双重理性视阈下近代中国嬗变轨迹与逻辑理路

工具理性和价值理性的辩证关系，以“格物”“致知”等形式生根于中国传统文化之中，“格物”可理解为追求工具理性的昌明，“致知”可理解为促使价值理性进入澄明状态。到近代，仁人志士们发起的救亡图存运动中，他们对工具理性和价值理性的辩证关系多有误读甚至忽略，致使相关变革不够彻底或是失败。基于此，通过深度剖析工具理性和价值理性的辩证逻辑，在深刻总结近代中国发展过程中4个典型历史事件基础上，运用历史分析法、逻辑归纳法、分析比较法等，揭示了近代中国走向进步的嬗变轨迹与逻辑理路。研究认为，这一理想化的逻辑理路可作如下表述:一方面，通过工具理性的“格物”，人们可以发现“致良知”和“致真知”等四大领域的价值理性；另一方面，四大领域的价值理性一旦进入澄明状态，又能够驱动社会发展的“六驾马车”向前发展。对照上述逻辑理路，洋务运动遭遇了双重“水土不服”，仅仅推动了社会发展的“半架马车”；戊戌变法和辛亥革命遭遇另外两种“水土不服”，是“无根”的事业。相比之下，陈独秀发起了新文化运动，请出“赛先生”和“德先生”，在重拾传统智慧的基础上，为中国社会进步开启了新的一页。

Revolution path and development logic of modern China under the perspective of dual rationalities

The dialectical relationship between instrumental rationality and value rationality is rooted in Chinese traditional culture in the form of “investigation of things” and “knowledge acquisition”.The “investigation of things” can be understood as the pursuit of instrumental rationality, while “knowledge acquisition” can be understood as driving value rationality into a state of clarity.In modern times, people with lofty ideals initiated the rescue of China from subjugation to ensure survival.Unfortunately, the dialectical relationship between instrumental rationality and value rationality was often misread or even ignored, resulting in halfway reforms or downright failed reforms. Thus, based on a profound summary of the four typical historical events in the development process of modern China, this paper analyzes the dialectical logic of instrumental rationality and value rationality in depth, and uses historical analysis, logical induction, and comparative analysis to reveal the evolution path and development logic of modern China’s advancement.The study believes that this idealized logic can be expressed as follows. On the one hand, through the “investigation of things” of instrumental rationality, people can find the value rationality of the four major fields such as “extension of intuitive knowledge” and “acquisition of genuine knowledge”. On the other hand, once the value rationality of the four major fields enters a state of clarity, it can drive the “six carriages” of social development to move forward.In contrast to the logic above, the Westernization Movement encountered dual “non acclimatization” and only promoted “half carriage” of social development. The Reform Movement of 1898 and the Revolution of 1911 encountered two other types of “non acclimatization” and were “rootless” causes.In contrast, CHEN Duxiu initiated the New Culture Movement and invited “Mr. Science” and “Mr. Democracy” to open a new page for China’s social progress on the basis of regaining traditional wisdom.