超越后现代社会学，建构后现代性社会学——鲍曼的理论构想及方法论探析

英国著名的社会学家齐格蒙特· 鲍曼在4050 年发表的《社会学对后现代性的回应》（后收入《后现代性的通告》）一文中首次对后现代社会学与后现代性社会学进行了区分。鲍曼尝试用“社会性”、“栖息地”、“自我建构”与“自我组装”等概念分析当代西方社会崭新的人类状况。本文试图在阐述鲍曼关于后现代性社会学理论构想的同时，剖析这一构想所凸显的社会学在后现代状况下的理论定位及方法论问题。     

“表演”的跨学科比较——试析戈夫曼、特纳及鲍曼的表演观

自＂表演＂进入社会科学领域,由日常词汇转变为社会理论研究的新视角以来,社会学、人类学及民俗学界均给予极大的关注。由于不同学科学术传统存在差异,在三个领域内逐渐形成了相异的表演观。因此,通过对戈夫曼、特纳及鲍曼关于＂表演＂的理论进行分析,在比较的视角中进一步认识表演理论在不同学科中的发展脉络及相互区别的表演观,具有相当的理论意义。     

消费社会中的人际关系——论齐格蒙特·鲍曼的消费主义思想

当人际关系变得可供消费之时,必然会造成人际纽带的脆弱,妨害“道德自我”的生成,导致人际关系的破败和共同行动的不可能性.本文从消费社会中人际关系的现况、根源及突围的可能性论述了鲍曼对消费社会中人际关系的思考.     

A lonely society? Loneliness and liquid modernity in Australia

This paper reviews recent studies of loneliness in order to assess whether it is becoming endemic in Australian society. It develops the idea that loneliness is an embedded social structural feature of contemporary Australian life likely to affect people through the life course, creating psychological stress, ill health and social dysfunction. Zygmunt Bauman's writing on liquid modernity is used to trace a sequence of less binding social bonds from the community the workplace, intimate relationships, friendship and kinship that may account for a more generalised distribution of loneliness. Empirical evidence from recent national surveys in Australia demonstrates how Bauman's gloomy prognosis is particularly applicable in Australia. The paper argues that it has been invisible as a social issue until recently, but that its scope and scale have grown such that robust policy initiatives are now warranted. It argues that Australia's gendered pattern of loneliness indicates that Bauman's broad theory of liquid modernity must be mediated by several factors relating to national cultures, historic patterns of family formation, and the gender role distribution in the creation and maintenance of social bonds.     

Zygmunt Bauman's poisoned gift of morality

Bauman's attempt to develop a sociological theory of morality turning around fundamental premises of Durkheim's approach fails in the last analysis, since in Bauman's view the 'moral party of two' does not constitute a social situation. It is argued that the necessary condition to think sociologically about morality is the concept of reciprocity and thus one can arrive at a view of morality in postmodernity consistent with Bauman's earlier theory of practice. If Bauman's idea about responsibilty as the core of morality is transformed to the idea of an appeal of history to compassion and is supplemented with the idea of reciprocity as an emerging norm it is possible to outline a sociological theory of moral practice according to postmodern conditions.     

三种新政治观的共识与差异

吉登斯、U.贝克与Z.鲍曼构成1990年代以降西方社会理论界的三驾马车,他们分别从解放政治、决策缺陷与秩序追求三个视角达成反思性的共识,即西方现代内蕴的政治悖谬在全球化进程中愈发凸显,将代之以新的政治形式。他们各自编织生活政治、亚政治和共和政治的新图景。三者在共识基础上的差异形成一种彼此互补性的关联,即吉登斯的民族国家立场、U.贝克的世界主义方法论和Z.鲍曼的后民族国家视野。     

齐格蒙特·鲍曼流动的现代性消费生活思想——瞬间化、欲望式、循环性的现代消费生活

20世纪以来,鲍曼以流动的现代性理论框架时现代社会里的消费生活进行崭新的思考,初步形成流动的现代性消费社会思想。鲍曼流动的现代性消费生活表现为：消费样态趋向瞬间化、欲望式和循环性;消费时间呈“点滴化”;消费理念“受欲望支配”;消费生活是废弃式、过度化、更替性的消费方式。瞬间化、欲望式和循环性的消费模式是流动的现代消费生活的主题。固然,流动的消费生活形象地描述了现代人的生活方式,却没有提出如何避免流动的消费生活负面影响的举措。     

Is Bauman's bureau Weber's bureau?: a comment*

In his highly regarded and influential Modernity and the Holocaust Zygmunt Bauman launched one of the most passionate and sustained critiques of 'bureaucratic rationality' seen within social theory for some time. In so doing he drew heavily upon the work of Max Weber for support. In this brief paper I am interested in exploring the extent to which Weber really is the anti-bureaucratic ally Bauman claims him to be. In the first part of the paper I outline the main elements of Bauman's critique of bureaucratic rationality, drawing particular attention to its reliance upon a self-consciously Weberian theoretical lexicon. In the second part of the paper I seek to indicate that, despite his claims to be following in Weber's tracks, Bauman's conclusions regarding the moral vacuity of bureaucratic conduct are the very antithesis of Weber's own.     

论鲍曼社会理论的核心议题

引言齐格蒙特·鲍曼(Zygmunt Bauman,1925-)现为利兹大学和华沙大学退休的社会学教授,是当代现代性与后现代性研究最著名的理论家之一。澳大利亚社会学家、国际性社会理论杂志Thesis Eleven的主编贝尔哈兹(Peter Beilharz)说,鲍曼是“当今用英语写作的最伟大的社会学家”(Beilharz,2001:1);当代著名的英国社会学家吉登斯(Anthony Giddens)也说,“对我而言,鲍曼是一个后现代性的理论家。他用非凡的才华和创造力,发展了一个任何人都必须认真对待的立场”(See Bauman,1995:back cover)。鉴于其对社会学与社会理论研究方面的卓越贡献,鲍曼…     

The governmentalities of neoliberalism: panopticism,post‐panopticism and beyond

This paper draws on the writings of Michel Foucault, in particular his lectures on biopolitics at the Collège de France from 1978–79, to examine liberalism and neoliberalism as governmental forms that operate through different models of surveillance. First, this paper re‐reads Foucault's Discipline and Punish in the light of his analysis of the art of liberal government that is advanced through the course of these lectures. It is argued that the Panopticon is not just an architecture of power centred on discipline and normalization, as is commonly understood, but a normative model of the relation of the state to the market which, for Foucault, is ‘the very formula of liberal government’. Second, the limits of panopticism, and by extension liberal governance, are explored through analysis of Gilles Deleuze's account of the shift from disciplinary to ‘control’ societies, and Zygmunt Bauman's writings on individualization and the ‘Synopticon’. In response to Deleuze and Bauman, the final section of this paper returns to Foucault's lectures on biopolitics to argue that contemporary capitalist society is characterized not simply by the decline of state powers (the control society) or the passing down of responsibilities from the state to the individual (the individualization thesis), but by the neoliberal marketization of the state and its institutions; a development which is underpinned by a specific form of governmentality. In conclusion, a four‐fold typology of surveillance is advanced: surveillance as discipline, as control, as interactivity, and as a mechanism for promoting competition. It is argued that while these types of surveillance are not mutually exclusive, they are underpinned by different governmentalities that can be used to address different aspects of the relationship between the state and the market, and with this the social and cultural logics of contemporary forms of market capitalism more broadly.