五四前后文化调和论研究

【作者】 王代莉；

【导师】 耿云志；

【作者基本信息】 中国社会科学院研究生院 ， 中国近现代史， 2009， 博士

【副题名】以杜亚泉和《东方杂志》为中心的考察

【摘要】 五四前后,正是中国社会从传统向近代转型的重要时期。在思想文化上,为寻找中国文化的出路,针对东西文化、新旧思想冲突日益剧烈的问题,各种思潮纷呈涌现,各种文化建设方案竞相出台,相互交织,论争激烈。文化调和论即为其中一股颇有影响力的文化主张。这一时期,提倡文化调和论最突出的代表人物是杜亚泉,此外章士钊、李大钊、梁启超、钱智修等人也有不少相关论述。杜亚泉是一个执著的调和论者,在其主编的《东方杂志》上刊载了大量相关言论,使这一杂志成为了五四前后提倡文化调和论的言论主场地,引起了思想界的广泛关注与论争。五四前后的文化调和论,其内涵是多方面的,有着深刻的思想价值:它在承认东西文化为性质之异的前提下,主张以稳健的改革步骤,谋求东西文化的调剂体合,新旧思想的接续不断,精神与物质的互补,对立双方的协力共进,最终以创造新文化为其目的;提倡以理性的态度为指导,反对盲目从西,对西学实行“有条件的容受”,以科学的法则刷新固有文明以创造新文化;强调一种民族情感上的文化反省态度,改造国民之“惰性”,努力使中国文化成为世界文化的一部分,寻求一种多元并存中的“和谐”状态。从思想根源来说,这种“调和”的观念一方面有着浓厚的中国文化底色,与传统的中庸思想及“和而不同”的理想紧密相联,一方面也吸收了法国、英国、印度、日本等国的思想养料。是一种中西文化交流碰撞下的产物。从杜亚泉等人的言论及实践来看,虽然他们在具体的文化建设主张上与激进的新文化运动者有着“先立后破”与“先破后立”路径选择上的差异,但在建设新文化的目标上却是一致的。无论是在对个性主义的提倡,在反对立孔教为国教,在努力建立与世界文化的密接关系上,以及对新文学运动的态度上,他们与《新青年》派的主张都是不冲突的。其言论主要针对的是激进新文化运动者在理论上的极端主张及实践中的过激行为,希望以“调和”的处方对其有所校正和补苴,并以和平的方式进行新文化的建设,与激进的新文化运动恰好形成了互补。他们并不是新文化运动的反对力量,也不是无原则的折衷派,而是新文化运动的参与者,是新文化运动中一支相对理性、稳健的力量。虽然文化调和论在思想上有诸多可贵的思想资源可供取鉴,在文化实践上也有一定的成绩,但它并非完美无缺。由于调和论者对西学认知的不深,以及“调和”概念本身的含混性,使这种文化观带上了一种主观的理想色彩,与现实产生了一种错位感,经不过实践的检验,因而在新文化建设上,成绩不足,最终在激进主义高涨的五四时期,没能得到更大多数人的支持而日渐沉寂。我们应本着客观理性的态度评价其得失,既要看到它所蕴含的丰富思想资源,对其加以肯定与吸收,也应看到其理论上的缺陷及实践上的不足,不可盲目拔高。时至今日,中国的近代文化转型依然在探索中踽踽前行,我们除了从历史中吸取思想养料外,更应着眼于现实,进行新的开创。应本着更加开放健全的心态,理性地对待中西文化,处理好传统与现代的关系,创造积极健康的交流环境,让不同的文化能够充分地接触、交流、融汇,让它们在文化的自我调适机制中,进行取舍,逐渐演进,创造新文化。这是一个仍待继续思考及努力实践的时代课题。更多还原

【Abstract】 The May Fourth Movement era in China’s history is an important period during which China’s society has witnessed a great transformation from the traditional into a modern one. In the intellectual and cultural fields, various streams of thoughts spring out, and numerous programs are put forward for cultural development to find a way out for traditional Chinese culture in the face of increasing conflicts between western and oriental, traditional and new cultures, forming a scenario of intense competition and debates. The school of culturlal conciliation is a strong one among the competing streams of thoughts at the time, whose most outstanding advocate is Du Yaquan. Of course, such figures as Zhang shizhao, Li Dazhao, Liang Qichao, and Qian Zhixiu also hold similar ideas on this. However, a firm advocate of culturlal conciliation among them is Du Yaquan, whose ideas are embodied in Oriental Journal of which he himself is the editor-in-chief. With Du’s arduous efforts, Oriental Journal becomes the main battlefield or mouthpiece for this school of thought, arousing wide attention and debates among intellectuals.The ideas of culturlal conciliation during the May Fourth Movement era carry multifaceted connotations and deep intellectual values. Specifically, with its recognition of the heterogeneity between western and Chinese culture as a prerequisite, and with the generation of a new culture as its ultimate pursuit, it maintains that steady steps should be taken for reforms of the traditional Chinese culture, while seeking the coordination and combination between western and Chinese culture, the continuity between the traditional and new culture, the complementarity between the spiritual and material, the co-marching forward of the opposites. It also advocates taking rational attitudes as the guidance, opposes following the west blindly while accepting western culture with“conditional tolerance”, and upgrades the traditional Chinese civilization in a scientific manner to create a new culture. In addition, it stresses to conduct a cultural self-reflection without any national or parochial bias, changing the inertness of the Chinese nationality, integrating the Chinese culture with the world, thus reaching a harmonious state of pluralistic cultural coexistence.As for its intellectual roots, the thought of eclecticism carries not only deep Chinese features, relating closely with the traditional Chinese thinking of“taking the middle ground”and“seeking the common ground while preserving the differences”, but adopting ideas from France, Britain, India, and Japan. In brief, it is a product of exchanges and conflicts between the west and the east. Du Yaquan’s words and deeds reveal that he shares the goal of building a new culture with those from the radical school of the New Cultural Movement, though they choose different methods for the new-culture-building cause, with the former advocating“building comes before breaking”while the latter emphasizing“breaking comes before building”. They are not in intellectual conflict with those from the school of the New Youth in their attitudes toward the New Literature Movement, and on such matters as supporting individualism, opposing setting the Confucian as the state religion, building close relations with other cultures on the world. Their ideas are mainly aimed at those theoretically radical ideas and practically radical behavior of the radical New Cultural activists against which they wish to rectify and complement in a conciliatory manner, and to cultivate a new culture peacefully. They are neither the opposing forces of the New Cultural Movement, nor utter eclectics. As a matter of fact, they too are participants of the New Cultural Movement, and they constitute a relatively rational and steady school compared with others.Of course, culturlal conciliation is not without flaw, although it contains valuable ideas and gains some achievements in cultural cultivation. The cultural eclectics’shallow knowledge about western culture, and their ideational vagueness about how to integrate the western and Chinese culture, overcast their ideas an idealistic color, creating a gap between reality and their ideals and failing the test of the worldly affairs. As a result, culturlal conciliation soon fades out as it does not harvest due progress or gain the support of the majority in the era of the May Fourth Movement during which radicalism runs high. Therefore, we should be objective in evaluating the thought of culturlal conciliation, taking into account both of its strong points and its weaknesses.Today, Chinese culture is experiencing further transformation. In conducting this great cause, we should not only learn from history, but pay more attention to the present and have more innovations. We should be more open-minded, treat the western and Chinese culture in a rational way, handle properly the relationship between traditions and modern ideas, and create a healthy environment for cultural exchanges, thus enabling the exchanges and integration among different cultures, facilitating the generation of a new culture. This is a significant topic that deserves our further considerations and practical efforts.更多还原