城、镇与士绅——读费孝通《中国士绅》

<正>《中国士绅》取材于1947~1949年费孝通先生在中国报纸上发表的一系列文章。根据美国人类学家罗伯特·雷德斐尔德在1952年为其所写的导言所述,1948年他在清华大学做访问学者,同年秋,费先生向其夫人玛格丽特口述了他发表的这一系列文章的大致内容。玛格丽特女士回国后将费先生的这些文章与周荣德先生在云南昆阳访谈的六位士绅的生活史一同编辑成《China’s Gentry》一书,1953年在英语世界出版。时隔半个多世纪之后,赵旭东、秦志杰将玛格丽特的英文版重译回中文,形成了中文版的《中国士绅》一书。     

一个士绅眼中的美国民主——读费孝通《美国与美国人》

<美国与美国人>由<初访美国>(1945年)、<美国人的性格>(1947年)和<访美掠影>(1980年)三本小册子集结而成,收录的多是游记和通讯.其中,<初访美国>描述了二战后美国在科学、工商业、居民生产生活品质方面的概况以及作者对美国的民主制度、宗教信仰的理解;相对于<初访美国>中抽象层次较高的探讨,<访美掠影>则更加注重对美国的交通、能源、电子计算机等具体方面的描摹;而<美国人的性格>则是费孝通对Mead的<美国人的性格>一书的一系列读书笔记.     

读费孝通《美国与美国人》

费孝通<美国与美国人>①书中余笔一章里有这么一段话:在一年里想从这复杂的文化中去找出一个头绪来,其实已经是奢望……人家若问我美国是怎样的,叫我怎样回答?……爽性拒绝回答这类问题为是.     

美国与中国:读费孝通《美国与美国人》

费孝通先生的<美国与美国人>以"访外杂写"的方式记录了他1943年访美期间对美国的印象.在书中,我们看到的是-个中国人类学家描写的美国.显然,这个人类学家既不是那个"怀着对野蛮民族好奇心"的人类学家,也不是那个"接受殖民主义资助并为统治服务"的人类学家,更不是那个"试图在原始民族那里挖掘批判当今西方世界的素材"的人类学家.     

《中国回族民俗学》英文版后记

《回族学民俗学概论》自 1994年 4月出版以来 ,至今已再版 2次 ,印刷 3次 ,受到国内外专家学者的好评 ,在国内外反响很大。先后荣获中国图书奖、中国民间文学专著一等奖、中国民间文艺“山花奖”首届学术著作二等奖、宁夏文学艺术作品一等奖、宁夏社会科学优秀成果二等奖、中国北方十五省、市、自治区哲学社会科学优秀图书奖。2 0 0 1年 4月中旬 ,宁夏大学副校长左理率宁夏大学代表团访问巴基斯坦 ,参加了由国际伊斯兰大学 (InternationalIslamicUniversity ,Islamabad)主办的国际学术讨论会 ,签订了两校学术文化交流协议。6月中旬 ,巴基…     

重读费孝通——编订七卷本《费孝通文存》的读书心得

2020年11月2日是中国著名的社会学家、人类学家和民族学家费孝通先生诞辰110周年的日子。作为一种纪念,也作为一种学术传承,我们特别编订了一套七卷本的《费孝通文存》,以飨读者。编书也是读书,编过之后,总会留下那么一丝的印记,这便是写在这里有似蜻蜓点水一般的读书心得,以此作为一个将来有更多机会去深入研究费孝通思想的引子。如能因此引起同行的批评,那也是一件幸事。     

感悟《乡土中国》——纪念费孝通先生诞辰100周年

<乡土中国>是费孝通先生的经典之作,诸多学者对其进行了研究和解读,其中不乏精到的见解.但也存在以偏概全、曲解原意等种种偏颇.本文创新解读视角,以乡土社会中公私群己关系的构建及其整合为主线,在纵向上有机贯通该书的一系列观点,在横向上深入剖析公私群己关系形成的乡土环境,由此积淀的整合方式以及交织于传统与现代之中的历史变迁.在推敲该书主要论点和论证思路的基础上.本文力求还<乡土中国>以本来面貌,并探讨该书带给我们的深深思考.     

结构与神话思维——读《神话的结构》

<正>深层的心智而非浅层的情感,从宗教民族学的心理学进路出发,列维-斯特劳斯(Claude Lévi-Strauss,1908~2009)为自己的神话研究确立了方向。发表于1955年的《神话的结构》一文1,作为其神话研究的先导之作,则系统阐述了结构主义神话学的基本概念和分析方法。列维-斯特劳斯是如何看待神话以及神话思维的,而他又是如何使神话具有进行结构主义分析的可能性,这些议题将是本文的关照所在。在此需要说明的是,虽然在文章中列维-斯特劳斯试图通过具体的神话案例验证理论,其中就包括颇为经典的对俄狄浦斯神话的分析,但这些片段性的说明与其后来大部头的神话研究作品相比不过九牛一毛,因此本文并不纠结于     

英文版《中国民族》创刊了!

建国以来我国第一本全面展示中国55个少数民族历史和社会生活的英文刊物——《中国民族》英文版,于今年3月正式创刊发行。2001年,国家民委党组正式批准了《中国民族》杂志创办英文版的申请;其后,国务院宣传办公室和国家新闻出版总署相继批准了这一申请。根据国务院宣传办和国家新闻出版总署的意见,《中国民族》英文版的办     

浅谈中国社会结构分化问题——读《共产党宣言》有感

<共产党宣言>是卡尔·马克思和弗里德里希·恩格斯为共产主义者同盟起草的纲领,国际共产主义运动第一个纲领性文献,马克思主义诞生的重要标志.它第一次全面系统地阐述了科学社会主义理论,指出共产主义运动已成为不可抗拒的历史潮流.本文就在<宣言>中提到的关于社会结构问题,谈谈中国现今社会结构的分化问题.     

费孝通的甘肃实践

费孝通教授为了重建他一生"志在富民"的学科,躬身来到"陇中苦甲天下"的甘肃定西,来到黄河上游,来到丝绸之路民族走廊的"小民族"中间。他在中央实施西部大开发伊始,又及时提出"西部大开发中人文资源的保护、利用和开发"的问题……。他想到,他说到,他身体力行,在实践中,他重建着中国的社会学、人类学学科。     

文明及其反思:马林诺斯基、《自由与文明》与费孝通先生

本文梳理了马林诺斯基学术思想的演变脉络,继而通过解读其丰硕的学术著作和思想遗产,探究了由其确立并影响至今的文化功能理论和田野调查规范;并通过剖析其亲自编撰的最后一部遗著《自由与文明》,殿现了马氏在人类学视角下对自由的理论探索;同时,通过分析费孝通晚年提出的“文化自觉”的政治与学术反思,展现了马氏学术思想在中国人类学界的传承与升华。本文试图呈现有血有肉的马林诺斯基及其褒贬不一的文化理论和备受争议议的田野调查,在重新解读中对这位充满神话色彩的一代宗师的广博思想进行批判性的继承,在大师与大师的对举中探索人类学本土化的一种可能性。     

大瑶山调查与费孝通民族研究思想初探--纪念费孝通、王同惠大瑶山调查七十周年

2005年是费孝通、王同惠大瑶山调查七十周年,费孝通先生也于同年4月24日逝世.笔者在调查研究的基础上,查阅了大量相关资料,试图就大瑶山调查对费孝通人生和学术的影响、民族研究思想的形成以及晚年提出的文化自觉思想展开初步的研究.     

历史上的河湟文化与河湟教育(一)

文章对河湟文化与河湟教育的产生的历史轨迹进行较为详细的考证 ,以及对河湟地区藏传佛教文化、儒家文化、伊斯兰文化及其教育在河湟地区的传播、殖根和发展脉络进行了全面的梳理     

《五世达赖喇嘛传》与西北民族史研究

《五世达赖喇嘛》中有许多反映蒙古和西藏政治、文化、宗教情况的资料,是研究西藏地方史、清朝断代史、宗教史和民族史的重要著述.本文简要论述了这部自传的史料价值.     

2004年全国藏学研究论文资料要目索引(上)

一、政治庶民自知保家国,我以我血荐轩辕--记西藏人民第二次抗英战争 阴法唐《中国藏学》2004:1西藏人民1904年抗英战争百年祭 胡岩《中国藏学》2004:2邓小平的西藏发展观     

师儒与官绅：传统中国治水社会的士绅研究述评

Already for quite some time, the u-nique power structure of the traditional Chinese so-ciety has been viewed and discussed in the field of humanities and social sciences. Focusing on the status and role of its gentry class, Chinese and Western scholars have deeply researched the gen-eral characteristics of the political structure in the traditional Chinese society. And the analysis of the interaction between different social groups from the perspective of the traditional Chinese ‘hydraulic ’ structure has even gradually deepened and expand-ed this research topic. This paper looks at relevant research conducted by former scholars like e. g. Weber, Wittfogel, and Fei Xiaotong while attemp-ting to come to a more historic understanding of the relationship between the imperial power and the gentry class within the power structure of tradition-al Chinese society: this essay indeed focuses on the political status and social function of the gentry class in the traditional Chinese hydraulic society. Based on the research findings of scholars like Adam Smith, John Stuart Mill, and Karl Heinrich Marx, Weber pointed out that in Eastern societies there was a certain relationship between the autoc-racy and the local irrigation-based agriculture. And Weber believed that the relationship between the autocratic imperial power and the more local Con-fucian gentry was the key to understanding the po-litical structure of the Chinese society. At that time and place, the local water management-projects, other entrenched bureaucracies, the respected Confucian gentry, as well as the central imperial power were all intertwined together; this shaped a unique form of political power in traditional China. By borrowing Marx’ s concept of ‘the Asiatic mode of production’ , Wittfogel discussed the rela-tionship between ( i ) the political autocracy and ( ii) indigenous irrigation projects in Eastern socie-ties, seen from the perspective of political econom-ics. He proposed that the political autocracy was a result of the social functioning of hydraulic pro-jects, and briefly described the Eastern society as an ‘Oriental-authoritarian ’ society under the rule of an ‘absolute monarchy’ . In the eyes of Wittfo-gel, the traditional Chinese gentry was just a bu-reaucratic group attached to the totalitarian rule:their power did not draw from their own knowledge monopoly of value ethics and ritual standards, but solely from their power-relationship with the des-potic ruler. According to Wittfogel, the‘hydraulic society’ , totalitarian rule, bureaucratic groupings, and imperial power were all intertwined and togeth-er made up the government form of the traditional Chinese society. While Weber described the gentry as reputa-ble Confucian intellectuals, Wittfogel regarded them as mere bureaucrats firmly attached to the to-talitarian rule. In contrast with the Western schol-ars’ too simple view of the ‘gentry group’, Chi-nese scholars have emphasized that this ‘gentry group’ was an organism made up of bureaucrats and literati:they not only participated in local gov-ernance and cultural activities, but they also lived and passed on the inheritance of Confucian ortho-dox ideology. Fei Xiaotong stressed constantly that the tradi-tional Chinese political system wasn ’ t completely arbitrary;instead it was closely related to the so-cial class of the scholar-officials ( a combination of the bureaucrats and gentry within Chinese socie-ty) . Fei stated that the traditional Chinese society had a‘bottom-up’ or‘secondary/parallel’ track:this ‘informal track’ made it possible for the ordi-nary people to pass on their opinions to top level people. Guided by tao-t’ung ( Confucian orthodox-y) , the scholar-intellectuals were able to influence political power by expressing their opinions and by putting forward a set of ethical principles. Al-though they had no part in real political power, they still maintained a social prestige. As a buffer between imperial power and the common people, the scholar-officials could not only extend the pow-er of the monarch to the far corners of society, but they also could properly protect the interests of farmers through some informal channels outside of the system. In the view of Yu Yingshi, the scholar-offi-cials not only were royal officers but also teachers of the emperor: that is why they could exert con-straint to autocratic imperial power. Nevertheless, autocratic imperial power also constrained them. Even so, the bureaucrats and gentry kept alive the tao-t’ung in traditional Chinese political life, which safeguarded basic social values. However, the strength of tao-t’ung was always weaker than that of the royal power, therefore, Chinese society did have a tendency of ‘oriental despotism’ described by Wittfogel. In the study of Zhang Yahui, the scholar-offi-cial group was positioned right in middle of the so-ciety: this allowed them to work upwardly and downwardly. They thus could ( i) cooperate with the public to fight against the rulers ’ invasion of local life, and they ( ii) could compromise and a-gree with the rulers as to construct a new harmoni-ous coexistence model. His study reemphasized the historical role of the scholar-official group in keep-ing social harmony. In this study, the scholar-offi-cial group on one hand counterbalanced the central power’ s interference with local affairs, and on the other hand shaped more reasonable identities of the central power, acceptable for local communities. Zhang Yahui’ s study reminds us that-in the tradi-tional Chinese society-authoritarian rulers, the scholar-official group, and the public interlaced with, constrained, and supported each other, and thus constituted the overall picture of the traditional China. The scholar-official group thus was a major force in maintaining the social cohesion of the tra-ditional Chinese society. When indeed we consider both the ‘master-scholars’ and ‘bureaucrats’-the two special components of Chinese scholar-official class-we can better understand the characteristics of the vivid and interactive relationships between the rulers, the scholar-officials, and the local com-mon people. In other words, only when we recog-nize these two aspects of the gentry class, can we see the ‘unifying mechanism ’ of the traditional Chinese society;this allows us to develop a clearer social and historical picture of the traditional Chi-nese interaction between imperial power, scholarly power, and civil rights. To get to this new under-standing of the power structure of the traditional Chinese hydraulic society, we need to critically re-view all sorts of other simplified understandings of the period gentry group.     

中国留置权的立法缺陷与完善

中国现行法中的留置权存在适用范围窄、留置物种类少、特殊留置权空白、留置权消灭方式单一等缺陷,物权法(草案)对其缺陷有所修正,但依然存在不足,还应从增大留置权适用范围、增加留置物种类、增设留置权类型和改进留置权消灭等方面予以完善.     

时间就是社会——在历史人类学的脉络中解读《传统的发明》

<传统的发明>一书是1983年由英国著名的近代史学家霍布斯鲍姆与非洲史专家兰格合编的论文集.全书的七篇论文都是英国马克思主义历史学杂志<过去与现在>研讨会上的结晶,由霍布斯鲍姆与五位英美学者共同撰写,通过考察在18世纪末至20世纪初的欧洲(主要是英国)及其殖民地的历史中建构传统的种种情形,提出了一个颇具激发力的观点:那些表面看来或者声称是古老的传统其实是19世纪末与20世纪的-种发明或‘生产.     

牛日子里的牛"钟表":《努尔人》的一种读法

六十多年前的《努尔人》还多少有点"侍女"的容颜,但是,以现在的"审美趣味"观之,其内在的气质是很丰富的。《努尔人》的主题是尼罗河畔一个人群的政治制度,但是,其内容被分为了生活方式和政治制度两部分。对此,埃文思-普里查德(E.E.Evans—Pritchard)明确地提到:"如果不把环境因素和生活方式考