙运动的共同目标。其次,揭示中西启蒙运动的不同之处。一是文化传统的不同。西方是理性与神性相结合的文化传统,中国文化以儒学为主流、儒释道互补,“道统”一脉相承,关注的领域是社会人生,宗教意识淡薄。两种文化传统的不同根本在于理性与德性的不同人性预设。一是启蒙与传统关系的不同。“五四”新文化运动在中西文化的比较中,把西方文明的优势泛衍到文化比较的领域,从一开始就形成了一个遮掩的价值判断,表现出对传统的全面否定。在西方的启蒙进程中,启蒙与传统却表现为一种回归关系,它是在西方文化自身体系内做出的自我调整。所以,在某种意义上,西方启蒙运动是对传统中的希腊路向的复归,它所反对的是神性的宰制性垄断,而不是对传统进行全面的否定。它的反传统并没有打破整个西方文化体系的构架。再次,分析中国启蒙的特殊性。一是启蒙的外源性与文化民族性维度的凸显。“五四”新文化运动作为受到西方启蒙精神影响的文化启蒙运动,标志着中国文化由近代到现代的时代转化。同时,启蒙的外源性决定了“五四”新文化运动面临文化民族性的纠结。启蒙的外源性决定了任何一种非西方文化在现代化的道路上都要面临文化民族性的维度,这是文化保守主义虽然显得不太合时宜却又具有深刻思想价值的原因,也是“五四”留给我们的另一种意义上的启蒙。二是救亡压倒启蒙：国家民族本位取代个体意识。西方启蒙运动的中心是对人的研究,把启蒙推进到人的主体性层面。与此相比,“五四”新文化运动的启蒙思想也注意到启蒙张扬个性一面,但由于国家与民族的存亡危机,并未向西方启蒙运动一样进入到深层的理性与自由去揭示启蒙意义,而是把启蒙定位于科学与民主这样一种外显的范畴。三是启蒙塑造的理性精神在西方社会结构层面上具有坚实的市民社会基础。与此相比,中国启蒙显然缺少市民社会成熟的现实土壤。从社会结构看,中国传统的“家”、“国”同构的社会结构不利于市民社会的形成。中国市民社会的建立,其特点表现为一种文化上的觉醒,国家在社会的变革中扮演主导的角色,市场经济发展的贫弱状况尚无法提供有力的世俗基础的支持。第四章对“五四”新文化运动在以下两个方面进行了反思：理性的独断化必然导致启蒙精神走向自身的反面,这是启蒙的悖论所在。对历史时代的永恒的批判是对待“启蒙”应有的态度；早期马克思主义者意识到启蒙的双重性,把新文化看作对传统文化和近代文化的双重超越,寻求回归传统与全盘西化之外超阶段发展的“第三条道路”,依然有着重要的启示意义。反传统并不是启蒙的应有之义,“五四”新文化运动非主流思潮凸显的是对传统维度的维护,作为外源性启蒙,我们应从中汲取更多的思想养分；现代新儒家的科学化与马克思主义哲学的人文化是文化自我反省透显出的理性与价值的整合取向,这是超越“五四”启蒙心态、进行传统创造性转化的契机。

    With the collision of modernized West and conserved China, May Fourth New Culture Movement, holding high the two flags of science and democracy, played an important role of cultural enlightenment when the Chinese nation was faced with a great survival crisis. This has been a hot academic issue under discussion. The development of modern Chinese culture implicated a way of reflection and interpretation of May Fourth New Culture Movement.The introduction part defines the concept of May Fourth New Culture Movement, sets precisely its starting and ending time, and summarizes the previous studies. The multi-facets and multi-meaning of May Fourth New Culture Movement were revealed in the past reflections, which presented much progress in the following topics as, the distinction of May Fourth New Culture Movement and the students’Patriotic Movement, the interpretation of the connotation of the New Culture Movement Enlightenment, the review on the schools of thoughts of the New Culture Movement, and the meaning of tradition in the postmodernism. Through the cultural rush of1980s and the cultural conservatism of1990s, in recent years, the study on May Fourth New Culture Movement has opened up a new period, which is more peaceful and tends to seek integration. During this period, people no longer stick to the Enlightenment and counter-Enlightenment debates. Instead, with an open cultural mentality, people break the academic paradigm since May Fourth New Culture Movement, and progresses rapidly in response to contemporary issues based on the integrated innovation. However, the vigorous cultural enlightenment of May Fourth New Culture Movement does not meet the public’s expectations, which aims to realize science and democracy. Compared with the Western Enlightenment, what had happened to May Fourth New Culture Movement in the Enlightenment? What kind of special difficulties it had encountered? Therefore, it is still necessary to deepen the subject. This dissertation tries, from a cultural comparative perspective, to show clear the coordinative meaning of enlightenment, to present the traits and difficulties of enlightenment, and to discover a breakout for reflecting and overcoming May Fourth New Culture Movement. Chapter one traces the previous thoughts and problems in the field of cultural comparison before May Fourth New Culture Movement Cultures. May Fourth New Culture Movement, similar to the Western Enlightenment, is a cultural enlightenment movement promoting the modern transformation of Chinese culture. The difference between them lies in that the Enlightenment in China is exogenous, which is a result of collision of the Eastern and Western cultures, and performs a role in the cultural enlightenment from a cultural comparison perspective. During the Westernization Movement,"Chinese essence, Western techniques" is a comparative framework based on the separation of the West and East. After realizing that a strong army is not the essence of Western culture, reformers began to understand westernization from the perspective of political systems. As a result, the question about how to deal with the relationship of West and East assumed the vital importance. Under this circumstance, the East root was challenged and threatened. Although reformers still stuck to the principal of "Chinese essence, Western techniques", actually the content had changed, and tended to get rid of the biases toward the differences between West and East. Yan Fu is the founder of the "discovered" paradigm in May Fourth New Culture Movement the founder of Paradigm, he advocated the natural scientific methods of "Elimination of the false and worship of the truth," and called for a democratic political system of "sacrificing private for public", which is the harbinger of science and democracy. He believed in the theory of evolution and the practical experience, established the basic premises for the New Culturists and the school of thoughy of science. On the May Fourth New Culture Movement Eve, the great cultural gap between Eastern and Western culture is viewed everywhere. In the era of Chinese and Western cultural comparison, relevance is the formation of the "cosmopolitan" tendencies and the radicalization of the idea "change".Chapter two gives a summary and comparative analysis of May Fourth New Culture Movement in the two cultural debates and intellectual trend. From the Westernization Movement, the Reform Movement, the1911Revolution, to the "May4th" New Culture Movement, and strengthen the country level from the objects to change the political system, to the ideological and cultural awareness, for the Oriental culture and Western culture, history and logic Debate available on the double meaning of the premise. From the debate of the East and West, the new centralists and the cultural conservatives agreed on such issues, as they have gradually gained recognition toward science and democracy and understanding on the differences between Western and Eastern culture. However, they had quite different ideas on other problems, such as the judgment of essential differences between West and East, understandings on the old and new cultures, and the future of the world culture. Science and democracy are the tow results of Western Enlightenment. The May Fourth New Culture Movement is trying to, in the absence of appropriate social factors; make the two notions of science and democracy generalized through both the promotion of the response to the national salvation era theme. The May Fourth New Culture Movement deepened their understanding of democracy, emphasized the people’s liberation and affirmed the value and meaning of life. Meanwhile, it held critical ideas toward Chinese traditional ethics, focused on the democratic significance of the cultural enlightenment with nationalism, and viewed the concept of democracy as a value and a tool to enlighten the whole nation. In the absence of modern science, science is more a philosophical. Cultural context is recognized, scientific truth is not only intellectual, but also becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. Beyond the field of scientific knowledge, expansion and social sciences, and even the universe in all areas of life, it suddenly becomes an all-powerful new idol. Scientific generalization showed a turn from the pursuit of goodness to the pursuit of truth and a strong scientific belief and orientation toward positivism and metaphysics.The Controversy of Science and Metaphysics is a continuation of East-West controversy. It involves not only Chinese and Western relations, but also contemporary issues as Chinese culture and philosophy. It reflects not only the relationship between scientism and humanism in western culture, but also the twist between metaphysics and modernity. The Controversy in the Scientology by the thought of Western positivism, the link between science and philosophy from the start, tries to achieve a scientific philosophy, unity of the universe and life science, specifically as follows:First, science will take the place of experience, trying to re-establish a metaphysical picture of the world; second, the mechanization of human and human in the perspective of science; third, the shelter of truth for goodness; Fourth, to realize the value of field overstepped through the universal scientific method. When Scientology takes science as a holographic vision of the universe and life, the scientific view of the arbitrariness leads to the emergence of scientific doctrine. Metaphysics and science party had a strong vision of different conscious, and this initiative comes from the profound understanding of the duality of human existence. Although Metaphysics sadly in this debate curtain call, the questions of life and free will they raised are concerned with human ultimate happiness and where a peaceful life can start. With its meaning, it effectively reveals the necessity for any exogenous enlightenment to adhere to its own national character and cultural dimensions. The Controversy of Science and Metaphysics also marked the separation of early Marxism and liberalism. This dissertation analyzes briefly the divergence from the "problem versus doctrine" to "The Controversy of Science and Metaphysics " between early Marxism and liberalism. In the "problem versus doctrine", their argument focuses on problems as the historical and instant functions of doctrine, re-constructed civilization and social revolution, piecemeal evolution and the fundamental transformation, the different understandings of class competition. The experimentalist Hu Shi pursued also showed its own two defects:experimentalism becoming a truth through methodology; experimentalism is good at criticize, but short at building. In the Controversy of Science and Metaphysics, the differences between early Marxism and liberalism mainly lie in the different presupposition of theory:the basis of a distinction between monism and pluralism; the distinction between substance ontology and doubts about the idealism.Chapter three compares the New Culture Movement with the Western Enlightenment. The May Fourth New Culture Movement promoted the Chinese culture’s turning into modern culture, but science and democracy are still our unfinished career, which has a long way to go when compared with the historical trend the Western Enlightenment had shaped. Firstly, by the Western Enlightenment, human rights replace the monarchical power, human-orientation replaces God, science replaces doctrine, we can discover the ego of self through sense May Fourth New Culture Movement in the form of enlightenment through science and democracy Praise and criticism of the feudal morality stand out from the human subjectivity, highlighting people’s rational spirit, with the specific content of the western Enlightenment, which are different. But, actually the person by reason of self-discovery, human is found to be the common goal of both Western and Eastern Enlightenment. Secondly, it reveals the differences. On the one hand, they have different cultural traditions:the West is a combination of ration and Godhood, while the Chinese culture follows the mainstream of Confucianism, Buddhism and Taoism and has very weak religious consciousness. Differences between the two actually lie in the different presupposition of humanity. On the other hand, the relationships between enlightenment and tradition are different. May Fourth New Culture Movement in the comparison of Chinese and Western culture, the advantages of Western civilization to the pan-cultural comparison of the areas of derivatives from the beginning formed to judge the value of a cover showing the traditional completely negated. In the Western Enlightenment, the relationship between Enlightenment and tradition is regressive. The Western culture does judgment within its own system and with the reason to oppose the monopoly of divinity. Therefore, the Western Enlightenment is the return to the traditional Greek way, and is against the divine domination of monopoly, instead of full negation to tradition. Its anti-tradition did not break the system architecture of Western culture. Thirdly, the Chinese Enlightenment has its own particularity. On the one hand, the exogenous Enlightenment and the cultural nationalism are in highlights. Affected by the spirit of the Enlightenment, May Fourth New Culture Movement marked that Chinese culture’s transformation from modern times to the contemporary age. Meanwhile, the exogenous enlightenment decided that May Forth New Culture Movement would face the tangle of cultural nationality. It also determined that any non-Western culture must confront cultural dimensions of national character Enlightenment in the modern way. This is why the cultural conservatism is not entirely appropriate, but it has profound ideological value. This is a different sense of enlightenment May Fourth New Culture Movement left us. On the other hand, salvation overwhelmed Enlightenment:national position replaced the individual consciousness. The center of the Western Enlightenment, human study, advanced the Enlightenment to human subjectivity level. Meanwhile, May Fourth New Culture Movement of the Enlightenment also noted the personality of the Enlightenment. But because of the survival of the national crisis, there is no access to the same deep level of rationality and freedom to explore the significance of the Enlightenment, just as the Western Enlightenment did. It can only locate science and democracy in such a category. Third, the rational spirit of the Enlightenment shaped the social structure in the West reflected the gradual maturity of civil society. By contrast, China Enlightenment apparently lacks social maturity basis in reality. From a societal perspective, the traditional Chinese family structure and the country’s social structure is not conducive to the formation of civil society. The Chinese civil society has the following characteristics:performance of enlightenment is a cultural awakening; the state plays the main role in the social changes; the development of market economy is still unable to provide a strong secular foundation.Chapter four reflects the May Fourth New Culture Movement in the following two aspects:the arbitrariness of rational enlightenment will inevitably leads to the opposite, which is the paradox of enlightenment; the eternal criticism toward history is the right attitude to treat "the Enlightenment"; early Marxists realize the dual nature of the Enlightenment, and they treat the new culture as a transcendence of both traditional culture and modern culture. It still has an important significance to seek a new road beyond returning to the tradition and ultra-Westernized. Anti-Enlightenment tradition is not the proper meaning of enlightenment. The emergence of non-mainstream thought May Fourth New Culture Movement is a kind protection to the traditional dimensions. May Fourth New Culture Movement is an exogenous enlightenment, and we should learn more ideological nutrients; the scientization of modern Neo-Confucianism and the humanization of Marxist philosophy represent the orientation formed through rational self-reflection and combination of different values, which is the mentality exceeding the May Fourth Enlightenment, and the opportunity to transform the traditional creativity.

文化比较视域下“五四”新文化运动再思考

中文摘要8-12ABSTRACT12-17引论18-33    一、“‘五四’新文化运动”概念厘定20-21    二、“五四”新文化运动起讫时限界定21-22    三、研究文献综述22-30    四、“五四”新文化运动再思考的意义30-33第一章 “五四”新文化运动前文化比较思想概述33-47    第一节 中西学割裂的“中西之争”33-37    第二节 “新旧之争”基础上的中西会通论37-38    第三节 严复的西化“发现”范式38-43    第四节 文化时代性的凸显43-47第二章 “五四”新文化运动与“德”“赛”两先生47-94    第一节 东西文化论战与“德”“赛”两先生48-57        一、东西文化论战概述49-53        二、新文化派与文化保守主义者的论战焦点53-57    第二节 “民主”与“科学”的泛化57-71        一、“五四”新文化运动中的民主思想及其特点58-63        二、“五四”新文化运动时期“科学”的泛化倾向63-71    第三节 “科玄论战”及其历史意蕴71-94        一、“科玄论战”概述71-74        二、科学派及其科学主义表现74-79        三、玄学派对形而上学的维护79-85        四、早期马克思主义与自由主义的分歧85-94第三章 “五四”新文化运动与西方启蒙运动异同之比较94-119    第一节 启蒙的实质及其在“五四”新文化运动中的表现94-106        一、何谓“启蒙”?94-102        二、“五四”新文化运动中的启蒙表现形式102-106    第二节 中西启蒙运动之异106-110        一、文化传统的不同106-108        二、“启蒙”与“传统”：否定抑或回归?108-110    第三节 中国启蒙的特殊性110-119        一、启蒙的外源性与文化民族性维度的凸显110-113        二、救亡压倒启蒙：国家民族本位取代个体意识113-114        三、市民社会的不成熟114-119第四章 “五四”新文化运动的启示119-129    第一节 启蒙悖论与“第三条道路”的抉择119-124        一、启蒙的悖论119-121        二、启蒙反思中的“第三条道路”121-124    第二节 启蒙中的传统与传统的创造性转化124-129        一、反传统不是启蒙的应有之义124-127        二、传统的创造性转化的思考127-129参考文献129-149致谢149-150攻读博士学位期间发表的学术论文目录150-151学位论文评阅及答辩情况表151

  本文关键词：文化比较视域下“五四”新文化运动再思考，，由笔耕文化传播整理发布。