本文選題：唯物史觀 + 知識(shí)社會(huì)學(xué)��； 參考：《華東師范大學(xué)》2011年博士論文

【摘要】：本文旨在從唯物史觀的視域出發(fā)來分析、評(píng)價(jià)和研究曼海姆知識(shí)社會(huì)學(xué)的相關(guān)思想及其所涉及的各種理論問題。 曼海姆知識(shí)社會(huì)學(xué)是在已有的思想基礎(chǔ)和社會(huì)背景下產(chǎn)生的。馬克思、涂爾干和舍勒三位思想前驅(qū)對(duì)知識(shí)社會(huì)學(xué)都做出了重要的探索和貢獻(xiàn)。馬克思唯物史觀和意識(shí)形態(tài)理論中蘊(yùn)藏著豐富的知識(shí)社會(huì)學(xué)思想,唯物史觀的核心命題“社會(huì)存在決定社會(huì)意識(shí)”也是知識(shí)社會(huì)學(xué)的核心命題；涂爾干的知識(shí)社會(huì)學(xué)思想則是在他的宗教理論中得到隱約闡述的,他認(rèn)為宗教是人類的“集體表象”,知識(shí)源于宗教和社會(huì)；舍勒在其已有的現(xiàn)象學(xué)分析框架內(nèi),對(duì)諸如知識(shí)的類型及其社會(huì)起源、知識(shí)的運(yùn)動(dòng)形式、知識(shí)與政治、貿(mào)易、階級(jí)的關(guān)系等問題進(jìn)行了頗有創(chuàng)見的分析。西方現(xiàn)代性危機(jī)和魏瑪共和國危機(jī)分別是曼海姆知識(shí)社會(huì)學(xué)出場(chǎng)的大、小背景。 曼海姆知識(shí)社會(huì)學(xué)是以意識(shí)形態(tài)分析為邏輯起點(diǎn)的。他對(duì)意識(shí)形態(tài)的特殊概念和總體概念、意識(shí)形態(tài)概念的特殊闡述與一般闡述、評(píng)價(jià)性的意識(shí)形態(tài)和非評(píng)價(jià)性的意識(shí)形態(tài)、意識(shí)形態(tài)與虛假意識(shí)、意識(shí)形態(tài)與烏托邦等范疇作了詳細(xì)辨析,并討論了集體無意識(shí)問題。曼海姆主張對(duì)各種具有視角性的知識(shí)進(jìn)行綜合,并試圖讓“知識(shí)分子”這一特殊社會(huì)群體去完成這一歷史任務(wù)。 曼海姆基本建立起了一個(gè)比較完整的知識(shí)社會(huì)學(xué)的科學(xué)范式。他分析了知識(shí)社會(huì)學(xué)的出場(chǎng)“位系”,對(duì)知識(shí)社會(huì)學(xué)的性質(zhì)、范圍、前提、特征以及分析程序等做了較為明晰的界定。他認(rèn)為,“思想的存在決定”是知識(shí)社會(huì)學(xué)的核心思想,諸如競(jìng)爭(zhēng)、代等“超理論因素”不論對(duì)知識(shí)的形式還是對(duì)知識(shí)的內(nèi)容都具有根本性的決定作用。具有代表性概念的含義、反概念、思維模式、抽象層次以及本體論預(yù)設(shè)等諸思想要素都會(huì)反映出特定的社會(huì)過程的影響和滲透。 曼海姆知識(shí)社會(huì)學(xué)存在諸多的理論問題和邏輯矛盾。其中,“反身性問題”、“相對(duì)主義問題”以及“兩種知識(shí)的劃分問題”是針對(duì)曼海姆知識(shí)社會(huì)學(xué)批評(píng)和爭(zhēng)論的焦點(diǎn)所在。為了化解這些問題和矛盾,曼海姆本人和其他知識(shí)社會(huì)學(xué)家作了種種探索。文章在總結(jié)和分析前人理論的基礎(chǔ)上,從不同方面對(duì)曼海姆知識(shí)社會(huì)學(xué)中的理論問題進(jìn)行重新理解和定位。 曼海姆知識(shí)社會(huì)學(xué)具有重要的認(rèn)識(shí)論意義。曼海姆在其知識(shí)社會(huì)學(xué)視域中對(duì)傳統(tǒng)理性主義的認(rèn)識(shí)論展開深入的反思和批判。文章借鑒曼海姆的批判視角,從實(shí)踐觀、主體觀、客體觀和真理觀四個(gè)向度對(duì)傳統(tǒng)馬克思主義教科書的認(rèn)識(shí)論進(jìn)行了全方位的反思。文章認(rèn)為,馬克思主義認(rèn)識(shí)論本質(zhì)上是實(shí)踐認(rèn)識(shí)論,其認(rèn)識(shí)主體是具有多方面屬性的從事實(shí)踐活動(dòng)的現(xiàn)實(shí)的人,認(rèn)識(shí)客體本質(zhì)上屬于社會(huì)存在的范疇,作為認(rèn)識(shí)結(jié)果的真理是融合了“以我觀之”、“以物觀之”和“以人觀之”三維向度的產(chǎn)物。在唯物史觀視域中,自然科學(xué)和人文科學(xué)是統(tǒng)一的。經(jīng)驗(yàn)、理論與真理屬于不同的范疇,經(jīng)驗(yàn)只具有“特殊有效性”、理論具有“一般有效性”,而真理才具有“普遍有效性”。視角主義是分工的產(chǎn)物,但其又會(huì)在分工基礎(chǔ)上所形成的交往實(shí)踐中得到克服。文章認(rèn)為,我們應(yīng)該挖掘唯物史觀的認(rèn)識(shí)論意義,特別是要充分挖掘“社會(huì)存在決定社會(huì)意識(shí)”這一唯物史觀核心命題的認(rèn)識(shí)論意蘊(yùn)。 文章比較了曼海姆知識(shí)社會(huì)學(xué)與馬克思唯物史觀之間的異同。就相同之處而言,兩者都堅(jiān)持歷史主義的分析方法、都堅(jiān)持從基礎(chǔ)性的社會(huì)結(jié)構(gòu)去理解思想觀念、都將思想的主體理解為集體和社會(huì)而非個(gè)人。就相異之處而言,兩者對(duì)現(xiàn)代思想困境的診斷與施救方式不同、兩者對(duì)意識(shí)形態(tài)基本性質(zhì)的理解不同、兩者所假托的履行社會(huì)歷史任務(wù)的社會(huì)主體不同、兩者關(guān)于思想與存在之關(guān)系的聯(lián)系機(jī)制不同、兩者對(duì)客觀的社會(huì)科學(xué)知識(shí)何以可能的回答不盡相同。兩者間的差異本質(zhì)上屬于自由主義和馬克思主義的對(duì)立。 曼海姆知識(shí)社會(huì)學(xué)核心命題的邏輯歸宿應(yīng)是“實(shí)踐基礎(chǔ)知識(shí)與社會(huì)的相互建構(gòu)”。不論是傳統(tǒng)知識(shí)社會(huì)學(xué)所主張的“社會(huì)決定論”,還是其他一些思想流派所強(qiáng)調(diào)的“知識(shí)決定論”,都具有片面化的傾向。即使是伯格和盧克曼等人所提出的知識(shí)與社會(huì)的相互建構(gòu)理論,由于他們囿于現(xiàn)象學(xué)社會(huì)學(xué)的理論立場(chǎng),也未能把握住知識(shí)與社會(huì)之關(guān)系的本質(zhì)。我們應(yīng)立足“實(shí)踐”這一核心范疇理解知識(shí)與社會(huì)間的關(guān)系。 曼海姆知識(shí)社會(huì)學(xué)具有重要的現(xiàn)實(shí)意義。就理論意義而言,它可以為我們豐富和發(fā)展馬克思主義提供重要“參照系”和思想資源；就實(shí)踐意義而言,它既可以為我們構(gòu)建一個(gè)尊重差異、包容多樣、健康和諧的思想文化生態(tài)提供重要引導(dǎo)和啟發(fā),也可以為我們抵制西方自由主義的普世話語提供學(xué)理支撐。 曼海姆晚期的計(jì)劃重建理論與其中期的知識(shí)社會(huì)學(xué)都是寄望知識(shí)精英這一社會(huì)階層去化解西方自由主義所引發(fā)的社會(huì)危機(jī),本質(zhì)上都屬于自由主義的改良主義,但對(duì)化解自由資本主義的緊張與混亂也具有積極意義。
[Abstract]:The purpose of this paper is to analyze and evaluate Mannheim's Sociology of knowledge and its theoretical issues from the perspective of historical materialism.
Mannheim's knowledge sociology came into being under the existing ideological basis and social background. Marx, Durkheim and Scheler, three thought forerunner made important exploration and contribution to the knowledge sociology. Marx's historical materialism and ideology theory contain rich knowledge social thought, the core proposition of historical materialism "society" It is the core proposition that determines the social consciousness "is also the core proposition of the sociology of knowledge; Durkheim's knowledge sociological thought is elaboration in his religious theory. He believes that religion is the" collective representation "of human beings and that knowledge is derived from religion and society; in the framework of his existing phenomenological analysis, Scheler has the class of knowledge, such as knowledge. Type and its social origin, the form of knowledge movement, knowledge and politics, trade, and the relationship between class, etc. have been made a remarkable analysis. The crisis of the western modernity and the crisis in the Republic of Weimar are the big and small backgrounds of Mannheim's knowledge sociology.
Mannheim's Sociology of knowledge is the logical starting point of ideological analysis. His special concept and general concept of ideology, the special exposition and general exposition of ideology, the ideology of evaluation and the ideology of non evaluation, ideology and false consciousness, ideology and Utopia are analyzed in detail. It also discusses the problem of collective unconscious. Mannheim advocates the integration of all kinds of perspective knowledge and tries to make "intellectuals" a special social group to accomplish this historical task.
Mannheim has established a relatively complete scientific paradigm of knowledge sociology. He analyzed the "position of the sociology of knowledge", and made a clearer definition of the nature, scope, precondition, characteristics and analytical procedures of the sociology of knowledge. Such as competition, the "super theoretical factors", such as "super theoretical factors", have a fundamental decisive role in both the form of knowledge and the content of knowledge. The meaning of the representative concept, the anti concept, the mode of thinking, the level of abstraction and the presupposition of ontology all reflect the influence and infiltration of the specific social process.
There are many theoretical and logical contradictions in Mannheim's Sociology of knowledge. Among them, the "reflexive problem", "relativism" and "the division of two kinds of knowledge" are the focus of the criticism and debate of Mannheim's knowledge sociology. On the basis of summarizing and analyzing the predecessors' theories, the article makes a new understanding and orientation of the theoretical problems in Mannheim's knowledge sociology from different aspects.
Mannheim's knowledge sociology has important epistemological significance. Mannheim has deeply introspection and criticism on the epistemology of traditional rationalism in his knowledge sociology perspective. The article draws on Mannheim's critical angle of view and advances the epistemology of the traditional Marx doctrine textbooks from four dimensions of practice, subject, object and truth. The author thinks that the theory of Marx's epistemology is essentially practical epistemology, the subject of which is the reality of practical activities with many attributes, and the object of cognition is in the category of social existence in essence, and the truth of the result of cognition is integrated with "view of things" and "view of things" and " In the view of historical materialism, in the view of historical materialism, natural science and human science are unified. Experience, theory and truth belong to different categories. Experience only has "special effectiveness", theory has "general validity", and truth has "universal validity". It will be overcome in the communication practice formed on the basis of division of labor. The article holds that we should excavate the epistemological significance of historical materialism, especially to fully excavate the epistemological implication of the core proposition of "social existence determines social consciousness", the core proposition of historical materialism.
The article compares the similarities and differences between Mannheim's Sociology of knowledge and the historical materialism of Marx. As for the similarities, both insist on the analytical method of historicism, both insist on understanding ideas from the basic social structure, and understand the main body of the thought as collective and society rather than individual. The diagnosis of ideological predicament is different from the way of rescue. The two are different in understanding the basic nature of ideology. The social subjects of the two are different in the social and historical tasks that perform the social and historical tasks, and the relationship between the two is different. The two are different to the objective social science knowledge. The differences between the two are different. It is essentially the opposite of liberalism and Marx doctrine.
The logical result of the core proposition of Mannheim's knowledge sociology should be "the mutual construction of practical basic knowledge and society". Whether the "social determinism" advocated by the traditional knowledge sociology or the "knowledge determinism" emphasized by some other schools of thought, it has a one-sided tendency. Even Berg and Lukman and others The theory of mutual construction of knowledge and society, because they are limited to the theoretical standpoint of phenomenological sociology, has not been able to grasp the essence of the relationship between knowledge and society. We should understand the relationship between knowledge and society based on the core category of "practice".
Mannheim's Sociology of knowledge is of great practical significance. As far as theoretical significance is concerned, it can provide an important "reference" and ideological resources for us to enrich and develop Marx's doctrine. As far as practical significance is concerned, it can provide an important guide for us to build an ideological and cultural ecology that respects differences, inclusive and diverse, and is healthy and harmonious. And inspiration can also provide academic support for us to resist the universal discourse of western liberalism.
The theory of the planned reconstruction of the late Mannheim and the sociology of knowledge in its period are all the social strata that have been sent to the social stratum of the knowledge elite to dissolve the social crisis of the liberalism of the West. It is essentially a liberalist reformism, but it also has positive significance to dissolve the tension and confusion of the free capitalism.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類號(hào)】：C91-06

【引證文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 鄧琳;;“意識(shí)過渡視角”下的知識(shí)社會(huì)學(xué)路徑——評(píng)曼海姆《意識(shí)形態(tài)與烏托邦》[J];學(xué)術(shù)界;2013年02期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 李靜;高校生態(tài)文明素質(zhì)教育路徑研究[D];河南師范大學(xué);2012年

，

本文編號(hào)：2071526