【作者】 杨小辉；

【导师】 朱学勤；

【作者基本信息】 上海大学 ， 社会学， 2007， 博士

【摘要】 本文研究中国知识阶层从传统乡土性“士绅”到现代都市型“知识分子”的转型过程，运用历史社会学的比较分析方法，从教育制度与群体变迁的维度，考察此一转型的具体过程、机制和逻辑，以及由此所产生的深远历史影响。转型肇端于废科举、兴学堂。这一骤然切换，实现了教育体系从培养传统形态的“士绅”，到培养满足现代社会分化与专业化功能需求的职业人才的跨跃。知识分子疏离了政治，获得了知识自觉，回归文化本位，赢得相对自由的公共空间。他们通过近代大学、出版、研究机构等基础性文化建制找到安身立命之所，自主进行知识生产和传播。转型过程中，知识阶层从社会中心退缩到社会边缘，从功能复合、角色二重，但职业单一的支配阶层，演变为角色、功能单一，职业多元，存在于阶级之间、而不是阶级之上的集合体，成为曼海姆所说“自由漂浮的”阶层。与此相应的是知识阶层自我意识与集体认同的嬗变。从“中等社会”开始，知识阶层就一直在努力寻找新的身份，力图与传统士绅告别。五四运动之后，用以指涉新式教育所催生的新社会群体的“知识阶级”日益流行，此一概念对比二十世纪初年的“中等社会”，已经基本将士绅排除出去。值得注意的是，这一阶层定位不是没有分歧：一部分成员努力建构“学术社会”，力图重塑知识的尊严，重建社会重心；另一部分知识分子则主动认同边缘，放弃知识人身份，慨叹：“我很惭愧，我还不是一个工人”。新式教育的层次结构、区域分布日趋失衡，城乡以及沿海与内地的教育差距急剧扩大。教育重心向城市转移，尤其向沿海大都市移动，农村智力资源大量流失，农村文化生态蜕化，乡村社会失去重心，自治性和自主性不复存在，在内忧外患的刺激下，进而埋下革命病灶之一——乡村推翻城市，内地颠覆沿海。更多还原

【Abstract】 This paper studies the process of China’s intelligentsia transformation from the rural gentry to the urban intellectual. By the historical/comparative analysis method, the paper analysis the idiographic process, mechanism, logic, and the profound impacts of the transformation of this social society, from the dimensionality of the change of educational system and intelligentsia.The inchoation of China’s intelligentsia transformation from tradition to modern was institutional change of the abolition of the imperial examination system and the establishment of modern schools. The transition from the imperial examination system to the modern school, had realized the evolution of the system from brought up traditional type gentry to the professional. The professional met the functional demand of social differentiation and specialization.In the process of the transformation, intelligentsia had become the free-floating stratum in deed. They moved back to society margin from the center. Their social role and function had become singleness from the compound social function and double role. Though intellectuals alienated political power, they had gained the free public space, with the giving birth to self-consciousness of knowledge and regressing cultural role. They had settled down and get on with their pursuit in the modern culture infrastructure such as university, press, and research organization. Intellectuals had gained an independence system of producing knowledge and spreading abroad culture by this infrastructure.Contrast with this was the change of intelligentsia’s self-consciousness and collective identity. Since "the middle society", intelligentsia had been struggling to quest new identity, and tried to say goodbye to gentry. After the "May-forth Movement", the term "intelligentsia class" denoting the new social society had been brought up by the new education had becoming increasingly popular. Contrast with "middle society" in the beginning of twenty century, this term had already excluded the gentry. But we should pay attention to that the orientation of "intelligentsia class" had been produced divarication. Some intellectuals made great efforts to build the "academe society", tried to win the dignity of knowledge again, and construct the new core of modern society. But the others actively identified with the lower stratum and abandoned the intellectual identity. They had sighed with regret, "I am ashamed of that I am not a worker now!"But after the abolition of the imperial examination system, the unbalance of the hierarchy, structure and regional distribution of the new education had gradually been out of control. The educational center moving to the urban, especially to the coastal metropolis, caused the education gap of rural-urban and interior provinces-coastal areas widening increasingly. So mass of the rural educated persons had been swarming into urban unceasingly, the rural cultural-ecological system gradually had been degenerating, and the rural society lost its elites. It was one of the root reason of the rural revolution would pull down urban and interior provinces would overthrow coastal areas.更多还原