【作者】 郑燕；

【导师】 王育济；

【作者基本信息】 山东大学 ， 专门史， 2014， 博士

【副题名】保罗·莱文森媒介思想研究

【摘要】 本文以媒介环境学派的第三代旗手保罗·莱文森的媒介思想作为研究的目标,用知识社会学的研究路径,剖析了莱文森在媒介环境学派中的地位及其主要的媒介思想,并结合我国的媒介技术应用和媒介环境进一步印证了莱文森具有历史关怀和富有洞察力的预见性理论,为我们当前的媒介研究寻求一个参考性的视野和研究的样本。在技术的变迁中,媒介在满足人的需求的同时,也总是在某些方面违背人的本性或者说诱惑了人本性中劣根性的张扬,所以说技术在实现人类对生活的种种美好理想的同时,也把我们推到更大的交流困境中。不少学者对此保持足够的警醒,比如法兰克福学派认为大众媒介就是对人的精神奴役和全面控制。对于媒介非人性化的一面,我们要进行具体分析,不能因为媒介负面性的存在否定了传播技术的进步作用,否定了传播技术变迁中媒介不断趋向人性化的事实,从而对技术采取拒斥的态度,这是保罗·莱文森在倾其一生的媒介研究中坚持的态度与原则。他继承和发展了麦克卢汉媒介分析的研究视角,借用达尔文的自然选择理论和卡尔·波普尔“渐进社会工程”的变革方案,提出了信息技术的发展和媒介形态的变革是自然界动态进化过程的一部分,是人类社会进步和发展的重要力量但非唯一的决定性力量这一“软”决定论。莱文森对技术促进媒介形态的变革持乐观态度,他认为人的主体性是构成媒介人性化趋势的根本原因。人具有主观能动性,能够在媒介演化中进行理性选择,能够主动地选择和改进媒介,这是决定媒介使用、传播和发展的重要因素之一,这不仅展现了他积极乐观的媒介技术观,而且体现了媒介环境学派的核心思想,是莱文森最重要的媒介思想之一。同时他还认为任何一种后继的媒介,都是对过去某一种先天不足的媒介功能的补救,从而使媒介越来越完美,越来越“人性化”。他的人性化趋势、补救性媒介、技术进化论思想使他成功地超越了麦克卢汉,被誉为“数字时代的麦克卢汉,是后麦克卢汉主义第一人”。本文共分为五章。首先,将保罗·莱文森放置于媒介环境学派中,剖析了他在三代研究群体中的地位以及对前两代学人思想的继承与超越。在对待媒介、技术与人的关系问题上,莱文森继承了麦克卢汉“道德中立”的立场,在媒介即信息的基础上提炼出自己的“人性化趋势”理论,并发展了麦克卢汉的媒介四定律思想,展开自己的“补救性”媒介理论。对自己的导师波兹曼,莱文森却没有那么听话,在学术旨趣和思想渊源上都大相径庭。在媒介形态上,波兹曼认为文字培养理性,图像降低思考,而莱文森却认为文字易受干扰,图像符合感知。对于技术催生的新媒介,波兹曼认为电子文化是对印刷文化的颠覆,而莱文森却认为是对印刷文化的补救。俩人最集中的对立,是在对待技术演化中人的地位的认识,波兹曼的态度是悲观的,人在技术发展中变得越来越无能为力,而莱文森却认为人可以对技术进行理性的选择,能够主动去选择和改进媒介。进化论是莱文森媒介思想体系形成的关键。他深受芝加哥社会学派技术乐观主义思想的启蒙,康德的先验认识论和马克思的唯物主义互动论为莱文森的技术进化论思想提供了哲学基础,他借鉴并发展了达尔文的进化论思想,借用唐纳德·坎贝尔的生物进化三部曲推出自己的知识演化的三部曲,并对波普尔的3个世界理论进行了修正,提出自己的3个“技术-世界”观念。莱文森的技术进化论为他的媒介进化思想提供了哲学基础,他创造性地提出每一种媒介都是沿着玩具-镜子-艺术的演化路径展开,沿着以满足人的需求为尺度的方向上演进,比如文字的出现使得人类交流第一次超越了自身的生物边界,信息和思想跨越时空得以延展和流传,后继而来的印刷、报纸、电报、摄影术都在视觉上更趋向于人的交流需求,广播、电话、留声机则是在听觉上跨越时空满足人的需求,电影、电视从试听两个方面使得技术的发展趋于人的需求,后一种媒介是对前一种媒介不足的补偿。莱文森的数字传播思想与实践。相比于麦克卢汉和波兹曼,莱文森有幸目睹并参与了数字媒体发展的整个过程,他的主要论著也大多完成于世纪之交前后的十年,他用大量的时间和精力来考察数字传播中社会关系和社会组织的影响。本文用了两章的篇幅来讨论他的数字媒介思想。手机作为补偿性媒介的集大成者,莱文森关注了移动性媒介给传统媒介和社会带来的巨大解构作用,手机的出现解放了人们远距离交流被困守在房间内的窘境,也让办公从固定的场所移至你所到的每一个地方。莱文森写作《手机》的时候是2004年,十年后的手机所带来的变革更是难以阻挡,它不仅仅作为媒介信息的传递者而存在,更重要的是它对我们社会的传统行业造成的冲击和颠覆令人震惊,创造了移动互联网的新时代。不仅如此,莱文森将20世纪90年代以后出现的不同于网络聊天室、邮件、BBS等网络新应用创造性取名为“新新媒介”,以区别于互联网早期的应用。所谓新旧只是个相对的概念,有很多人对这一提法提出不同的看法,笔者也不尽赞同这一概念,但是这一概念的提出确实帮助我们能够更方便、直观地观察和研究以博客、推特、微博与微信为代表的新媒介形式。“新新媒介”人们也习惯地称之为“自媒体”,它们的出现对传统主流媒体以及社会管理方式都带来新的冲击和消解,似乎真的实现了“处处是中心,无处是边缘”的民主社会,迫使国家赋权于民、网民的个性化透过社交网络尽显本色,同时也成为社会公共生活的舆论场,尤其是在中国,网民透过自媒体平台实施了一场又一场个人命运的救赎。当然,莱文森也关注到一切媒介都具有的双刃剑功能,带来利的同时,弊也无可避免。比如网络话语权的赋予,消解了专业人士对专业问题的权威性,百度百科和维基百科的词条良莠不齐,缺乏权威性就是一个最好的例证；社会精英把持话语权而导致的草根话语权形同虚设和自身批判精神的缺失,网络围观而导致的群体极化现象严重等。如果说莱文森的导师尼尔·波兹曼的研究是从人性和道德的尺度鞑伐技术的负面性,而莱文森则侧重于媒介变迁的技术、社会、文化的根源与发展趋势,从分析媒介演化的历史入手,通过揭示媒介演化的规律和趋势,不但肯定传播技术和媒介的重要意义,而且突出了人作为媒介的创造者和控制者的主体地位,从而更加全面地剖析了我们所处的数字时代。相比于波兹曼去裁决媒介是有益还是有害的人文主义视角,莱文森的视角更加宏大。他认为媒介的进化服从于人的理性,有无穷的发展潜力,更加人性和合理化。所以,莱文森对待技术与媒介的态度要明亮的多,对未来也更积极与乐观。更多还原

【Abstract】 This thesis takes the media theory of Paul Levinson, the standard banner of the third generation of the media ecology school, as the research objective, analyzes Levinson’s status and major media theories in the media ecology school with the research approach of knowledge sociology. Besides, combing the application of media technology with media environment, this thesis further proves the predictive theories of Levinson which are history-concerned and insightful to provide our current media research with vision for reference and samples for research.With the shifting technology, media, while satisfying human needs, also violate human nature in some aspects or promote the defects in human nature. Therefore, despite the fact that technology has realized human’s ideals for life, it also pushes us into more serious communication problems. Some scholars are alert enough about it, for example, the Frankfurt school regards mass media as the mental slavery and overall control of human beings. We should analyze specifically the dehumanization of media. We should not deny the progressive role that communication technology plays and the growing humanization of media technology through changes and reject technology. These are attitudes and principles Paul Levinson has sticked to throughout his lifetime media research. He inherits and develops the research perspectives used by Marshall Mcluhan in media analysis. Besides, borrowing the theory of natural selection of Darwin and Piecemeal social engineering of Karl Raimund Popper, he brings forward his own soft power determinism theory that the development of information technology and the change of media form are parts of the dynamic evolution of nature as well as important, but not the only decisive power in social progress and development. Levinson is positive about the reform of media form pushed by technology. According to him, human subjectivity is the fundamental reason for the media humanization. Human, with subjective initiative, is able to not only make reasonable choices in media evolution but also select and improve media of his own accord, a major reason which decides the use, transmission and development of media. This, demonstrating his active attitude towards media technology as well the core of media ecology, is one of Levinson’s most important media theories. Meanwhile, he considers subsequent media as a kind of remedy for congenitally deficient media function of the past so as to perfect and humanize media. His humanization theory, remedial media theory and technology evolution theory help him transcend Mcluhan, being a Mcluhan in the digital age and the best scholar of post Mcluhamism.This thesis is divided into five chapters. It puts Paul Levinson in the media ecology school and analyses his status in three generations of researchers and his inheritance as well as transcendence of the first two generations. In terms of the relationship between media technology and human, Levinson takes Mcluhan’s neutral morality. On the basis of media is the message, he refines his humanization theory, develops Mcluhan’s four laws of media theory and improves his own remedial media theory. Nevertheless, he is not that obedient to his own mentor Neil Postman, being different from him in academic interest and ideological origin. When it comes to the form of media, Postman argues that words cultivate reason while images decrease thinking. On the contrary, Levinson states that words are vulnerable to interference while images agree with perception. With regard to new media created by technology, Postman thinks that the electronic culture subverts print culture while Levinson regard electronic culture a remedy for print culture. The toughest contradiction between the two scholars lies in their attitude towards man’s status in technology evolution: Postman is pessimistic, worrying that human is loosing power in technological development; Levinson, however, claims that human can make reasonable choices on technology, select and improve media actively.Evolution theory is the key in the formation of Levinson’s media theory system. Enlightened by the technological optimism of Chicago School of Sociology, he takes Kant’s Transcendental epistemology and Marx’s Materialism interaction theory as his philosophical foundation, uses and develops Darwin’s evolution theory, draws lessons from Donald Thomas Campbell’s biological evolution trilogy to bring out his knowledge evolution trilogy, revises the three world theory of Karl Popper and comes up with his three tech-world conception. Levinson’s technology evolution theory provides the philosophical foundation for his media evolution theory. He puts forward in a creative way that each kind of media develops along the evolution path of toy-mirror-art and satisfies human needs. For example, words allow human to communicate beyond biological boundaries for the fist time; the transmission and spreading of information and thoughts go across time and space; print, newspaper, telegraph and photograph tend to meet human’s vision need; radio, telephone and phonograph satisfy human’s hearing need, remedied by movie and television which satisfy both needs.The digital communication theory and practice of Levinson.Compared with Mcluhan and Postman, Levinson has the fortune to witness the whole process of digital media development. His major works were completed in10years around the turn of the century when he spent a great deal of time and energy to analyze the effect of social relations and social organizations in digital communication. This thesis uses two chapters to discuss his digital communication theory. He pays great attention to the huge deconstruction brought by mobile media to traditional media and society. As a representative of remedial media, cellphone solves the problem that man is confined to rooms during remote communication and brings the once fixed office with people all the time. Cellphone was written by Levinson in2004.10years later, cellphone, bringing irresistible reforms, is not only the transmitter of media information but also shockingly strikes and subverts traditional industries in our society, creating the new era of mobile internet. What’s more, Levinson names new web apps after1990s "new media" since they are different from earlier web apps like online chat room, e-mail and BBS. In fact,"new" and "old" are relative concepts and many people think differently on them. Although, the author is not totally in this concept, it indeed helps us to observe and study new media forms represented by blog, twitter, micro-blog and we chat in a more convenient and more direct way. New media is also known as we media. It, bringing new hits and digestions to major traditional media and social management methods, seems to create a democratic society where all are in the center and become the public opinion field by forcing government to grant rights to civilians. Besides, the individuality of netizens is fully displayed through social network. In China, especially, netizens manage to achieve a series of self-redemptions through the platform provided by we media. However, Levinson also notices that media is a double-edged sword which brings both advantages and disadvantages. Take the right of discourse in network for example. It decreases the authority of experts on professional issues which is proved by Baidupedia and Wikipedia for they include good and bad entries at the same time and therefore, lack authority. Another example is related to social elite. They control the discourse power. As a result, grassroots loose their discourse power and self-criticism spirit. Furthermore, network circusee makes group polarization even worse.If Levinson’s mentor Neil Postman’s research parts from a human and moral dimension of negative cutting technology, Levinson focuses on the root causes and trends in technology development, social and cultural changes of the medium, from the analysis of the evolution of media history to start by revealing patterns and trends in the evolution of media, not only affirmed the importance of the spread of technology and media, but also highlights the dominant position of people who create. and control the media as, and thus more comprehensive analysis of our in which the digital age. Compared to Bozeman to award the media is beneficial or harmful humanist perspective, Levinson’s perspective is more ambitious. He believes that the evolution of the media subject to human reason, there are endless potential for development, more humane and rational. So Levinson treats technology and media attitudes to bright and more and more positive about the future with optimism.更多还原