【作者】 丁华东；

【导师】 邓伟志；

【作者基本信息】 上海大学 ， 社会学， 2008， 博士

【摘要】 正如恩格斯所言:“每一时代的理论思维,从而我们时代的理论思维,都是一种历史的产物,在不同的时代具有非常不同的形式,并因而具有非常不同的内容”。自20世纪60年代美国科学哲学家、科学社会学、科学史家托马斯·库恩提出“范式”概念与范式(转换)理论以来,一直受到学术界的高度关注和重视。库恩用范式为核心概念,描绘了一个“大异其趣”的科学发展图象,被誉为科学观的一次革命和“学术史上的一个里程碑”。同时基于库恩并非是从科学研究者的个体主体性,而是从科学家的群体主体性出发来研究科学家(共同体)所持的基本信念、世界观、价值观念、理论取向以及所使用的概念、方法、工具等方面的革命性变化来建构科学发展的动态模式,将科学的“内部研究”(“范式”的转变)和外部研究(“科学共同体”的兴衰)结合起来,因而其理论本身便赋予了社会学的性质。这一性质不仅为库恩所承认,而且随着科学社会学的兴起与发展,被科学社会学家、科学知识社会学家所倡扬。因此,范式概念与范式理论可以说融合了科学哲学、科学社会学、科学史等学科思想,是一个具有较强包容性和解释力的概念与理论,已被不同学科的学者在不同的层次上加以运用,作为分析自身学科发展的理论工具。范式理论不仅对研究自然科学的发展和变化具有理论指导意义,对理解和解释社会科学的发展和变化同样具有重要意义。英国学者维·姆·什维尼尔拉兹曾说:“科学研究愈来愈以反省和自我意识为特征,旨在理解自身”。档案和档案工作是社会活动的产物和社会管理的需要,作为一种普遍而又特殊的社会现象,隐含了社会的所有因素和成分。在不同时期和环境下,人们对档案的认识、理解和对档案工作的构想、设计,都集中体现在档案学研究及其建构的理论和知识体系中。在各门学科千帆竞发的今天,如何运用社会学理论和方法,在学科思想互渗的基础上,建立档案社会学,增强对档案和档案工作的理解,揭示其深刻的社会因素,已成为档案学术共同体的企求。范式理论对于解释档案学的发展来说,是社会学理论进入档案学的一条途径,不仅具有适用性,而且有利于我们从群体主体性的思维出发,来探索和发现学术共同体对于档案现象的理解和档案学知识体系的建构,在深化学科理论、拓展学科研究领域的同时,更加深刻地理解自身关于档案学知识的生产,从而生产出更具有生命力和现实性的档案学知识。本文即试图运用科学社会学的理论和方法,从库恩的范式和学术共同体视角对档案学研究及其理论的发展作一解析,研究档案学发展中的理论转变和知识体系的建构,以及这种转变与建构是如何受社会因素影响的,力求发现在档案学知识体系的建构和理论研究中学术共同体的理论和思维的转变,为档案学反思性地理解自身,认识其发展变化的内在脉络提供理论解释,也为档案社会学的建设提供知识积累。本文共包括9个部分。导论部分,主要对研究的问题、理论选择、主要概念、研究方法和研究的意义作一交待,重点说明范式理论作为科学研究的理论工具意义,即它汇聚了科学哲学、科学社会学和科学史的视野,是对学科发展作出解释的一种重要理论工具,以此对档案学的发展进行解释,对发展档案社会学具有重要意义。第一章“范式理论及其社会学价值”部分,主要对库恩的范式及其范式转换理论进行简要介绍、对范式理论的社会学价值进行分析、并以社会学、行政管理学、心理学等学科关于范式的研究成果为例,说明范式理论在各社会科学学科中的运用,旨在说明范式理论本身所具有的社会学性质,以及范式理论作为分析社会科学学科理论发展的适用性与可行性。第二章“档案学的学科性质及其理论范式的建构”部分,主要阐述了档案学的学科发展、学科性质、档案学研究的双重实践性、中外档案学界关于档案学理论范式研究现状、建构档案学理论范式“基准”等问题,侧重说明并论证档案学作为一门具有较强应用性的社会科学,其研究活动具有认知实践和(科学研究的)社会实践的双重性,可以运用范式理论对其发展进行新的解释;同时在分析中外档案学界关于范式问题研究的基础上提出自己关于档案学理论范式建构的基准及其范型;第三章至第六章主要对档案学理论的五种范型,即档案史料整理理论范型、档案文件管理理论范型、档案信息资源管理理论范型、档案知识管理理论范型和档案社会记忆理论范型等进行分析,对每一范型的形成、发展、范型共同体的结构特征、学术取向与学术特色等进行深入阐述,旨在表明每一范型都是档案学术共同体中的一部分成员,从其对档案所秉持的不同信念或者说对档案属性的不同认识而展开的学术研究,对档案学的学科形象和专业发展产生了不同的影响。鉴于各范型产生的时代和对学科的影响不同,笔者认为档案史料整理理论范型、档案文件管理理论范型是档案学的传统理论范式,档案信息资源管理理论范型是当代档案学的主流范式,而档案知识管理理论范型和档案社会记忆理论范型是档案学的前沿范式。第七章“档案学理论范式的特点”部分,主要是在综合前面各章对范型理解的基础上,结合社会科学领域中相关学科范式的研究,对档案学科理论范式的特点进行概括和阐述,以表达笔者对档案学科范式存在状况的思考。第八章“档案学理论范式产生及其转变的社会动因”部分,是在前文有关范式形成背景的基础上,以整体的观点对档案学科范式产生及其转变的社会动因进行概括和阐述,以反映档案学理论范式生成及其转变的社会根源。“如果从范式的视角梳理一下学术史,我们会发现很多有价值的东西。”通过本文的研究,笔者粗浅地认为:(1)运用范式理论来解释档案学理论的发展与演变具有理论分析的可行性、解释力和学术潜力。在档案学理论中,理论范式既是多元并存的,也是转变的。档案学理论范式的转变主要表现为新范式的产生(产生新的理论取向和范型共同体)和学术共同体研究旨趣与目标的转变(也可以说是研究视野的转变)。不同的历史时期和社会环境,学术共同体体现出一定的学术倾向性,因而造成某一范型处于显性状态或主导状态,而另一些范型处于隐性状态或次要状态,从而构成了学科的主流范式与支流范式。社会变化尽管导致了学科主流范式的变化,但学科中仍存在着其他不同的支流范式。坚持多元范式而不是一元范式,看到范式转换与既有传统对档案学发展有着重要的意义。(2)档案学理论范式与档案工作实践的发展是互动生成的。社会科学,特别是应用性的社会科学,其研究主体和研究对象都与社会实践活动有着直接的关联。在理论与实践的互动中,理论群体主体性与实践群体主体性存在一定的一致性。由此,将学科的理论范式看作是一种实践范式,即管理范式,是对范式理论的推延与发展。(3)范式的产生与转变都有深刻的社会动因。每一种范型的生成都有其时代背景和深刻的社会动因,传统的与现实的、国外的与国内的、理论的与实践的、思想的与技术的、理性的与非理性的等等因素的变化,导致了学术共同体思维与理论的转变,从而形成新的范型共同体和范式。理论的危机不仅在于理论自身与社会的适应性和契合性,更在于学术共同体对自身社会地位提高的期盼。任何科学理论都是时代的产物,只能提供具有时代特征的关于客观世界的图景,随着社会的发展和人们认识水平的提高,人们还会不断提供关于世界的新的科学图景。19世纪末20世纪初期以来,特别是20世纪60—70年代以后,随着科学社会学的兴起,人们越来越重视将科学活动和科学知识置于社会学的视野下开展研究,以探察科学知识的生产及其与其他社会建制的关系,成果卓著,思想深刻。本文虽然努力运用科学社会学的理论和思想,但限于自身的研究能力和水平还很肤浅,对于学科理论范式的特点、理论范式与实践活动的互动关系等诸多问题虽有所注意,但理解不深,仍有待在今后继续努力学习和探索,发挥“社会学的想象力”,提高学术水平,企望为档案社会学建设有所贡献。更多还原

【Abstract】 1. Just as what Engels has said, the theoretic al thinking of every era, thus the theoretical thinking of our times, is all results of history with quite different forms in different eras, therefore it includes varied contents. Since American scientific philosopher and historian T. S. Kuhn put forward the concept of paradigm and the theory of paradigm shifts in 1960s, it has kept attracting great concern from the academia. Applying paradigm as the key concept, Kuhn has described a dynamic vision of scientific development of very different tastes and interests with paradigm shifts, which was praised as a revolution of the scientific view and a milestone in the academic history. However, Kuhn’s research was not derived from the scientific researcher’s individual entity but from subjectivity of all the scientists, to study the scientist’s (community) basic faith, world outlook, values, the revolutionary character in respects such as concept, method, tool used that is changed (paradigm shifts) to build the dynamic mode of constructing scientific development. Kuhn combined inside study (paradigm shifts) with outside study (the rise and decline of scientific community); therefore he provided his thought with the characteristics of sociology. This characteristic was not only admitted by Kuhn, but also was advocated by scientific sociologists, scientific knowledge sociologists with the rise and development with scientific sociology. So it can be said that the concept of paradigm and its theory has merged discipline thoughts such as philosophy of science, scientific sociology, and science history and so on together. It is a concept and theory that has stronger forgiving nature and explaining strength, which has already been used on different levels by the scholars of different disciplines. It is also regarded as the theory tool which can be used to analyze one’s own discipline development. The paradigm theory has directive significance of theories not only in studying development and change of natural science but also in interpreting the development and change of social science.2. British scholar W.M. Shewneillarz has put forward: "Scientific research features more and more self-retrospection and self consciousness, aiming at understanding one’s self" . The archive and archive work are the result of social activities and need of social management, as a general and particular social phenomenon, they imply all factors and compositions of the society. Under different circumstances during different periods, people’s understanding, idea and design to the archives work are incarnated in the study of archives and the constructed theory and knowledge system. Today, different fields of science are thriving. How to use sociology theory and method, on the basis of the discipline thoughts oozing each other, to set up archive sociology, strengthen the understanding of the archive and archives work, announce its deep social factor, have already become the seeking of academic community of archives. The paradigm theory provides sociology theory an entry to explain development of archival science. It is not only applicable, but also of great help for us to explore and find academic community, gain knowledge of the building and constructing of the system to archive understanding and archive of phenomenon, proceeding from thinking of colony’s entity. At the same time, it’s helpful for deepening the discipline theory, expanding research field of discipline, understanding one’s own production regarding the archive, gaining knowledge more deeply, thus it helps produce the energetic and real knowledge. This dissertation attempts to apply scientific sociology theory and method to the interpretation of archival science and development of its theory from the angle of Kuhn’s paradigm and academic community’s. It also studies theory change and knowledge system construction in the development of archival science and how these transition and construction were made under the influence of social factors; this dissertation also makes every effort to find out theoretical and logical shift of academic community in the construction of archives knowledge system and research. It is to review understanding of the archival science, to study the inherent thread of its development and change and offer theoretical explanation, and to provide knowledge for construction of archive sociology as well.3. This text includes 9 parts altogether. In the introduction part, the author mainly states the research problem, its theory choice, main concept, significance of its approach and research. The author wants to explain the significance of paradigm theory as the theory tool of scientific research especially. Because paradigm theory has a comprehensive perspective of science philosophy, scientific sociology and scientific and technological history; and it is a kind of important theory tool to explain the discipline’s development as well as the development of archival science; paradigm theory is significant in developing the archive sociology. In Chapter One, "the paradigm theory and sociology value" , the author mainly makes a brief introduction to Kuhn’s paradigm and paradigm shifts .He analyses the sociology value of paradigm theory and regards the research results as the example about paradigm of the disciplines such as sociology, administrative management, psychology as the example. He also states paradigm theory is applied in every social science discipline, aiming at stating its sociology properties. Paradigm theory is also applicable and feasible to the analysis of the discipline theory development of social science. In Chapter Two, "the discipline properties of archival science and the constructing of theory paradigm" , the author explains the discipline development of archival science, its properties, its double practicality, the current study of Chinese and foreign archive educational circles and the basis of constructing archival science theory paradigm. He lays particular emphasis on explaining and proving that archival science is one social science with stronger application. The research of archives science’s activities has cognitive practice and social work (scientific research). Archives science can apply paradigm theory to the new explanation of its development. When analyzing the paradigm problem what educational circles of Chinese and foreign archives study, the writer propose his own regarding on the basis of the example of archival science paradigm construction. From Chapter Three to Chapter Six, the author mainly analyses the five paradigm models of archival science. They are archive historical data rectifying theory paradigm model, files management theory paradigm model, archive information resources management theory paradigm models, archive knowledge management theory paradigm models and archive social memory theory paradigm models. He also explains each paradigm model’s forming, development, structural characteristics, academic orientation and academic special thoroughly, indicating each paradigm model is some members of the academic community. The author researches from different faiths and understandings what the paradigm model regards the archive, which has a different impact on the vivid and professional development of archival science. Owning to the difference from impact on discipline and eras that paradigm model produced, the writer regards archive historical data rectifying theory paradigm models, files management theory paradigm models as the traditional theory paradigm in archival science, and he regards archive information resources management theory paradigm models as contemporary mainstream paradigm of archival science. While he regards archive knowledge management theory paradigm model and archive social memory theory as front station of paradigm of archival science. In Chapter Seven, "archival science theory characteristic of paradigm", He synthesizes the understanding that the preceding chapters have studied and combines the research of the paradigm of relevant disciplines in the domain of the social sciences. He summarizes and explains the characteristic of the theory paradigm of the archive discipline, indicating his own consideration of the paradigm existing in the archive discipline nowadays. In Chapter Eight , " social reason that the theory paradigm of archival science produces and changes" , he summarizes and explains the social reason what the archive discipline paradigm produced and shifted on the whole, which is on the basis of the relevant above-mentioned paradigm background. The author tries to reflect the social origin how the theory paradigm of archival science formed and shifted.4. If we study the academic history from the perspective of paradigm, we will find a lot of valuable things. By the research of this paper, the writer reaches a conclusion as follows. (1) The application of paradigm theory to the explanation of the development and evolution of archival science theory is characterized by feasibility of theoretical analysis, explanation and academic potentiality. In the archival science theory, the paradigm theory is pluralistic coexisted and changed. The paradigm shifts of archival science shows new production (produce new theory orientation and paradigm community). It also shows the shifts of the impetus and the goals that the academic community studies (show the focus shifts). In different historical periods and social environments, the academic community embodies certain academic tendencies, which causes certain Fan in a dominant state or leading state and other fans in a recessive state or secondary state. The social change constitutes the mainstream paradigm of disciplines and the tributary Paradigm and other different discipline tributary paradigm. Adherence to pluralistic paradigm instead of single paradigm and notice of paradigm shifts with proceeding traditions is significant to the development of archival. science. (2) The development is interactively generated between the theory paradigm of archival science and archive work. The subject of science research and its object, especially applied social science has direct relation with the social activity. When the theory and practice interact with each other, there is certain consistency in colony’s theory entity and colony’s of practice entity. Therefore, the theory paradigm of discipline was regarded as a kind of practice paradigm or manage paradigm, which will put off or develop the paradigm theory. (3) There are deep social reasons in paradigm’s formulation and transitions. That is to say each formulation of Fan has their era’s background and deep social causes, such as the changes of traditional and realistic, foreign and domestic, theoretical and practical, considerate and technical, rational and irrational factors. These changes cause the transition of academic community thought and theory, thus form new Fan community and paradigm. The crisis of the theory not merely lies in the adaptability and agreement with of the society and theory, but lies more in the expectation to improve one’s own social status of academic community.5. All scientific theories are the results of the times, offering the view of objective world with characteristics of different eras. With the development of the society and improvement of people’s understanding of the society, people will also offer the new scientific views about the world constantly. Since 1960s and 1970s, with the rise of scientific sociology, people attach more importance to the study of scientific activity and scientific knowledge from the perspective of sociology, exploring the production of scientific knowledge and its relation with other social organizational system. The achievement is distinguished and the thought is deep. Though the author makes great efforts to use the theory and thought of scientific sociology in the paper, the research is still very superficial due to limitation of his own research ability and level. The author makes great efforts to quote a great deal of issues about the discipline theory’s characteristic, the theory paradigm and inter dynamic relation between the activity of practice and the theory paradigm. The dissertation is a new research program, which is open to further study and hard exploration to give play to the imagination of sociology in the future and improvement of the academic level for contributing humble effort to archive sociology.更多还原