社会保护与社会秩序

本文对社会保护机制做了一般性分析，指出了我国目前社会保护机制中所存在的问题，旨在实践层面力促社会主义市场经济新秩序的建立     

社会秩序的本质探析

社会哲学对社会秩序本质的探析不能脱离各具体科学对此问题的理解.在社会哲学的层面骀上,社会秩序作为一种特殊的社会存在可以分别从实体、活动和关系等三个层次加以理解,即作为社会活动的一致性状态的层次、作为社会关系的结构化状态的层次和作为社会规则的约束性状态的层次.这三种状态是社会秩序的本质属性的具体表现形态.     

重建社会秩序的先秦思想

社会秩序问题一直是社会学的中心问题,也是重要的中国现实问题。关于中国传统社会秩序思想的专门研究不多,分析层次不高,局限于儒家研究。本文选择结构主义方法论,以社会秩序建构的目标（个人和社会的关系）和途径（内在途径和外在途径）作为分析框架,发现社会秩序是先秦社会思想的主题,先秦思想界出现了孔孟、荀子、老庄、墨子、韩非、杨朱六大社会秩序观,这些重建社会秩序的社会思想对于当今社会有可以借鉴之处。     

中国社会秩序的理性化困境

从实现现代化、建设小康社会到建构和谐社会,标志着中国政府的社会发展观念已经发生了深刻变化.实现现代化和建设小康社会,其主要目标是提高社会的发展程度,而建构和谐社会更重要的是协调社会的运行秩序.那么,怎样有效地协调中国社会的运行秩序?这成为实现中国社会发展一个不可回避的重大问题.     

社会秩序的强力性重构:耕战与赏罚——韩非子的现实旨趣

社会秩序的重构问题成为春秋战国时期的突出性时代问题。在如何重构社会秩序的问题上,存在着柔性重构和强力重构的对峙和冲突。韩非以性恶论为基础,对耕战与赏罚的强力手段提出了不同于墨家的见解,将耕战提高到法的首要高度,极为重视法的实现手段———赏罚。法家思想在当时历史条件下具有的积极意义和作用。耕战与赏罚作为法的重要内容和实现手段,成为社会秩序强力重构的方式,应当说是更为可行的。现在看来,社会秩序和人心秩序的问题仍是我们时代的问题,对于这一问题,韩非子的问题意识的现实旨趣或许能给予我们以有益的启示。作为对一种传统理论的诠释学解读的尝试,力图为韩非子思想学说的研究乃至为我国当前的法制建设寻求一种新的建构范式。     

道德整合:社会公平与社会秩序获得的根本出路

稳定的社会秩序是一个社会健全程度的标志。因此 ,如何获得社会秩序的问题历来受到人们的关注。在所有谋求社会秩序的方式中 ,通过政府而实现的社会公平和正义是最为可靠的。一个社会只有实现了公平和正义 ,才能够消解一切根本性的社会冲突诱因 ,实现稳定的社会秩序供给。但是 ,在现实中 ,腐败问题尤其是政府中存在的一些严重的腐败问题成了当前一切社会冲突的诱因。所以 ,应当从反腐败着手 ,在实现政府道德化的过程中 ,实现整个社会道德水平的全面提升 ,实现社会秩序的道德整合     

现代社会的社会秩序、个体自由与社会控制——基于对部分社会学经典文献的分析

人类进入现代社会以后,为了在持续变动的社会中重建秩序,不断探索创设新的社会机构、规范机制和控制机器。在此背景下,罗斯和涂尔干立足于对"社会何以可能"的思考,分别对社会控制何以产生并存在(罗斯)以及现代社会的社会规范机制的作用(涂尔干)做了研究;而韦伯和福柯则从对"个体的自由何以可能"的担忧出发,对理性铁笼对现代社会以及现代人的结构性控制(韦伯)和微观权力技术以及宏观治理术(福柯)展开了分析。     

利益分化背景下的城市基层社会秩序建构

单位制解体后,在利益分化背景下的城市基层社会管理实践中,“控制”命题已经逐渐让位于“利益整合”命题.代表“国家”的制度化行政管理网络内部并非铁板一块,而是存在着利益分化,这使基层社区权责型参与者之间产生了行动不一致.代表“社会”的居民或居民自治组织也并非是完全团结的,相互间的利益冲突常使“社区自治”陷入需要权责型参与者重新介入才能达成的尴尬境地.中国城市基层社会秩序建构中的“悖论事实”要求我们的基层社会管理模式与理论都必须创新.     

"天上人间"的同构——中国传统文化中的空间观念与社会秩序的建构

中国是以空间来建构社会的,世俗秩序是生命空间的仿制,是"天上人间"的同构。中国古代的空间观念源于对天地运行和物理形态的感知与思索,以"北极星"为中心的组织严密的天体秩序和四方隔绝的地理位置启迪了中国人,"天圆地方"、"天尊地卑"成为对生命空间的抽象概括。空间秩序成为社会结构的模板,"天人合一"成为社会建构的"元叙事"。空间的垂直度体现为天、人、地的排列,"天"成为掌管"人"和"地"的至上权威,反映在社会设置上就是等级制度的建立:皇帝、官僚、百姓形成了垂直的社会等级结构。空间的水平度体现为"尚中"观念的确立———皇权为最高权威,"中国"成为华夏乃至世界的中心。以"尚中"与"差序"为核心理念,中国人建构了从物质空间到理念空间、从政治空间到文化空间、从私人空间到社会空间高度一体化的空间秩序,实现了社会的高度整合。中华文明的孕育、产生与发展都与中国古代的空间观密不可分,对空间观与社会秩序二者关系的分析,有助于我们厘清中国社会的原初形态,从而借助传统与现代的文化元素来构建和谐社会。     

社会秩序变革的三重动因:社会哲学的视域

社会秩序变革是指同一社会秩序的自我更新或因不同秩序间更替而产生的社会秩序性质发生根本变化的过程。社会秩序作为非实体性存在,其变革的动力机制内在于社会系统并因社会系统诸要素的交互作用而生成。在社会哲学的层面上考察,社会结构体系演进是社会秩序变革的深层动因,个体需要的拓展、组织利益的博弈和国家权力体系的推动是其主体动因,社会规范体系的更新是其直接动因。上述三种动因交互作用形成社会秩序变革的动力系统,统一于社会整体的运动过程。从这三种不同的视角透视社会秩序变革的动因,有利于更全面和深刻地理解社会秩序变革的规律。     

Order relations among efficient decision rules

The paper introduces the concept of polar decision rules and establishes that majority rules are polar rules. We identify second best rules and penultimate rules in cases that majority rules are optimal or the most inferior, respectively. We especially specify the almost expert rule and the almost majority rule as the secondary rules of the expert and majority rules, respectively.     

Rules, Social Ontology and Collective Identity

Mainstream game theory explains cooperation as the outcome of the interaction of agents who permanently pursue their individual goals. Amartya Sen argues instead that cooperation can only be understood by positing a type of rule-following behaviour that can be (and often is) out of phase with the pursuit of individual goals, due to the existence of a collective identity. However, Sen does not clarify the ontological preconditions for the type of social behaviour he describes. I will argue that Sen's account of collective identity can be best interpreted in the light of John Searle's notion of collective intentionality, while Sen's explanation of rule-following behavior and agency is best understood using the critical realist transformational model of social activity.     

Scoring Rules,Condorcet Efficiency and Social Homogeneity

Theory and Decision - In a three-candidate election, a scoring rule λ, λ∈[0,1], assigns 1,λ and 0 points (respectively) to each first, second and third place in the individual...     

试论欧阳修的人道、官道和文道

欧阳修是北宋著名的学者,名臣,文坛领袖,这一切都以他高尚的人格为基石。欧阳修为人求知务道,见义敢为;为官清廉公正,刚直不阿;为文道以充文,穷而后工。三者相得益彰,成就了他不凡的一生和后世的英名。     

Endogenous risk and protection premiums

Endogenous risk implies an individual perceives he can influence the likelihood that a state of nature will occur. To add structure to endogenous risk models, I define a protection premium for reduced uncertainty about protection efficiency when a stochastic variable enters the probability functionp(x) rather than the utility function. For a binary lottery, a measure of aversion of uncertain protection efficiency(x) =-p(x)/p(x) is defined to unambiguously determine the effects of increased risk on an individual's voluntary contribution to public good supply earmarked to reduce the probability of an undesirable state. Finally, I examine the protection premium in ann-state discrete lottery and when uncertainty exists in both the probability and utility function.     

Endogenous risks and the risk premium

This note tries to correct a deficiency of the microeconomic literature on decision making under uncertainty. Indeed, when considering meaningful comparative statics results in situations where risks are at least partially controllable (endogenous), this literature has mostly relied upon the traditional Arrow-Pratt risk aversion functions and has paid very little attention to the definition of the risk premium. However when they defined the risk premium and the risk aversion functions, Arrow and Pratt considered only roulette gambles, i.e. risks totally exogenous to the individual. This note highlights the fact that several definitions of the risk premium may be proposed for endogenous risks. Two of them, already used in the literature, do not preserve the intuitively-appealing properties of the Arrow-Pratt risk premium. An alternative definition is then proposed. It is shown that this new definition of the risk premium applied to endogenous risks exhibits the properties generally admitted for roulette gambles.The three authors have benefitted from Ph. Caperaa's advice and from a referee's comments.     

State Governance,Global Governance and the Construction of World Order

State governance and global governance are two intertwining aspects in the construction of world order. A peaceful, prosperous and equitable world order encompasses internal order of sovereign states and international order of the international systems. Effective state governance nurtures internal order of sovereign states, eschews internal disorder, and prevents the spillover of negative externality into the international systems. In this sense, state governance is the cornerstone for constructing world order. In the meantime, effective global governance constructs world order and assists sovereign states in constructing internal order. In the construction of world order, different actors in the international systems represented by sovereign states inter alia must cooperate with a view to dissolving conflicts of interests and policies among states, managing global public domain, responding to common challenges and sharing responsibilities in assisting internally disordered states to govern effectively. Since the reform and opening up, China has contributed its distinctive part to the construction of world order by means of responsible state governance and global partnership governance.     

德与周代选拔官吏政策

当我们从政治伦理标准的角度出发 ,将目光凝聚到周代的选拔官吏政策上 ,则不难发现 ,其显然受德的影响。德与选拔官吏政策的结合 ,是周代严格宗法制下 ,有效选拔官吏、使之在政治上获得长治久安的重要保证。明古以鉴今 ,对周代受德影响的选拔官吏政策的探讨 ,对现阶段我国政治制度的发展 ,不无裨益。